ArticleTherapeutic advances in infectious disease
Perspectives on syringe services programs among patients hospitalized with injection drug use-associated endocarditis: a qualitative study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in infectious disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) has increased markedly among people who inject drugs (PWID). Harm reduction is a tool to help PWID improve health outcomes and mitigate IE. Objectives: To understand the knowledge, perceptions, past engagement, and planned use of harm reduction services from syringe services programs (SSPs) for PWID hospitalized with IE. Design: Qualitative study of PWID hospitalized with IE. Methods: The research team conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 participants at a large academic hospital from June 2021 to May 2022. Two study personnel coded the interviews and analyzed the data using a combination of structural codes, applied thematic analysis, and thematic comparison. Results: The majority of participants reported past experiences obtaining safe injection supplies from SSPs, and participants generally viewed SSPs as places for facilitating safer injecting practices, receiving sterile supplies, learning about harm reduction, and/or obtaining overdose reversal kits. However, some participants reported being unable to access SSPs because of their rurality, lack of SSP availability, or transportation barriers. In addition, some participants reported a lack of interest in receiving SSP information during hospitalization, believing that it would enable an undesired return to drug use, while others felt that SSP services would not be relevant for them post-hospitalization. Conclusion: Patient past and planned use of harm reduction services offered by SSPs was impacted by geographic barriers to accessibility and patient concerns that SSPs would facilitate an undesired return to drug use. Health systems have an opportunity to improve patient usage of harm reduction services post-hospitalization by improving patient education and integrating harm reduction services as tools of care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.