Planning for implementation: 1997.

AIM: To provide a comprehensive review of the literature on harm reduction theories and strategies related primarily to licit and illicit drug use. BACKGROUND: Although human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) disease transmission is well understood, it continues to spread, particularly among injection drug users (IDUs). Despite early indications that HIV would be contained within the IDU community, it is spreading to non-IDU sexual partners and to children of IDUs, threatening a more widespread epidemic. METHODS: An examination of research studies and theoretical writings including reviews and policy papers published in English between 1990 and 2000. RESULTS: Harm reduction does not seek to eliminate drug use; it focuses on minimizing the personal and social harms and costs associated with drug use and spread of HIV. It seeks to ameliorate conditions surrounding drug use responsible for the spread of HIV in the IDU community: unequal access to health services; sharing of infected needles; racial and social discrimination; poverty; exposure to street violence; inadequate housing; lack of employment; poor general or mental health and other demographic and social determinants. Some controversial harm reduction strategies are described: methadone maintenance programmes, illegal drugs dispensing under controlled conditions, needle exchanges, HIV testing, vein maintenance, safe-sex and would-care programmes. CONCLUSION: The main challenge is to get IDUs to protect themselves against HIV when suffering physical and social privations and addiction needs. Diverse perspectives on harm reduction are problematic with consequences for success of drug use initiatives. Practical, ethical and theoretical complexities exist but further research is needed to build support for a harm-reduction orientation in practice and policy formulation.

Community-Institutional Relations↗

PubMed2001

Radiotherapy service delivery models for a dispersed patient population.

Access to health care interventions can be impeded when significant patient travel is required. In this economic evaluation we compare, from a societal perspective, three scenarios for the delivery of radiation treatment to an idealized population of 1,600 patients distributed between two urban nodes (1,200 + 400 patients each) separated by up to 500 km. As it is implicitly assumed that the clinical outcome for those patients who access the system is independent of the service delivery model, this study constitutes a cost minimization analysis from a societal perspective. The costs to the health care system are based on an activity costing model developed by us and consistent with recent Canadian studies. The costs to the patient are approximated by a formula that includes direct costs (travel and accommodation) and indirect (time) costs, with the latter based on a human capital approach. A sensitivity analysis has been performed to confirm the robustness of our conclusions both to uncertainties in the input data and to the inclusion of time costs, the estimation of which remains controversial. From a societal cost perspective only, we show that outreach radiotherapy (central comprehensive facility and satellite) is the economically superior service delivery model for separations between 30 km and 170 km. Beyond 170 km, a fully decentralized service would be warranted if the only consideration were societal economic advantage.

Community-Institutional Relations↗