Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods: comparing HIV-related risk behaviors among Puerto Rican drug users in Puerto Rico and New York.

National Development and Research Institutes, Inc., Center for Drug Use and HIV Research, New York, New York 10010, USA.
Substance Use &amp Misuse (Impact Factor: 1.11). 02/2003; 38(1):1-24. DOI: 10.1081/JA-120016563
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A dual site project was conducted to assess determinants of injection and sex-related risk behaviors among Puerto Rican drug users. The project focused on injection drug users and crack smokers, and was conducted in East Harlem, NY and Bayamón, PR in 1996-2000. Qualitative methods included ethnographic mapping, focus groups, in-depth interviews, and observations. A survey component (East Harlem, n = 800; Bayamón, n = 400) was also conducted. Procedures to ensure integration of methodologies and comparability of data were developed. This paper describes the qualitative and survey methods used, and presents the comparative HIV risk behaviors. The integration of the two methodologies served multiple functions: each component identified issues to be addressed in the other, enhanced cross-site comparability of data, and assisted in interpretation of findings. The survey data showed high levels of risk behaviors in both communities, with significantly higher levels of risk reported in Bayamón. Conducting studies of similar ethnic groups in different communities provides opportunities to examine diverse sources of influence on risk behaviors. The integration of qualitative and quantitative methods can enhance comparability and understanding of findings, particularly when there are differences in behaviors between communities.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Increasing access to sterile syringes and new drug preparation materials is an effective means of reducing HIV transmission among injection drug users (IDUs), and a fundamental component of harm reduction ideology. The purpose of this study is to examine changes during a three-year period in syringe acquisition by street-recruited Puerto Rican IDUs characterized by frequent drug injection and high HIV seroprevalence. At baseline (1998-1999) and 36-month follow-up, 103 IDUs recruited in East Harlem, New York (NY), and 135 from Bayamón, Puerto Rico (PR) were surveyed about syringe sources and HIV risk behaviors in the prior 30 days. A majority of participants in both sites were male (NY 78.6%, PR 84.4%), were born in Puerto Rico (NY 59.2%, PR 87.4%), and had not completed high school (NY 56.3%, PR 51.9%). Compared to PR IDUs at follow-up, NY IDUs injected less (3.4 vs. 7.0 times/day, p < .001), and re-used syringes less (3.1 vs. 8.0 times, p < .001). Between baseline and follow-up, in NY the proportion of syringes from syringe exchange programs (SEPs) increased from 54.2% to 72.9% (p = .001); syringes from pharmacies did not increase significantly (0.2% to 2.5%, p = .095). In PR, the proportions of syringes from major sources did not change significantly: private sellers (50.9% to 50.9%, p = .996); pharmacies (18.6% to 19.0%, p = .867); SEP (12.8% to 14.4%, p = .585). The study indicates that NY SEPs became more dominant, while NY pharmacies remained a minor source even though a law enacted in 2001 legalized syringe purchases without prescription. Private sellers in PR remained the dominant and most expensive source. The only source of free syringes, the SEP, permitted more syringes to be exchanged but the increase was not statistically significant. Implications for syringe exchange and distribution programs are discussed.
    Substance Use &amp Misuse 01/2006; 41(9):1313-36. · 1.11 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To identify individual- and neighborhood-level correlates of membership within high HIV prevalence drug networks. METHODS: We recruited 378 New York City drug users via respondent-driven sampling (2006-2009). Individual-level characteristics and recruiter-recruit relationships were ascertained and merged with 2000 tract-level U.S. Census data. Descriptive statistics and population average models were used to identify correlates of membership in high HIV prevalence drug networks (>10.54% vs. <10.54% HIV). RESULTS: Individuals in high HIV prevalence drug networks were more likely to be recruited in neighborhoods with greater inequality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 5.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40-24.42), higher valued owner-occupied housing (AOR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.14-1.92), and a higher proportion of Latinos (AOR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.19-2.80). They reported more crack use (AOR, 7.23; 95% CI, 2.43-21.55), exchange sex (AOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.03-3.23), and recent drug treatment enrollment (AOR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.05-2.50) and were less likely to report cocaine use (AOR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.79) and recent homelessness (AOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.57). CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between exchange sex, crack use, and membership within high HIV prevalence drug networks may suggest an ideal HIV risk target population for intervention. Coupling network-based interventions with those adding risk-reduction and HIV testing/care/adherence counseling services to the standard of care in drug treatment programs should be explored in neighborhoods with increased inequality, higher valued owner-occupied housing, and a greater proportion of Latinos.
    Annals of epidemiology 03/2013; · 2.95 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study used semi-structured interviews and content analysis to examine moral principles that street drug users apply to three hypothetical addiction research ethical dilemmas. Participants (n = 90) were ethnically diverse, economically disadvantaged drug users recruited in New York City in 2009 . Participants applied a wide range of contextually sensitive moral precepts, including respect, beneficence, justice, relationality, professional obligations, rules, and pragmatic self-interest. Limitations and implications for future research and the responsible conduct of addiction research are discussed.
    Substance Use &amp Misuse 11/2010; 46(6):728-41. · 1.11 Impact Factor