1
|
Mehrolhassani MH, Yazdi-Feyzabadi V, Hajebi A, Mirzaei S. Cross-country Comparison of Treatment Policies Facing the Drug Abuse in Five Selected Countries. ADDICTION & HEALTH 2019; 11:81-92. [PMID: 31321005 PMCID: PMC6633066 DOI: 10.22122/ahj.v11i2.233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2018] [Accepted: 02/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Drug abuse is one of the main problems of human's life; thus communities have been thinking about the solution of this problem. The present study aimed to compare the general features of drug abuse treatment policies, war on drugs (WOD), and harm reduction (HR), in the selected countries. METHODS The present study was a comparative and desk research that sought to compare context, stewardship, financing, type of substance abuse treatment services, reasons of paradigm shift, and executive challenges of treatment policies in the selected countries (China, Malaysia, Germany, Netherland, and Iran). The necessary data for comparison of the countries were collected through valid databases, review of documents, and reports of international organizations. FINDINGS Context conditions were better in the HR countries. In most countries, the central government played a key role in the stewardship, financing, and service providing. In WOD countries, the presence of judicial structure was higher in the treatment of drug abuse. The policy-making approach was ideological in WOD countries, but evidence-based in HR countries. CONCLUSION It seems that performance of HR countries is better than WOD countries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Vahid Yazdi-Feyzabadi
- Health Services Management Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
| | - Ahmad Hajebi
- Research Center for Addiction and Risky Behavior, Psychiatric Department, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Saeid Mirzaei
- Neuroscience Research Center, Institute of Neuropharmacology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Assessing the concordance between illicit drug laws on the books and drug law enforcement: Comparison of three states on the continuum from "decriminalised" to "punitive". THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DRUG POLICY 2017; 41:148-157. [PMID: 28190670 DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.12.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2016] [Revised: 12/14/2016] [Accepted: 12/19/2016] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Variations in drug laws, as well as variations in enforcement practice, exist across jurisdictions. This study explored the feasibility of categorising drug laws "on the books" in terms of their punitiveness, and the extent of their concordance with "laws in practice" in a cross-national comparison. METHODS "Law on the books", classified with respect to both cannabis and other drug offences in the Czech Republic, NSW (AU) and Florida (USA) were analysed in order to establish an ordinal relationship between the three states. Indicators to assess the "laws in practice" covered both police (arrests) and court (sentencing) activity between 2002 and 2013. Parametric and non-parametric tests of equality of means, tests of stationarity and correlation analysis were used to examine the concordance between the ordinal categorisation of "laws on the books" and "laws in practice", as well as trends over time. RESULTS The Czech Republic had the most lenient drug laws; Florida had the most punitive and NSW was in-between. Examining the indicators of "laws in practice", we found that the population adjusted number of individuals sentenced to prison ranked across the three states was concordant with categorisation of "laws on the books", but the average sentence length and percentage of court cases sentenced to prison were not. Also, the de jure decriminalisation of drug possession in the Czech Republic yielded a far greater share of administrative offenses than the de facto decriminalisation of cannabis use / possession in NSW. Finally, the mean value of most "laws in practice" indicators changed significantly over time although the "laws on the books" didn't change. CONCLUSIONS While some indicators of "laws in practice" were concordant with the ordinal categorisation of drug laws, several indicators of "laws in practice" appeared to operate independently from the drug laws as stated. This has significant implications for drug policy analysis and means that research should not assume they are interchangeable and should consider each separately when designing research.
Collapse
|
3
|
Ritter A, Livingston M, Chalmers J, Berends L, Reuter P. Comparative policy analysis for alcohol and drugs: Current state of the field. THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DRUG POLICY 2016; 31:39-50. [PMID: 26944717 DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.02.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2015] [Revised: 01/19/2016] [Accepted: 02/01/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A central policy research question concerns the extent to which specific policies produce certain effects - and cross-national (or between state/province) comparisons appear to be an ideal way to answer such a question. This paper explores the current state of comparative policy analysis (CPA) with respect to alcohol and drugs policies. METHODS We created a database of journal articles published between 2010 and 2014 as the body of CPA work for analysis. We used this database of 57 articles to clarify, extract and analyse the ways in which CPA has been defined. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the CPA methods employed, the policy areas that have been studied, and differences between alcohol CPA and drug CPA are explored. RESULTS There is a lack of clear definition as to what counts as a CPA. The two criteria for a CPA (explicit study of a policy, and comparison across two or more geographic locations), exclude descriptive epidemiology and single state comparisons. With the strict definition, most CPAs were with reference to alcohol (42%), although the most common policy to be analysed was medical cannabis (23%). The vast majority of papers undertook quantitative data analysis, with a variety of advanced statistical methods. We identified five approaches to the policy specification: classification or categorical coding of policy as present or absent; the use of an index; implied policy differences; described policy difference and data-driven policy coding. Each of these has limitations, but perhaps the most common limitation was the inability for the method to account for the differences between policy-as-stated versus policy-as-implemented. CONCLUSION There is significant diversity in CPA methods for analysis of alcohol and drugs policy, and some substantial challenges with the currently employed methods. The absence of clear boundaries to a definition of what counts as a 'comparative policy analysis' may account for the methodological plurality but also appears to stand in the way of advancing the techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison Ritter
- Drug Policy Modelling Program, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
| | - Michael Livingston
- Centre for Alcohol Policy Research (CAPR), Department of Public Health, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
| | - Jenny Chalmers
- Drug Policy Modelling Program, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
| | - Lynda Berends
- Centre for Health and Social Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
| | - Peter Reuter
- School of Public Policy and Department of Criminology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Vilibic-Cavlek T, Kucinar J, Kaic B, Vilibic M, Pandak N, Barbic L, Stevanovic V, Vranes J. Epidemiology of hepatitis C in Croatia in the European context. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21:9476-93. [PMID: 26327756 PMCID: PMC4548109 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i32.9476] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2015] [Revised: 06/03/2015] [Accepted: 07/18/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
We analyzed prevalence, risk factors and hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype distribution in different population groups in Croatia in the context of HCV epidemiology in Europe, with the aim to gather all existing information on HCV infection in Croatia which will be used to advise upon preventive measures. It is estimated that 35000-45000 of the Croatian population is chronically infected with HCV. Like in other European countries, there have been changes in the HCV epidemiology in Croatia over the past few decades. In some risk groups (polytransfused and hemodialysis patients), a significant decrease in the HCV prevalence was observed after the introduction of routine HCV screening of blood/blood products in 1992. Injecting drug users (IDUs) still represent a group with the highest risk for HCV infection with prevalence ranging from 29% to 65%. Compared to the prevalence in the Croatian general population (0.9%), higher prevalence rates were found in prison populations (8.3%-44%), human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients (15%), persons with high-risk sexual behavior (4.6%) and alcohol abusers (2.4%). Low/very low prevalence was reported in children and adolescents (0.3%) as well as in blood donors (0%-0.009%). In addition, distribution of HCV genotypes has changed due to different routes of transmission. In the general population, genotypes 1 and 3 are most widely distributed (60.4%-79.8% and 12.9%-47.9%, respectively). The similar genotype distribution is found in groups with high-risk sexual behavior. Genotype 3 is predominant in Croatian IDUs (60.5%-83.9%) while in the prison population genotypes 3 and 1 are equally distributed (52.4% and 47.6%). Data on HCV prevalence and risk factors for transmission are useful for implementation of preventive measures and HCV screening.
Collapse
|
5
|
Wiessing L, Ferri M, Grady B, Kantzanou M, Sperle I, Cullen KJ, Hatzakis A, Prins M, Vickerman P, Lazarus JV, Hope VD, Matheï C. Hepatitis C virus infection epidemiology among people who inject drugs in Europe: a systematic review of data for scaling up treatment and prevention. PLoS One 2014; 9:e103345. [PMID: 25068274 PMCID: PMC4113410 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 178] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2014] [Accepted: 06/29/2014] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND People who inject drugs (PWID) are a key population affected by hepatitis C virus (HCV). Treatment options are improving and may enhance prevention; however access for PWID may be poor. The availability in the literature of information on seven main topic areas (incidence, chronicity, genotypes, HIV co-infection, diagnosis and treatment uptake, and burden of disease) to guide HCV treatment and prevention scale-up for PWID in the 27 countries of the European Union is systematically reviewed. METHODS AND FINDINGS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for publications between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2012, with a search strategy of general keywords regarding viral hepatitis, substance abuse and geographic scope, as well as topic-specific keywords. Additional articles were found through structured email consultations with a large European expert network. Data availability was highly variable and important limitations existed in comparability and representativeness. Nine of 27 countries had data on HCV incidence among PWID, which was often high (2.7-66/100 person-years, median 13, Interquartile range (IQR) 8.7-28). Most common HCV genotypes were G1 and G3; however, G4 may be increasing, while the proportion of traditionally 'difficult to treat' genotypes (G1+G4) showed large variation (median 53, IQR 43-62). Twelve countries reported on HCV chronicity (median 72, IQR 64-81) and 22 on HIV prevalence in HCV-infected PWID (median 3.9%, IQR 0.2-28). Undiagnosed infection, assessed in five countries, was high (median 49%, IQR 38-64), while of those diagnosed, the proportion entering treatment was low (median 9.5%, IQR 3.5-15). Burden of disease, where assessed, was high and will rise in the next decade. CONCLUSION Key data on HCV epidemiology, care and disease burden among PWID in Europe are sparse but suggest many undiagnosed infections and poor treatment uptake. Stronger efforts are needed to improve data availability to guide an increase in HCV treatment among PWID.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucas Wiessing
- European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Marica Ferri
- European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Bart Grady
- Cluster Infectious Diseases, Department of Research, Public Health Service, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Center for Infection and Immunity Amsterdam (CINIMA), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maria Kantzanou
- National Reference Centre for Retroviruses, Laboratory of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece
| | - Ida Sperle
- Copenhagen HIV Programme (CHIP), Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Katelyn J. Cullen
- HIV & STI Department, Centre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Angelos Hatzakis
- National Reference Centre for Retroviruses, Laboratory of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece
| | - Maria Prins
- Cluster Infectious Diseases, Department of Research, Public Health Service, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Center for Infection and Immunity Amsterdam (CINIMA), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Peter Vickerman
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, United Kingdom
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Jeffrey V. Lazarus
- Copenhagen HIV Programme (CHIP), Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Vivian D. Hope
- HIV & STI Department, Centre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, United Kingdom
| | - Catharina Matheï
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|