1. Syringe Access Services
A hepatitis C and HIV
Prevention Intervention
Narelle Ellendon, RN
Katie Burk, MPH
www.harmreduction.org
2. Harm Reduction Coalition
2
Founded in 1994 to work with individuals and communities
at risk for HIV infection due to drug use and high-risk sexual
behaviors.
The Harm Reduction Coalition is a national advocacy and
capacity-building organization that promotes the health and
dignity of individuals and communities impacted by drug use.
3. HRC Programs & Services
The Institute @HRC
Capacity Building for Syringe Access Services Mobilization
HIV Prevention Capacity Building Initiative for CBOs
Harm Reduction Training Institute
Overdose Prevention Programs (SKOOP/DOPE)
LGBT Project
Policy Advocacy
National and Regional Conferences
Next National Conference: Portland, Oregon in Nov. 2012
Harm Reduction in The South; NC Sept 2011
4. Training Agenda
Introductions
Harm Reduction Definition
Defining the problem
The National Context of Syringe Access Programs
Benefits of Syringe Access Services
Getting Started: Program Models
Practicing Drug User Cultural Competency
5. Working Definition of Harm Reduction
Harm Reduction:
A set of practical, public health
strategies designed to reduce
the negative consequences of
drug use and promote healthy
individuals and communities.
6. Goals of Harm Reduction
Increased Health and well-being
Increased self-esteem/self-efficacy
Better living situation
Reduced isolation and stigma
Safer drug use
Reduced drug use and/or abstinence
7. What’s the Problem?
18000 Newly infected each year in
16000 the USA due to syringe and
14000 equipment sharing:
12000
10000 8,000 people with HIV
8000 17,000 with Hep C
6000
4000 Overdose is the second
2000 leading cause of accidental
0 death in the US.
Source: The Center for Disease Control and Prevention, AIDS United.
HIV Hep C
http://www.aidsunited.org/policy-advocacy/issues/syringe-exchange/
http://www.cdc.gov/idu/hepatitis/viral_hep_drug_use.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Poisoning/brief_full_page.htm
8. What’s the Problem?
IDUs tend to have…
High prevalence of other health problems
High prevalence of mental health issues
High prevalence of trauma
Poor social supports
Higher level of homelessness
Higher level of previous incarceration
Poor relationship with healthcare system
9. What’s the Problem?
Drug Treatment is not
always a viable option.
Limited availability
Research demonstrates
that drug dependence is a
chronic condition (ie:
relapse is a part of the
process)
Oftentimes people may
not be ready to quit or
may choose not to
10. Who are IDUs?
Estimate of current number of
IDUs in the USA in 2003: 1.4
million.
IDU occurs in every
socioeconomic and racial/ethnic
group and in urban, suburban, and
rural areas.
Males are twice as likely to report
injecting drugs than females.
Source: Baciewicz GJ, et al. Injecting Drug Use. Medscape Reference: Drugs, Diseases and
Procedures. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/286976-overview#a0199
11. Meeting people where they are
Syringe access programs
Started in Holland in the 1980s
in response to a hep B outbreak
First US SAP started in Tacoma
in 1988 in response to the AIDS
crisis
13. SAPs: The National Context
Significant shifts toward support of syringe access
programs on a federal level:
Lift of the federal ban in 2009
Federal funds can now be used to directly support syringe
access programs (reinstated in 2011)
National HIV/AIDS Strategy (NHAS) 2010
Calls for minimizing HIV infection among IDUs
Specifically sites syringe exchange as an intervention that
will reduce the HIV infection rate among IDUs
National Hepatitis plan 2011
Call to enhance IDU access to sterile syringes
Sources:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/NHAS.pdf, http://www.hhs.gov/ash/initiatives/hepatitis/actionplan_viralhepatitis2011.p
df
14. Benefits of SAPs:
Reduction in HIV incidence
Syringe access programs are the most
effective, evidence-based HIV prevention tool for
people who use drugs
Seven federally funded research studies found that
syringe exchange programs are a valuable resource
In cities across the nation, people who inject drugs
have reversed the course of the AIDS epidemic by
using sterile syringes and harm reduction practices.
Source: Office of the Surgeon General (2000): Evidence-based Findings on the Efficacy of Syringe Exchange Programs: An Analysis of the Scientific Research Completed
Since April 1998. US Department of Health and Human Services: Washington DC.
15. Successful outcomes
HIV Seroprevalence among IDU’s in NY
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1990-92 1993-95 1996-98 1998-2002
Don C Des Jarlais Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, NY
16. Benefits of SAPs:
Reduction in HCV Transmission Risk
More than half of IDUs acquire syringes from a
potentially unsterile source in NYC*
Almost 1/3 of IDUs (31.8%) report “sharing”
syringes and other equipment**
Many participants of SAPs have been injecting for
some time
Large number of IDUs already infected with HCV
*Source: HIV Prevalence and Risk among IDUs in NYC: Results from NHBS. HIV Epidemiology Program of NYC Dept of Health and Mental Hygiene/Center
for Drug Use and HIV Research. Available at http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/dires/epi-resupdates-riskdrugusers.pdf
**Source: HIV-Associated Behaviors among Injecting Drug Users—23 Cities, United States, May 2005-Feb 2006. The CDC. MMWR. April 10, 2009 /
58(13);329-33 Available at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5813a1.htm
18. Benefits of Syringe Access:
It’s not just syringes!
SAPs connect difficult-to-reach populations to
much needed services:
Detox and drug treatment programs
Medical, Dental & Mental health services
Counseling and referral
Case Management
HIV/HCV services
Housing services
Community building
Overdose prevention
Prevention for non-injectors
19. Benefits of SAPs:
Cost Effectiveness
The lifetime cost of medical care for each
new HIV infection is $385,200-$618,000.
For hepatitis C, the lifetime cost of
medical care exceeds $100,000.
The equivalent amount of money spent
on syringe access could prevent dozens of
new HIV infections annually.
Sources:.
Press Release. Schackman B. The Lifetime Cost of Current Human Immunodeficiency Virus Care in the United States. Medical
Care, Nov 2006; vol 44: pp 990-997.
Press Release. San Francisco Hep C Task Force Releases Recommendations for Fighting Epidemic. Available at
http://www.natap.org/2010/newsUpdates/012611_04.htm
20. Benefits of SAPs:
Reduction of Needle Stick Injuries
30% of law enforcement
officers have experienced
a needle stick injury (NSI).
66% reduction in NSIs
among law enforcement
officers following the
implementation of SAPs
Sources: Lorenz J, et al. Occupational Needlestick Injuries in a
Metropolitan Police Force. American Journal of Preventative
Medicine, 2000. 18:146-150.
Groseclose SL, et al. Impact of Increased Legal Access to
Needles and Syringes on Practices of Injecting Drug Users
and Police Officers—Connecticut 1992-1993. Journal of AIDS
and Human Retrovirology. 10(1): 71-72.
21. Debunking Myths about SAPs
Syringe Access Programs DO NOT:
X .. encourage drug use
X .. increase crime rates
X .. Increase inappropriately discarded
syringes
X .. increase needlestick injuries
22. Characteristics of Effective SAPs
Ensure low threshold access to services
Promote secondary syringe distribution
Maximize responsiveness to the local IDU
population
Provide or coordinate provision of health and
other social services
Include diverse community stakeholders in
creating social and legal environment supportive of
SAPs
Source: Recommended Best Practices for Effective Syringe Exchange Programs in the in the United States: Reports from a Consensus Meeting, 2009. Available at
http://www.harmreduction.org/downloads/Best%20Practices%20for%20Syringe%20Exchange%20Programs%20consensus%20statement.pdf
23. Getting Started: Core Elements of a
Needs Assessment Process
Identifying relevant stakeholders
Where are IDUs getting services?
Review of existing data, policies, resources, and
services
Existing services, HCV/HIV prevalence, OD rates
Getting to know the IDU Community
Who is injecting drugs?
What drugs are being injected?
Where does drug purchase and injection take place?
24. Getting Started: Equipment
Needles & Syringes Sterile water
in various sizes containers
Cookers
Alcohol swabs
Condoms
Cottons/Filters
Tourniquets/Ties
Health education
literature
25. Getting Started: Equipment
If Budget allows…
Powdered Citric /Ascorbic
acid
Gauze pads and band aids
Twist ties
Bleach kits
Fit packs
Baggies
Crack kits
26. Getting Started:
What do SAPs look like?
Storefront
Street-based
Secondary or peer-delivered
Underground programs
Pharmacy access
27. Storefront SAPs
Case Study: Lifepoint, Tucson, AZ
Pros Cons
House other services Limited access
Shelter from steet- (hours, location)
based activities Participants must
come to you
Increased privacy
High overhead and
On site storage space upkeep
Creating “safe space” Potential focus of
community opposition
28. Street-Based SAPs
Case Study: The CHOW Project, Hawaii
Pros Cons
Flexibility if drug Hard to include
scene changes ancillary services
More acceptable to Inclement weather
neighborhood can be a deterrant
Informal or low-
threshold Privacy concerns
Meeting people Hard to supervise
where they are outreach staff
29. Peer-Delivered SAPs
Case Study: Southern Tier AIDS Program, NY
Pros Cons
Taps into peer Cost of training and
knowledge supervising peers
Can reach groups Managing boundary
unlikely to access SAPs issues
Empowers peers to Peers may need to
take ownership collect and transport
Increased volume others’ equipment
30. Underground SAPs:
Case Study: Austin, TX
Pros Cons
No restrictions on Legal vulnerability
practice More limited reach
Potential to be more Difficult to fund, staff
participant-driven
31. Pharmacy Access
Case Study: Nevada
Pros Cons
Mainstream location Pharmacists often
refuse to sell syringes
May have more without a prescription
extended hours Cost can be prohibitive
Could be located No counseling services
closer to where Other injection
injectors live or hang equipment not available
out No disposal options
32. Why is there a need for Drug User
Cultural Competency?
Demonstrating More More
cultural meaningful effective
competency engagement interventions
33. The Principles of Drug User Cultural
Competency:
Understand the role of stigma in the lives of drug users
Recognize the vast diversity within IDU communities
Nonjudgmental and non-coercive provision of services
Compassionate pragmatism vs. absolutism
Ensuring that the communities served have a real
voice in the creation of programs and policies
Embracing a multi-tiered, collaborative model
34. Key Elements of Drug-Related Stigma
Blame and moral judgment
Criminalize
Pathologize
Patronize
Fear and Isolate
35. Implications for Providers
Willingness to access services
Relationships and trust
Assumptions
Participant risk and behaviors
Participant self-worth
Funding
36. Multiple Social Inequalities
Homelessness
Sexism/
Trauma Homophobia/
Transphobia
Injection
Drug
User
Medical and
Incarceration Mental Health
Issues
Racism/
Nationalism
37. Practicing Drug User Cultural
Competency
Supporting consumer involvement
Community advisory boards
Secondary exchangers
Focus groups
Peer education trainings
Volunteering
Leadership
38. Ensuring that the communities served have a real
voice in the creation of programs and policies.
Respectful
Relevant
Responsive
40. For more information
The Harm Reduction Coalition www.harmreduction.org
Guide to Developing and Managing Syringe Access
Programs http://www.harmreduction.org/
Understanding Drug User Stigma Training materials
http://www.harmreduction.org/
Foundation for AIDS Research (amFAR) www.amFAR.org
North American Syringe Exchange Network (NASEN)
http://www.nasen.org/
41. What Can CBA Do For You?
Organizational Program Community
Development Development Mobilization for
SAS
•Strategic Planning •DEBIs and Public
Health Strategies •Community
•Board Development assessment
•Program adaptation
•Grant Readiness •Coalition building
•Recruitment and
•Program •Community-level
retention
Collaboration & interventions
Service Integration •Core competencies
•Social marketing
Process and Outcome Monitoring and Evaluation
Limited availability on the part of the program…very difficult to find slots of poor and homeless folks. Also limited ability for people to go (work, childcare, pets)
People inject for many reasons—Pleasure, Dependence, Exposure to injecting practices, Purity of the drug, Type of drug, Supply of drug, Cost of drug, Law enforcement practices, love of the ritualIt’s not just people injecting heroin, speed or cocaine--People inject hormones (transgender community) and steroids (weightlifters)
Second syringe access program opened in Seattle WA shortly after Tacoma’s program opened. It’s important to note that these are programs that are born of activists’ response to a crisis. The late 80s and early 90s were a very scary time in America. People were disappearing because of AIDS.
Many of the remaining states without SAPs have low rates of HIV attributable to IDU (ie: WY)Source: AmFAR, Foundation for AIDS Research (using NASEN and Beth Israel Hospital data)
Researchers say that this is the great success story of HIV Prevention. The biggest successes we have managed to have in HIV transmission is with perinatal transmission and transmission among IDUs
HIV Seroprevalence among Intravenous Drug Users in New York is down from 50% to 18% in 10 yearsThere has been an 80% reduction in HIV transmission.
Again, the data is very clear on this…they do reduce HIV infections, reduce risk of HCV infection, and connect difficult to reach populations to much needed services
A meeting of experts on SAP policy and programs convened in NY in August of 2009 to compile a report on best practices
Other pros: Other cons: can be difficult to stay attuned to drug use patterns in the neighborhood
Van can have high overhead, need off-site storageOther examples include Boulder, CO
Presentation + Participant input: discuss each with examplesBlame: “just say no”, your own fault for getting HIV, HCV, weak-willed, don’t care, etc.; contrast to “pity” Ex. Someone who is born without a hand vs. someone who loses their hand because of an injection-related infectionCriminalize: War on drugs (drugs = bad, get tough, punish). Stigma (investment in prisons, incarcerating drug users for non-violent crimes vs. resources into supportive services). Result: causes more harm to drug users than drugs:Increases stigma (external + internalized—”criminal”)HCV/HIV rates increaseInterruptions in services/txRacial profiling (social stigma increases – i.e. people of color are the ones who are causing problem…use/deal drugs/create crime in community.Pathologize: sick, diseased, mentally ill, self-medicating “sickness” in mind/character; something is wrong with drug users; they can not help themselves;Not the same as a public health approach to drug use.Patronize: language (ie, the way that information is communicated); also in the presumption that others know what is best for drug users; people are very often telling drug users what they should do, or what they need, as opposed to seeking input and involving drug users in the decisions that matter most to them. Fear and Isolate: people can’t talk about it (drug use, HIV, HCV) – outed.People are isolated; Drug users as “scary”; fear-based public education campaigns;