Monitoring quality and coverage of harm reduction services for people who use drugs: a consensus study.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wiessing Lucas, Ferri Marica, Běláčková Vendula, Carrieri Patrizia, Friedman Samuel R, Folch Cinta, Dolan Kate, Galvin Brian, Vickerman Peter, Lazarus Jeffrey V, Mravčík Viktor, Kretzschmar Mirjam, Sypsa Vana, Sarasa-Renedo Ana, Uusküla Anneli, Paraskevis Dimitrios, Mendão Luis, Rossi Diana, van Gelder Nadine, Mitcheson Luke, Paoli Letizia, Gomez Cristina Diaz, Milhet Maitena, Dascalu Nicoleta, Knight Jonathan, Hay Gordon, Kalamara Eleni, Simon Roland, EUBEST working group, Comiskey Catherine, Rossi Carla, Griffiths Paul
Аннотация
METHODS AND RESULTS: The framework was developed collaboratively using consensus methods involving nominal group meetings, review of existing quality standards, repeated email commenting rounds and qualitative analysis of opinions/experiences from a broad range of professionals/experts, including members of civil society and organisations representing people who use drugs. Twelve priority candidate indicators are proposed for opioid agonist therapy (OAT), needle and syringe programmes (NSP) and generic cross-cutting aspects of harm reduction (and potentially other drug) services. Under the specific OAT indicators, priority indicators included 'coverage', 'waiting list time', 'dosage' and 'availability in prisons'. For the specific NSP indicators, the priority indicators included 'coverage', 'number of needles/syringes distributed/collected', 'provision of other drug use paraphernalia' and 'availability in prisons'. Among the generic or cross-cutting indicators the priority indicators were 'infectious diseases counselling and care', 'take away naloxone', 'information on safe use/sex' and 'condoms'. We discuss conditions for the successful development of the suggested indicators and constraints (e.g. funding, ideology). We propose conducting a pilot study to test the feasibility and applicability of the proposed indicators before their scaling up and routine implementation, to evaluate their effectiveness in comparing service coverage and quality across countries.
CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of an improved set of validated and internationally agreed upon best practice indicators for monitoring harm reduction service will provide a structural basis for public health and epidemiological studies and support evidence and human rights-based health policies, services and interventions.