CommentaryOptimal provision of needle and syringe programmes for injecting drug users: A systematic review
Introduction
The emergence of HIV among drug using populations in the early 1980s prompted the introduction of programmes for distributing sterile injecting equipment, first in the Netherlands (van den Hoek, van Haastrecht, & Coutinho, 1989) and later in the United Kingdom (Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, 1998) and Australia (Wodak, 1995). Since then, provision of these services has grown rapidly and needle and syringe programmes (NSPs) have become a central component of harm reduction strategies aimed at injecting drug users (IDUs) in many developed and developing countries (Bastos & Strathdee, 2000). The rapid introduction of NSPs has been credited with averting HIV epidemics in the UK (Stimson, 1995, Stimson, 1996) and Australia (Wodak & Lurie, 1997), where HIV infection among IDUs has remained relatively uncommon (HPACI, 2007, National Centre in HIV, 2008). However, the same cannot be said for the prevalence of hepatitis C (HCV) (Crofts et al., 1997, Health Protection Agency, 2007).
There is good evidence that NSPs reduce injection risk behaviours among IDUs (Committee on the Prevention of HIV, 2006, Gibson et al., 2001, Wodak and Cooney, 2004), however questions remain about the impact of NSPs on HIV and HCV incidence (Committee on the Prevention of HIV Infection among Injecting Drug Users in High-Risk Countries, 2006). In developed countries where NSPs have been widely established, such as the UK and Australia, varying models of service provision have been implemented and further research is needed to identify the most effective combination of programmes (Committee on the Prevention of HIV Infection among Injecting Drug Users in High-Risk Countries, 2006). In addition, in the UK for example, there is great variation in the extent and types of services provided (Huntington et al., 2006, NTASM, 2007) and information on the effectiveness of different approaches to the organisation and delivery of NSPs is required for evidence-based decision making.
Considering the need to develop guidance on the optimal provision of NSPs from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) a systematic review was undertaken to inform the development of evidence-based policy recommendations in England by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). The data presented here are drawn from an extensive review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of NSPs for IDUs (Jones, Pickering, Sumnall, McVeigh, & Bellis, 2008).
The review sought to determine which approaches to the organisation and delivery of NSPs for IDUs are effective by addressing three research questions: (1) What types of NSPs are effective? (2) Which additional harm reduction services offered by NSPs are effective? and (3) Are NSPs delivered in parallel with, or alongside, opiate substitution therapy (OST) effective? In examining which types of NSPs were effective, the following organisational characteristics of services were considered: provider, site and setting of services; availability and accessibility; geographical setting; type of injecting equipment supplied; and return policies on used equipment.
Section snippets
Study selection and characteristics
Studies that addressed the research questions were eligible for inclusion if they examined the distribution of needles, syringes and other injecting equipment to populations of currently injecting drug users, including injectors of opiates, stimulants, and non-prescribed anabolic steroids and other performance and image enhancing drugs (PIEDs). Studies that examined the role of needle exchange in prisons were included in the original review (Jones et al., 2008) but are not reported on here.
Summary of studies identified
A total of 406 full text articles were screened for inclusion and of these, 16 studies were judged to be eligible for inclusion. The process of study selection is shown in Fig. 1 and a summary of the studies identified for inclusion is presented in Table 1. Eleven studies examined different types of NSPs, and based on the literature identified we were able to examine the effectiveness of different types of NSPs by site and setting (Fisher et al., 2003, Khoshnood et al., 2000, Masson et al., 2007
Discussion
This review examined the optimal provision of NSPs for IDUs in terms of different types of NSPs, and the additional harm reduction services that may be delivered alongside the distribution of injecting equipment, including the combination with OST. Sixteen studies were identified that addressed the research questions of interest. Eight studies, including two RCTs, examined the effects of setting on injection risk behaviours, and three cross-sectional studies examined the impact of different
Conclusions
This review has identified that there is a paucity of evidence with regards to different approaches to organisation and delivery of NSPs. Further studies are required which have a stated aim of evaluating how setting and the additional services provided at NSPs impact on effectiveness. These studies should consider how the diversity of populations attending NSPs and the influence of social, organisational and political context impact on effectiveness.
Currently, it is difficult to draw
Conflict of interest statement
None to declare.
Acknowledgements
This review was funded by the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) for the purposes of informing public health guidance. The interpretation, analysis and views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of NICE. We would like to thank the information staff at the Support Unit for Research Evidence at the University of Cardiff for developing and executing the search strategies for the review.
References (38)
- et al.
Evaluating effectiveness of syringe exchange programmes: Current issues and future prospects
Social Science and Medicine
(2000) - et al.
New challenges for agency based syringe exchange schemes: Analysis of 11 years of data (1991–2001) in Merseyside and Cheshire
International Journal on Drug Policy
(2003) AIDS and injecting drug use in the United Kingdom, 1987–1993. The policy response and the prevention of an epidemic
Social Science and Medicine
(1995)- et al.
Facilitating entry into drug treatment among injection drug users referred from a needle exchange program: Results from a community-based behavioral intervention trial
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
(2006) AIDS and drug misuse: Part one
(1998)- et al.
Sterile syringe access conditions and variations in HIV risk among drug injectors in three cities
Addiction
(2004) - et al.
Lethal injections: The law, science and politics of syringe access for injection drug users
University of San Francisco Law Review
(2003) Preventing HIV infection among injecting drug users in high risk countries: An assessment of the evidence
(2006)- et al.
Epidemiology of hepatitis C virus infection among injecting drug users in Australia
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
(1997) - et al.
Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: The TREND statement
American Journal of Public Health
(2004)
Needle exchange and injection drug use frequency: A randomized clinical trial
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
Effectiveness of syringe exchange programs in reducing HIV risk behavior and HIV seroconversion among injecting drug users
AIDS
Shooting up: Infections among injecting drug users in the United Kingdom, 2006
New HIV diagnoses surveillance tables
Diversity of needle exchange provision in the UK: Findings from a national survey
Eurosurveillance
A review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of needle and syringe programmes for injecting drug users: Final report
Syringe source, use, and discard among injection-drug users in New Haven, Connecticut
AIDS & Public Policy Journal
Challenges in motivating treatment enrollment in community syringe exchange participants
Journal of Urban Health
Injection risk behaviors among clients of syringe exchange programs with different syringe dispensation policies
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
Cited by (55)
Implementation and evaluation of a syringe vending machine trial in Tbilisi, Georgia
2022, International Journal of Drug PolicySyringe Services Programs’ Role in Ending the HIV Epidemic in the U.S.: Why We Cannot Do It Without Them
2021, American Journal of Preventive MedicineCitation Excerpt :Many SSPs offer additional services for preventing HIV transmission and other health and social sequelae of drug use.43,44 Programs are located in all regions of the country,42,45 and although most are fixed sites, some operate mobile sites, on-demand/on-call services, street outreach, and delivery to increase access.46,47 To further expand syringe distribution to areas where SSP implementation is limited or not feasible, pharmacies, hospitals, mail delivery, and vending machines can provide important complementary services to SSPs (Box 148–56).57
Implementation and evaluation of an educational intervention for safer injection in people who inject drugs in Europe: a multi-country mixed-methods study
2021, International Journal of Drug PolicyThe impact of COVID-19 restrictions on needle and syringe programme provision and coverage in England
2020, International Journal of Drug PolicyCommunity pharmacist experiences of providing needle and syringe programmes in Ireland
2017, Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy