Separating politics and scientific research on heroin prescription - In reply [Letter]

No Abstract

Heroin-assisted treatment as a response to the public health problem of opiate dependence

Injection drug use (involving the injection of illicit opiates) poses serious public health problems in many countries. Research has indicated that injection drug users are at higher risk for morbidity in the form of HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis B and C, and drug-related mortality, as well as increased criminal activity. Methadone maintenance treatment is the most prominent form of pharmacotherapy treatment for illicit opiate dependence in several countries, and its application varies internationally with respect to treatment regulations and delivery modes. In order to effectively treat those patients who have previously been resistant to methadone maintenance treatment, several countries have been studying and/or considering heroin-assisted treatment as a complementary form of opiate pharmacotherapy treatment. This paper provides an overview of the prevalence of injection drug use and the opiate dependence problem internationally, the current opiate dependence treatment landscape in several countries, and the status of ongoing or planned heroin-assisted treatment trials in Australia, Canada and certain European countries.

Property crime and income generation by heroin users

This paper provides a detailed analysis of patterns of income generation among 202 active heroin users in South West Sydney. We explore both sources of income and the relative contribution of different types of income generating activities, including drug sales and related activities, property crime, prostitution, legitimate income and avoided expenditures. Despite claims that heroin use leads inevitably to property crime, drug market activities accounted for a greater proportion of drug user income in this sample. Results indicate that law enforcement crackdowns that reduce opportunities for generating income from the drug market may increase property crime by heroin users.

Transitions between routes of benzodiazepine administration among heroin users in Sydney

A sample of 312 heroin users were interviewed regarding their benzodiazepine use. The majority (94%) had used benzodiazepines, 72% in the 6 months prior to interview. Benzodiazepine injecting was common, with 28% of the sample having injected these drugs, 13% in the 6 months preceding interview. Current benzodiazepine injectors showed greater polydrug use, injection-related HIV risk-taking behaviour, criminal involvement, psychological distress and injection-related health problems, as well as poorer general health, and an increased risk of having overdosed than other users of benzodiazepines. Of those subjects who had injected benzodiazepines, 55% were no longer current benzodiazepine injectors. Concern for general health emerged as the most common reason for having made a transition away from injecting, and for being likely to make such a transition.

The role of legal coercion in the treatment of offenders with alcohol and heroin problems

This article discusses the ethical justification for and reviews the American evidence on the effectiveness of; treatment for alcohol and heroin dependence that is provided under legal coercion to offenders whose alcohol and drug dependence has contributed to the commission of the offence with which they have been charged or convicted. The article focuses on legally coerced treatment for drink-driving offenders and heroin-dependent property offenders. it outlines the various arguments that have been made for providing such treatment under legal coercion, namely. the over-representation of alcohol and drug dependent persons in prison populations; the contributory causal role of alcohol and other drug problems in the offences that lead to their imprisonment; the high rates of relapse to drug use and criminal involvement after incarceration; the desirability of keeping injecting heroin users out of prisons as a way of reducing the transmission of infectious diseases such as HIV and hepatitis; and the putatively greater cost-effectiveness of treatment compared with incarceration. The ethical objections to legally coerced drug treatment are briefly discussed before the evidence on the effectiveness of legally coerced treatment for alcohol and other drug dependence is reviewed. The evidence, which is primarily from the USA, gives qualified support for some forms of legally coerced drug treatment provided that these programs are well resourced, carefully implemented, and their performance is monitored to ensure that they provide a humane and effective alternative to imprisonment. Expectations about what these programs can achieve also need to be realistic.

Conclusions

The researchers focussed on the impact of the heroin shortage that occurred in early 2001 on three Australian jurisdictions, namely NSW, Vic and SA. They interviewed 82 heroin dependent heroin users and 172 key informants from health and law enforcement agencies. They also examined a range of indicator data such as drug seizures, drug-related arrests, deaths related to drug use, emergency department admissions for overdose or drug induced psychosis , calls to telephone help lines about drug use, needles distributed for drug use, and notifications about blood borne diseases. In addition a range of documentation, in particular from the law enforcement sector, was examined.

Breaking the deadlock over an Australian trial of injectable opioid maintenance

INJECTABLE HEROIN MAINTENANCE has been advocated as a form of treatment for opioid dependence that would attract, and retain in treatment, addicts who have either not sought treatment or who have failed at other forms of treatment, including methadone maintenance. Advocates of heroin maintenance argue that it would increase the proportion of addicts in treatment and reduce heroin use, drug related crime, and deaths due to overdose.