注射器服务项目参与者样本中的危害减少、自我效能和非接触式供应获取动机。

IF 4 2区 社会学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Rachel A Hoopsick, Benjamin M Campbell, R Andrew Yockey
{"title":"注射器服务项目参与者样本中的危害减少、自我效能和非接触式供应获取动机。","authors":"Rachel A Hoopsick, Benjamin M Campbell, R Andrew Yockey","doi":"10.1186/s12954-025-01288-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Contactless harm reduction supply methods (e.g., vending machines, mail order, mobile delivery) have become prevalent in the United States. However, this approach has faced some criticisms, including the notion that, unlike staffed syringe services programs, contactless methods do not provide face-to-face support, education, or referrals to treatment, potentially limiting their overall impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected self-reported data from a sample of people who inject drugs who accessed a syringe services program (N = 50), including their demographics, harm reduction self-efficacy (i.e., confidence to employ specific health-preserving coping skills in high-risk drug using situations), and motivations for contactless harm reduction supply access via vending machine. We explored differences in the participants' demographics and harm reduction self-efficacy by usual method of harm reduction supply access (in-person vs. vending machine).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants accessed the harm reduction supply vending machine primarily out of convenience (66%) and limited syringe services program hours (56%). Fear of being seen by someone they knew (28%), law enforcement (34%), and social services (22%) were also motivators. Overall, harm reduction self-efficacy was highest for safer injection practices but lowest for reducing drug use. We did not find any significant differences in participants' demographics or harm reduction self-efficacy by access method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>People who access harm reduction supplies in person and through contactless methods may not meaningfully differ in terms of their demographics and harm reduction self-efficacy, and contactless harm reduction supply methods are more convenient than in-person services. Findings support continued reductions to barriers of harm reduction services.</p>","PeriodicalId":12922,"journal":{"name":"Harm Reduction Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"130"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12302801/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Harm reduction self-efficacy and motivations for contactless supply access among a sample of syringe services program participants.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel A Hoopsick, Benjamin M Campbell, R Andrew Yockey\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12954-025-01288-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Contactless harm reduction supply methods (e.g., vending machines, mail order, mobile delivery) have become prevalent in the United States. However, this approach has faced some criticisms, including the notion that, unlike staffed syringe services programs, contactless methods do not provide face-to-face support, education, or referrals to treatment, potentially limiting their overall impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected self-reported data from a sample of people who inject drugs who accessed a syringe services program (N = 50), including their demographics, harm reduction self-efficacy (i.e., confidence to employ specific health-preserving coping skills in high-risk drug using situations), and motivations for contactless harm reduction supply access via vending machine. We explored differences in the participants' demographics and harm reduction self-efficacy by usual method of harm reduction supply access (in-person vs. vending machine).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants accessed the harm reduction supply vending machine primarily out of convenience (66%) and limited syringe services program hours (56%). Fear of being seen by someone they knew (28%), law enforcement (34%), and social services (22%) were also motivators. Overall, harm reduction self-efficacy was highest for safer injection practices but lowest for reducing drug use. We did not find any significant differences in participants' demographics or harm reduction self-efficacy by access method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>People who access harm reduction supplies in person and through contactless methods may not meaningfully differ in terms of their demographics and harm reduction self-efficacy, and contactless harm reduction supply methods are more convenient than in-person services. Findings support continued reductions to barriers of harm reduction services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12922,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Harm Reduction Journal\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"130\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12302801/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Harm Reduction Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-025-01288-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harm Reduction Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-025-01288-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:非接触式减少危害供应方法(例如,自动售货机,邮购,移动交付)在美国已经变得普遍。然而,这种方法面临着一些批评,包括与人员注射器服务项目不同,非接触式方法不提供面对面的支持、教育或转诊治疗,这可能会限制其整体影响。方法:我们收集了一组参与注射器服务项目的注射吸毒者(N = 50)的自我报告数据,包括他们的人口统计数据、减少伤害自我效能感(即在高风险吸毒情况下采用特定健康应对技能的信心),以及通过自动售货机获得非接触式减少伤害供应的动机。我们通过通常的减少伤害供应获取方法(面对面与自动售货机)来探索参与者的人口统计学和减少伤害自我效能的差异。结果:参与者使用减害供应自动售货机主要是出于方便(66%)和有限的注射器服务时间(56%)。害怕被认识的人看到(28%)、执法部门(34%)和社会服务部门(22%)也是激励因素。总体而言,减少伤害的自我效能在更安全的注射实践中最高,但在减少药物使用中最低。我们没有发现访问方法在参与者的人口统计学和减少伤害自我效能方面有显著差异。结论:面对面和非接触式方式获取减害用品的人群在人口统计学和减害自我效能感方面可能没有显著差异,非接触式方式获取减害用品比面对面服务更方便。调查结果支持继续减少减少伤害服务的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Harm reduction self-efficacy and motivations for contactless supply access among a sample of syringe services program participants.

Background: Contactless harm reduction supply methods (e.g., vending machines, mail order, mobile delivery) have become prevalent in the United States. However, this approach has faced some criticisms, including the notion that, unlike staffed syringe services programs, contactless methods do not provide face-to-face support, education, or referrals to treatment, potentially limiting their overall impact.

Methods: We collected self-reported data from a sample of people who inject drugs who accessed a syringe services program (N = 50), including their demographics, harm reduction self-efficacy (i.e., confidence to employ specific health-preserving coping skills in high-risk drug using situations), and motivations for contactless harm reduction supply access via vending machine. We explored differences in the participants' demographics and harm reduction self-efficacy by usual method of harm reduction supply access (in-person vs. vending machine).

Results: Participants accessed the harm reduction supply vending machine primarily out of convenience (66%) and limited syringe services program hours (56%). Fear of being seen by someone they knew (28%), law enforcement (34%), and social services (22%) were also motivators. Overall, harm reduction self-efficacy was highest for safer injection practices but lowest for reducing drug use. We did not find any significant differences in participants' demographics or harm reduction self-efficacy by access method.

Conclusions: People who access harm reduction supplies in person and through contactless methods may not meaningfully differ in terms of their demographics and harm reduction self-efficacy, and contactless harm reduction supply methods are more convenient than in-person services. Findings support continued reductions to barriers of harm reduction services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Harm Reduction Journal
Harm Reduction Journal Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
126
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: Harm Reduction Journal is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal whose focus is on the prevalent patterns of psychoactive drug use, the public policies meant to control them, and the search for effective methods of reducing the adverse medical, public health, and social consequences associated with both drugs and drug policies. We define "harm reduction" as "policies and programs which aim to reduce the health, social, and economic costs of legal and illegal psychoactive drug use without necessarily reducing drug consumption". We are especially interested in studies of the evolving patterns of drug use around the world, their implications for the spread of HIV/AIDS and other blood-borne pathogens.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信