Social marketing of low dead space syringes in Vietnam: findings from a 1-year pilot program in Hanoi, Thai Nguyen, and Ho Chi Minh City

Usage of low dead space syringes and association with hepatitis C prevalence amongst people who inject drugs in the UK

INTRODUCTION

Syringes with attached needles (low dead space syringes [LDSS]) retain far less blood following injection than syringes with detachable needles (high dead space syringes [HDSS]). People who inject drugs (PWID) who share needles/syringes may be less likely to acquire Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection using LDSS, compared with HDSS, but data are limited.

METHODS

Utilizing drug behavior and HCV antibody testing data from the UK 2014/2015 Unlinked Anonymous Monitoring Survey of PWID, we calculated the percentage of syringes used in the past month that were LDSS. We investigated which injecting characteristics and demographic factors were associated with 100% LDSS (against 0-99%) usage, and whether 100% LDSS use was associated with antibody HCV-status, after adjusting for confounders.

RESULT

Of 2174 participants, 55% always used LDSS, 27% always used HDSS, and 17% used both LDSS and HDSS. PWID that had injected into their groin during the past month were unlikely to use LDSS, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.14 (95% confidence interval 0.11-0.17), compared to those not using the groin. Those injecting crack were less likely to use LDSS than those not, aOR 0.79 (0.63-0.98). Polydrug use was negatively associated with LDSS use, aOR 0.88 (0.79-0.98) per additional drug. LDSS use was associated with lower prevalent HCV among all PWID (aOR 0.77, [0.64-0.93]), which was stronger among recent initiates (aOR 0.53 [0.30-0.94]) than among experienced PWID (aOR 0.81 [0.66-0.99]).

DISCUSSION

People who inject into their groin were less likely to use LDSS. Exclusive LDSS use was associated with lower prevalence of HCV amongst PWID that started injecting recently, suggesting LDSS use is protective against HCV.

Malaria risk factors and care-seeking behaviour within the private sector among high-risk populations in Vietnam: a qualitative study

Background

Vietnam has successfully reduced malaria incidence by more than 90% over the past 10 years, and is now preparing for malaria elimination. However, the remaining malaria burden resides in individuals that are hardest to reach, in highly remote areas, where many malaria cases are treated through the informal private sector and are not reported to public health systems. This qualitative study aimed to contextualize and characterize the role of private providers, care-seeking behaviour of individuals at high risk of malaria, as well as risk factors that should be addressed through malaria elimination programmes in Vietnam.

Methods

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 11 key informants in Hanoi, 30 providers, 9 potential patients, and 11 individuals at risk of malaria in Binh Phuoc and Kon Tum provinces. Audio recorded interviews were transcribed and uploaded to Atlas TI™, themes were identified, from which programmatic implications and recommendations were synthesized.

Results

Qualitative interviews revealed that efforts for malaria elimination in Vietnam should concentrate on reaching highest-risk populations in remote areas as well their care providers, in particular private pharmacies, private clinics, and grocery stores. Among these private providers, diagnosis is currently based on symptoms, leaving unconfirmed cases that are not reported to public health surveillance systems. Among at-risk individuals, knowledge of malaria was limited, and individuals reported not taking full courses of treatment, a practice that threatens selection for drug resistance. Access to insecticide-treated hammock nets, a potentially important preventive measure for settings with outdoor biting Anopheles vectors, was also limited.

Conclusions

Malaria elimination efforts in Vietnam can be accelerated by targeting improved treatment, diagnosis, and reporting practices to private pharmacies, private clinics, and grocery stores. Programmes should also seek to increase awareness and understanding of malaria among at-risk populations, in particular the importance of using preventive measures and adhering to complete courses of anti-malarial medicines.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-017-2060-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Acceptability of low dead space syringes and implications for their introduction: A qualitative study in the West of England

BACKGROUND

It is recommended that needle and syringe programmes (NSP) distribute low dead space syringes (LDSS) to reduce blood-borne virus transmission. We explored the acceptability of detachable LDSS among people who inject drugs (PWID) and staff who work to support them.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were performed with 23 PWID (15 men and 8 women) and 13 NSP staff members (6 men and 7 women) in Bath and Bristol, England. Recruited PWID reflected varying demographic characteristics, drug use and injecting preferences. Interviews explored experiences of different types of injecting equipment, facilitators and barriers of changing this equipment and attitudes towards detachable LDSS. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

Decisions about injecting practices were underpinned by several factors, including early experiences and peer initiation; awareness and availability of alternatives; and the ability to inject successfully. Rinsing and re-using syringes represented a quandary where rinsing could encourage re-use, but not rinsing could result in the re-use of unclean equipment. Most PWID were reluctant to change equipment particularly in the absence of any problems injecting. Prioritising getting a 'hit' over the prevention of potential problems was an important barrier to change. Overall detachable LDSS are likely to be acceptable. Lower risk of transferring infections and reduced drug wastage were valued benefits of detachable LDSS. There was a preference for a gradual introduction of detachable LDSS in which PWID are given an opportunity to try the new equipment alongside their usual equipment.

CONCLUSION

Detachable LDSS are likely to be acceptable and should therefore be offered to those using detachable high dead space syringes and/or fixed 1ml LDSS syringes to inject into deeper femoral veins. An intervention is needed to support their introduction with 'training', 'education', 'persuasion' and eventual 'restriction' components.