Outcomes of a peer HIV prevention program with injection drug and crack users: the Risk Avoidance Partnership.

Institute for Community Research, Hartford, Connecticut 06106, USA.
Substance Use &amp Misuse (Impact Factor: 1.23). 02/2009; 44(2):253-81. DOI: 10.1080/10826080802347677
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Risk Avoidance Partnership (RAP) Project conducted in Hartford, Connecticut, tested a program to train active drug injectors and crack cocaine users as "Peer Health Advocates" (PHAs) to deliver a modular HIV, hepatitis, and STI prevention intervention to hard-to-reach drug users in their networks and others in the city. The intervention was designed to diffuse health promotion and risk-reduction interventions by supporting PHAs to model prevention practices and deliver risk- and harm-reduction materials and information. We compared change in behaviors and attitudes between baseline and 6-month follow-up of 112 primarily African-American and Latino PHAs, 223 of their drug-user network contact referrals, and 118 other study recruits (total n = 523). Results indicated significant HIV risk reduction among all study participants, associated with significant health advocacy action conducted by PHAs, and a relationship between exposure to the RAP peer-delivered intervention and risk reduction among all study groups. Findings suggest that active drug users' engagement in peer health advocacy can set in motion a feedback and diffusion process that supports both the continued work of the PHAs and the adoption of harm reduction and mimicking of health advocacy by their peers.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There are an estimated several million crack-cocaine users globally; use is highest in the Americas. Most crack users are socio-economically marginalized (e.g., homeless), and feature elevated risks for morbidity (e.g., blood-borne viruses), mortality and crime/violence involvement, resulting in extensive burdens. No comprehensive reviews of evidence-based prevention and/or treatment interventions specifically for crack use exist. We conducted a comprehensive narrative overview of English-language studies on the efficacy of secondary prevention and treatment interventions for crack (cocaine) abuse/dependence. Literature searches (1990-2014) using pertinent keywords were conducted in main scientific databases. Titles/abstracts were reviewed for relevance, and full studies were included in the review if involving a primary prevention/treatment intervention study comprising a substantive crack user sample. Intervention outcomes considered included drug use, health risks/status (e.g., HIV or sexual risks) and select social outcome indicators. Targeted (e.g., behavioral/community-based) prevention measures show mixed and short-term effects on crack use/HIV risk outcomes. Material (e.g., safer crack use kit distribution) interventions also document modest efficacy in risk reduction; empirical assessments of environmental (e.g., drug consumption facilities) for crack smokers are not available. Diverse psycho-social treatment (including contingency management) interventions for crack abuse/dependence show some positive but also limited/short-term efficacy, yet likely constitute best currently available treatment options. Ancillary treatments show little effects but are understudied. Despite ample studies, pharmaco-therapeutic/immunotherapy treatment agents have not produced convincing evidence; select agents may hold potential combined with personalized approaches and/or psycho-social strategies. No comprehensively effective 'gold-standard' prevention/treatment interventions for crack abuse exist; concerted research towards improved interventions is urgently needed. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
    International Journal of Drug Policy 01/2015; 26(4). DOI:10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.01.002 · 2.40 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We explore ethical issues faced by investigators as they conduct research as part of a peer-delivered HIV/AIDS risk reduction program for injection drug users (IDUs). Staff and participant experiences in peer-delivered interventions among IDUs have come under scrutiny by ethics researchers because of their potential to inadvertently and negatively impact participant rehabilitation due to continued engagement with drug-using networks during the course of outreach. This study explores whether enhanced communication of participant concerns and experiences with clinic and research staff helps to reduce inadvertent malfeasance in peer-delivered drug treatment interventions. Results contribute to the development of patient support infrastructure in peer-delivered risk reduction programs involving IDUs.
    Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 02/2014; 9(1):6-18. DOI:10.1525/jer.2014.9.1.6 · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It is increasingly recognized that the risk for HIV and hepatitis C (HCV) transmission among people who inject drugs (PWID), such as syringe sharing, occurs in the context of relationships between (at least) two people. Evidence suggests that the risk associated with injection behavior varies with injection partner types.
    PLoS ONE 10/2014; 9(10):e109282. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0109282 · 3.53 Impact Factor


Available from
May 23, 2014