Content uploaded by Vikram Kumar Gupta
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vikram Kumar Gupta on Apr 24, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Key words- Drug De-Addiction Centers (DDCs), Drug Addiction
Introduction
The use or abuse of drugs in one form or the
other has lived with the mankind as part of the life
for ages. Natural drugs prepared from plants or
fruits that grow wild have been abused in Asia since
ancient times. The cultivation of the opium poppy,
which is known for its medicinal properties, spread
from Asia minor to India and China more than
1,000 years ago. Cannabis grows wild in large
quantities in many tropical areas and alcohol is
easily obtained from fermentation. Alcohol, opium
and cannabis were the traditional substance of abuse
in India marked by moderate consumption generally
ritualized in social gatherings and have found their
way into the life of people and have been used for
social, recreational and medicinal purposes [1].
Use of synthetic substances capable of
having an altered effect on human health and
behavior is of recent origin. World Health
Organization (2002) estimates that there are about 2
billion people worldwide who consume alcoholic
beverages and 76.3 million with diagnosable
alcohol use disorders [2]. Alcohol causes 2.3
million deaths (3.8%) and a loss of 69 million
(4.5%) of Disability-Adjusted Life Years [3,4,5].
India is hemmed between the golden triangle
which include Myanmar (Burma), Laos, Vietnam, and
Thailand and the golden crescent which include
Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan; two prominent drug-
producing hubs in the world. India as a natural transit
zone, faces a major problem of drug trafficking. Drug
addiction in India has of late emerged as a matter of
A study of profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers in
the state of punjab
Vikram Kumar Gupta 1, Paramjeet Kaur2, Gurmeet Singh3, Amanpreet Kaur4, B. S. Sidhu5
Original Article
Department of Community Medicine, 1- Assistant Professor Dayanand Medical College & Hospital, Ludhiana, 2-Professor
Government Medical College & Rajindra Hospital, Patiala, 3- Associate Professor, Government Medical College & Rajindra Hospital,
Patiala, 4- Assistant Professor, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Sri Amritsar, 5- Professor of Psychiatry,
Government Medical College & Rajindra Hospital, Patiala.
www.ijrhs.com
ISSN (o): 2321 – 7251
Abstract
Introduction:
In Punjab, drug addiction is a cancer which is crippling the mental and physical well being of the youth
population of Punjab. There are 15 DDCs supported by Indian Red Cross Society in Punjab and many private DDCs are
also functional. So this study is an attempt to know the profile of patients taking treatment from these centres.
Materials
and Methods:
7 DDCs run by Indian Red Cross Society & 3 DDCs being run by Private registered societies located in
various districts of Punjab were included. A pretested questionnaire was used to interview the patients who were
admitted. Results:
120 patients were interviewed. All were males. 47.5% were in age group of 20-30 years. Mean age of
starting drug abuse was 21.15±5.29 years. 79.2% patients started drugs due to peer pressure. 59% belonged to rural area.
46% were in upper middle socioeconomic status & 65% patients were married. Patients were using more than one route
and 13.3% were on IDU. As per single drug usage, 20.8% were addicted to alcohol & 20.8% to capsule. As per multiple
drug usage, 62.5% were tobacco addict, 42.5% to alcohol & 40.8% to capsule. Rs 170.63 was the average amount spent
per day. 85.0% patients were dependent on self for buying drugs. 16% patients had positive family history of drug abuse.
60% patients were brought to centre by family members. 39.2% patients had positive history of previous treatment at any
other DDC. Conclusions:
It is recommended that both Red Cross & Private DDCs should be checked regularly by
authorities like Civil Surgeon and Deputy Commissioner & private centers should also be supported & promoted by the
government so that these centers run in a better way & can provide more facilities.
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 53
44
great concern both due to the social and economic
burden caused by substance abuse.
National Survey (2004), on extent, pattern
and trend of drug abuse conducted at the behest of
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
(MSJE), Government of India and United Nations
indicates that among males 12-60 years, drug abuse
is quite common in the country. Tobacco was the
most frequently used substance (55.8%), followed
by alcohol (21.4%), cannabis (3.0%), opiates (0.7%)
and sedatives (0.1%). About 15 million persons
addicted to alcohol and various kinds of other drugs
need urgent attention for their treatment,
rehabilitation and reintegration into social
mainstream. It was found that the five states
reporting the largest numbers of drug users in
descending order were Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra,
Punjab, Bihar, and Kerala [6].
Drug abuse is also associated with increased
risk of other diseases like HIV and STD’s. In India,
among Injecting Drug Users (IDUs), HIV sero-
prevalence is as high as 8.71 percent [7].
Drug addiction or substance abuse is
a pathological or abnormal condition which arises due to
frequent drug use. The disorder of addiction involves the
progression of acute drug use to the development of
drug-seeking behavior, the vulnerability to relapse, and
the decreased, slowed ability to respond to naturally
rewarding stimuli. DSM-IV has categorized three stages
of addiction: a) preoccupation/anticipation, characterized
by constant cravings and pre-occupation with obtaining
the substance, b) binge/intoxication, characterized by
using more of the substance than necessary to experience
the intoxicating effects and c) withdrawal/negative effect
characterized by experiencing tolerance, withdrawal
symptoms, and decreased motivation for normal life
activities.
According to DSM-IV, TR 2000; criteria for
substance (drugs) dependence is “a maladaptive pattern
of substance (drugs) use, leading to clinically significant
impairment or distress”, as manifested by three (or
more) of the following, occurring at any time in the
same 12-month period:
(1) Tolerance, as defined by either of the following:
(a) a need for markedly increased amounts of the
substance to achieve Intoxication or desired
effect
(b) markedly diminished effect with continued use
of the same amount of the substance
(2) Withdrawal, as manifested by either of the
following:
(a) the characteristic withdrawal syndrome for the
substance
(b) the same (or a closely related) substance is
taken to relieve or avoid withdrawal symptoms
(3) The substance is often taken in larger amounts or
over a longer period than was intended.
(4) There is a persistent desire or unsuccessful efforts to
cut down or control substance use.
(5) A great deal of time is spent in activities necessary
to obtain the substance (e.g., visiting multiple
doctors or driving long distances), use the substance
(e.g., chain-smoking), or recover from its effects.
(6) Important social, occupational, or recreational
activities are given up or reduced because of
substance use.
(7) The substance use is continued despite knowledge
of having a persistent or recurrent physical or
psychological problem that is likely to have been
caused or exacerbated by the substance (e.g., current
cocaine use despite recognition of cocaine-induced
depression, or continued drinking despite
recognition that an ulcer was made worse by alcohol
consumption).
(8) Drug treatment-cum-rehabilitation centre play an
important role to make drug addict, free of addiction.
It provide services to the community as awareness
generation, Identification of addicts, motivational
counselling, detoxification/de-addiction, vocational
rehabilitation, after care and re-integration into the
social mainstream and preventive education [8].
In Punjab, drug addiction is a cancer which is
crippling the mental and physical well being of the youth
population of Punjab, rendering them lifeless. Youth
with lots of time, money and lacking parental supervision
get easy lured into the drug habit, either prompted by
peers or on their own. This study is an attempt to study
the profile of patients admitted in drug de-addiction
centers running across various districts of Punjab to get
an insight into the problem.
Materials and Methods
This study was done in ten drug de-addiction
centers situated across various districts of Punjab.
Selection of DDCs: In Punjab, there are 15 drug de-
addiction centers which are run by Indian Red Cross
Society [9]. There are more private de-addiction centers
run by private registered societies. 7 DDCs run by Indian
Red Cross Society (selected by random sampling from
15 centers in list) and 3 DDCs being run by private
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 54
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
registered societies were included. Seven DDCs being
run by Indian Red Cross Society which were selected for
the study were at Patiala, Kharar (Mohali)
NawanShahar, Gurdaspur, Ludhiana, Faridkot, Bathinda
districts. Three DDCs being run by private registered
societies which were selected for the study were in cities
of Dasuya, Qadian and Bhogra. Inclusion Criteria:
Those patients who were admitted in the DDCs and
physically available at the time of visit were included. A
total of 120 patients were interviewed. Exclusion
Criteria: Those patients who were in state of addiction
or inebriated, or not available due to any reason at time
of visit were excluded. Total 5 patients were excluded.
Permission for Study: Permission was taken from
Secretary, Indian Red Cross Society, Punjab Branch
Chandigarh to visit Patiala, Gurdaspur, NawanShahar,
and Kharar as per letter number DDC/2009-10/188 dated
14th Feb, 2010. Project directors of other drug de-
addiction centers were contacted and purpose of study
was explained in detail and due permission from them
was taken. The study was duly approved by ethical
committee of Government Medical College & Rajindra
Hospital, Patiala.
Data Collection: Only those patients who were admitted
at centers on the day of scheduled visit, were
interviewed in person. Interview of indoor patients was
done after making rapport with them, taking their
informed consent and explaining them the purpose of
study. Confidentiality of information provided by them
was ensured. From interview of patients, on the basis of
a separate pre-tested proforma , data was obtained
regarding their socio-demographic profile, details of
drug abused, amount spent per day, reason for starting
drugs, source of income for spending on money,
previous history of admission to any DDC and family
history of any drug abuse. Data analysis: The data thus
collected was then statistically analyzed.
Results
Out of 120 patients, who were interviewed, all
were males. Table 1 shows age, sex, residence, marital
status wise distribution of patients. The range of age
distribution was 15-73 years with mean age of 31.22
years. Majority (47.5%) of patients were in age group of
20-30 years followed by 30-40 years (35.8%). About 78
(65.0%) patients were married followed by 38 (31.7%)
unmarried. 4 (3.3%) were divorced due to drug abuse. 49
(41%) were from urban areas and 71 (59%) belonged to
rural area.
Table 2 shows education, occupation and
income status of patients. About 34.2% patients were
educated upto matric followed by 19.2 % patients who
have done 10+2. About 43.3% of patients were farmer
followed by 29.2% who were skilled workers. 27.5% of
the patients had monthly income of more than Rs 20,000
followed by 24.2% having income between Rs 10,000-
19,999.
Table 3 shows route of administration and
type of drugs abused by patients. Patients were
using more than one route. 114 (95%) patients were
using oral route, 18 (15%) were using sniffing route
and 16 (13.3%) were on IDU. As per single drug
abuse, out of 120 patients, 25 (20.8%) of patients
were addicted to alcohol. Among opioids, 25
(20.8%) were addicted to capsule, 4 (3%) were
addicted to opium, 3 (2.5%) to smack, 2 (1.6%) to
bhukki and 1 (0.8%) to tablets. 3 (2.5%) patients
were addicted to Injection Avil. 2 (1.6%) were
addicted to bhang. Among Benzodiazepines, 3
(2.5%) were addicted to Injection Diazepam and 1
(0.8%) on Alprazolam. 1 (0.8%) patient was
addicted to eraser fluid.
Table 4 shows amount spent per day on
drugs, source of income for drugs and reasons for
starting drugs by patients. The range was Rs 25-
1500 per day with average spending of Rs 170.63
per day. 37.5% were spending Rs 100-200 per day,
followed by 21.7% spending Rs 50-100 per day.
85.0% were dependent on self for buying drugs and
11.8% on family.
79.2% started drugs due to peer pressure, 8.3% due
to curiosity, 6.7% due to family grief, and 3.3% due
to unemployment. About 3 (2.5%) patients started
drugs due to breakup with their girlfriends and all
were in age group of 15-20 years.
Table 5 shows family history of drug intake,
previous history of DDC visit, history of relapse and
patient brought to centre by whom at DDCs. 16%
patients had positive family history of drug abuse. 39.2%
had positive history of previous treatment at any other
drug de-addiction centers and history of relapse to drug
addiction. 60.0% were brought to centre by family
members, 26 (22%) reported themselves, 15 (12%) were
brought by relatives.
Table 7 shows age of starting drug abuse by
patients. The range of age of starting drug abuse
was 13-48 years with mean age of starting at
21.15±5.29 years with majority (54.2%) starting
drugs in age group of 20-30 years followed by
35.0% in 10-20 years.
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 55
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
Table 1: Age, sex, residence, marital status
wise distribution of patients undergoing
treatment at de-addiction centers
Particulars (n=120)
Numb
er of
Patien
ts
Percenta
ge
Sex
Male
120
100
Female
0
0
Age
(years)
10-20
2
1.7
20-30
57
47.5
30-40
43
35.8
40-50
10
8.4
50-60
7
5.8
>60
1
0.8
Range
15-73 years
Mean ± SD
31.22 ± 9.50 years
Marital
Status
Un-married
38
31.7
Married
78
65.0
Separated/divor
ced due to drug
abuse
4
3.3
Residen
ce
Urban
49
41.0
Rural
71
59.0
Table 2: Education, occupation and income
status of patients undergoing treatment at de-
addiction centers
Particulars (n=120)
Numb
er of
Patien
ts
Percent
age
Educatio
n
Professional
Degree
2
1.7
Graduation
7
5.8
10+2/Diploma
23
19.2
Matric
41
34.2
Middle
19
15.8
Primary
22
18.3
Illiterate
6
5
Occupat
ion
Professional
1
0.8
Semi-
professional
9
7.5
Clerical/Shop/F
armer
52
43.3
Skilled Worker
35
29.2
Semi-skilled
Worker
7
5.8
Unskilled
Worker
8
6.7
Un-employed
8
6.7
Income
(Rs)
>20,000
33
27.5
10,000-19,999
29
24.2
7,500-9,999
4
3.3
5,000-7,499
28
23.3
3,000-4,999
206
16.7
1,001-2,999
6
5
≤1,000
0
0
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 56
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
Table 3: Route of administration and type of
drugs abused by patients undergoing
treatment at de-addiction centers
Route of
Administration
of Drugs
Oral
114
95
Sniffing
18
15
IDU
16
13.3
TYPE OF DRUGS
ABUSED
Single
Drug
Abuse
Multi
Drug
Abuse
Tobacco
0
75
(62.5%)
Alcohol
25
(20.8%)
51
(42.5%)
OPIOIDS
Single drug
abuse
= 35 (29.2%)
Multi drug
abuse = 111
(92.5%)
Opium
4
(3.0%)
17
(14.1%)
Bhukki
2
(1.6%)
7
(5.8%)
Smack
3
(2.5%)
19
(15.8%)
Capsule
25
(20.8%)
49
(40.8%)
Tablets
1
(0.8%)
11
(9.2%)
Syrup
0
8
(6.6%)
Injection Avil
3
(2.5%)
16
(13.3%)
BENZO-
DIAZEPINES
Single drug
abuse = 4
(33.3%) Multi
drug abuse =
22 (18.3%)
Injection
Diazepam
3
(2.5%)
16
(13.3%)
Tab.
Alprazolam
1
(0.8%)
6
(5.0%)
Eraser Fluid
1
(0.8%)
0
Bhang
2
(1.6%)
8
(6.6%)
Table 4: Amount spent per day on drugs,
source of income for drugs and reasons for
starting drugs by patients undergoing
treatment at de-addiction centers
Particulars (n=120)
Numbe
r of
Patient
s
Percentag
e
Amoun
t spent
per day
on
Drugs
by
Patient
s
<50
14
11.7
50-100
26
21.7
100-200
45
37.5
200-300
15
12.5
300-400
8
6.6
400-500
3
2.5
500-1000
6
5
1000-2000
3
2.5
Range
Rs 25-1500
Mean
Rs 170.63
Source
of
Income
for
buying
Drugs
Self
102
85.0
Family
14
11.8
Employer
1
0.8
Friends
2
1.6
Theft
1
0.8
Reason
s for
starting
drugs
Peer Pressure
95
79.2
Curiosity
10
8.3
Unemployme
nt
4
3.3
Family Grief
8
6.7
Breakup with
Girlfriend
3
2.5
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 57
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
Table 5: Family history of drug intake, previous history of DDC visit, history of relapse and
persons brought to centre by whom at DDCs
Particulars (n=120)
Number of Patients
Percentage
Family History of
Drug Intake
YES
19
16
NO
101
84
Person who brought
patient to DDC
Self
26
22
Family
72
60
Relative
15
12
Others
7
6
Previous History of
DDC visit and
History of Relapse
Yes
47
39.2
No
73
60.8
Table 6: Relationship between early initiation of drug abuse & family history of drug intake
Family
history of
drug intake
Age of starting drug abuse
Total
Chi-square
p value
<20years
>20years
Yes
12
7
19
7.87
<0.01 H.S.
No
30
71
101
Total
42
78
120
Table 7: Age of starting drug abuse by patients undergoing treatment at de-addiction centers
Particulars (n=120)
Number of Patients
Percentage
Age of Starting Drugs
10-20
42
35.0
20-30
65
54.2
30-40
11
9.1
40-50
2
1.7
50-60
0
0
>60
0
0
Range
13-48 year
Mean±SD
21.15 ± 5.29 year
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 58
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
Discussion
Present study comprised of 120 male only
patients. Female wards are present at Ludhiana and
Patiala centers but no female patients were admitted
there. Similar findings were reported by Benegal et al
[10], who studied financial burden of alcohol on 113
patients admitted to a special de-addiction centre in
Karnataka, and found that all the patients were males.
Mohan et al [11] conducted a study on 180 cases at one
de-addiction clinic in GMC, Jammu (J&K) and also
found that all were males.
In present study, the range of age distribution
was 15-73 years with mean age of 31.22 years. Majority
(47.5%) of patients were in age group of 20-30 years
followed by 30-40 years (35.8%). About 78 (65.0%)
patients were married followed by 38 (31.7%)
unmarried. 4 (3.3%) were divorced due to drug abuse. 49
(41%) were from urban areas and 71 (59%) belonged to
rural area.
Similar findings were reported by Mohan et al
[11] who found that 59% belonged to 20-30 years
group and 25% belonged to 30-40 years age group.
Kadri et al [13] also found that majority of patients were
of the age group between 26-35 years (46%) [13]. Singh
et al [16] found that 59.03% of drug abusers were more
than 30 years of age followed by 19.86% in 26-30 years.
DeSilva & Fonseka [16] found that mean age of the drug
addicts was 34.04±7.5 years which is similar to mean
age of 31.22±9.50 years of present study. Thus age
group of 20-40 years is the most common age group in
which drug addicts are more.
Mohan et al [11] also reported that 70% of the
cases were married. So more of married males take
treatment at DDCs. Possible reason could be motivation
of addict by family members.
Mohan et al [11] found that 55% belong to urban
area and 45% were from rural background. Kadri et al
[13] found that 84.4% of the addicts were Urban. Saluja
et al [12] found that 83.5% were from urban
background. This difference observed can be due to
difference in socio-economic conditions of people of
Punjab, and their rural agricultural based economy.
In this study, more than 50% of patients had
undergone matric and 10+2. Thus, educated youth is also
falling in bad habit of drug abuse. This is similar to
finding of Singh et al [16] that most of the drug abusers
were educated up to primary and secondary level (40.13
and 41.10% respectively). Similarly, it was found by
Saluja et al [12] that most of the patients were school
dropouts (54.1%).
In present Study, as more patients were in higher
income group, this could be the reason that average
spending calculated was Rs 170.63 per day on drugs.
Benegal et al [10] found that the average individual
spent Rs 1938.40 per month (Rs 64.61 per day) on
alcohol. The difference could be due to better
socioeconomic profile of admitted patients and increase
in prices in year 2011 compared to year 2001.
In our study, 114 (95%) patients were using oral
route, 18 (15%) were using sniffing route and 16
(13.3%) were on IDU. But DeSilva & Fonseka [14] in
their study in Sri Lanka found that less than 1% used the
intravenous route. Thus oral route is the major route of
drug abuse and the number of addicts on IDU is also
increasing. Addicts on IDU are at increased risk of many
diseases like HIV, Hep-B, Hep-C, Abscess formation.
Due to this, needle exchange programme was launched
in 1995 by Government and National AIDS Control
Organization to decrease incidence of HIV in drug
addicts on IDU.
In this study, as per single drug abuse, out of
120 patients, 25 (20.8%) of patients were addicted to
alcohol. Among opioids, 25 (20.8%) were addicted to
capsule, 4 (3%) were addicted to opium, 3 (2.5%) to
smack, 2 (1.6%) to bhukki and 1 (0.8%) to tablets. 3
(2.5%) patients were addicted to Injection Avil. 2
(1.6%) were addicted to bhang. Among
Benzodiazepines, 3 (2.5%) were addicted to Injection
Diazepam and 1 (0.8%) on Alprazolam. 1 (0.8%) patient
was addicted to eraser fluid. Sachdev et al [15] in their
study on changing pattern of drug abuse among patients
attending de-addiction centre in Faridkot from 1994 to
1998 and concluded that there was an increase in the
patients using the drugs available over the counter with
chemist. This is similar to finding in present study.
Kadri et al [13] found that alcohol (70.2%) was
most commonly used, followed by smack (13.8%).
Singh et al [16] found that opium and alcohol were the
most commonly abused drugs (66.75% and 8.68%)
respectively. Saluja et al [12] found that commonest
abused substance was opioids (76.2 %) and 54.2 % were
also nicotine dependent. Venkatesan and Stelina [17]
found that majority of the patient were alcohol
dependent and polysubstance dependence showed an
increasing trend. The difference in the findings observed
could be due to easy availability of alcohol on corner of
every street and drugs at all medical stores and from
drug peddlars. Moreover, Punjab as a transit zone for
drugs from Pakistan so availability of Opium, Heroine
and Smack is also high.
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 59
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
Majority of patients relied on self for spending
on drugs in our study. But, still this cause problems to
the family as major part of income is spent by addict for
obtaining drugs and other basic needs of family remains
unfulfilled.
In our study, 79.2% started drugs due to peer
pressure, 8.3% due to curiosity, 6.7% due to family
grief, and 3.3% due to unemployment. About 3 (2.5%)
patients started drugs due to breakup with their
girlfriends and all were in age group of 15-20 years.
Saluja et al [12] found that most common reason for
starting the use of drug was curiosity (78.8%). DeSilva
& Fonseka [14] found that 74% initiated taking drugs as
an experiment out of curiosity. This difference could be
due to the fact that both peer pressure and curiosity play
a major role as pointed out by above mentioned authors
and they at most of the times co-exist.
About age of starting drug abuse, Kadri et al
[13] found that 46.4% of them had started taking the
drugs before the age of 20 years. Singh et al [16] found
that 44.13% of the abusers had started substance abuse at
the age of 16 to 20 years. Saluja et al [12] found that
mean age at 1st use of primary substance was 14.8 years.
DeSilva & Fonseka [14] found that majority (70.1%)
started using drugs when they were in the age group 10-
20 years. Venkatesan and Stelina [17] found that the
number of people getting initiated to substance use in
early age (10-19 years) showed an increasing trend. In
present study earliest age of drug abuse is 13 years
which is similar to finding of starting of drug abuse
before 20 years by above mentioned authors. Thus youth
of Punjab is falling victim to drug abuse at a very young
age.
In current study, 16% patients had positive
family history of drug abuse. 39.2% had positive history
of previous treatment at any other drug de-addiction
centers and history of relapse to drug addiction. Similar
findings were reported by Kadri et al [13] who found
that 26.1% had positive family history of drug addiction.
Similarly, Singh et al [16] in their study found that
24.8% of them gave history of drug addiction in family
members. Saluja et al [12] found that nearly 40.2% of
the subjects had positive family history of drug
dependence.
On statistical analysis by Chi-square test, the
association between family history of drug intake and
age of starting drug abuse was found to be statistically
highly significant (p<0.01). So, patients were starting
drug abuse at earlier age in which family history was
positive. Similar finding was explained in study by
Johnson and Leff [18], that Children of Alcoholics
(COAs) and children of other drug-abusing parents are
especially vulnerable to the risk for maladaptive
behaviour because they have combinations of many risk
factors present in their lives. The single most potent risk
factor of parent's substance-abusing behaviour can place
children of substance abusers at risk of drug abuse.
In this study, 60.0% were brought to centre by
family members, 26 (22%) reported themselves, 15
(12%) were brought by relatives. Similar findings were
reported by DeSilva & Fonseka [14] in their study who
found that most of them (75.8%) were either self-
referrals or referred by family members to the
rehabilitation centers. Thus, motivation by family
members play a major role for addict to get treatment at
DDC.
DeSilva & Fonseka [14] in Sri Lanka reported
that more than 55% of drug addicts were readmissions
compared to 39.2% in present study. This difference
could be due to difference in the socio cultural practices
and drug abuse behaviour in the two countries. It also
indicates that same addicts after de-addiction at DDC
fall again into drug abuse and possible reason for this is
that such patients go to same peer group and encounter
similar surroundings.
Conclusion
This study shows that youth of Punjab is falling
in vicious trap of drug abuse at early age with high rates
of relapse. There is urgent need to cover all schools and
colleges and universities with awareness programmes to
warn the youth population against drugs. Educated youth
is falling in bad habit of drug abuse which is an alarming
situation and due to this, his/her studies is affected and
whole academic carrier is destroyed. Support for
substance abuse education, prevention and treatment
must come from all sides including families, community
groups, schools, policymakers, and health professionals.
A vocational rehabilitation like training in tailoring,
carpenting or computer courses must be financed and
supported at all DDCs to reintegrate the de-addicted
persons into social mainstream. It is recommended that
all DDCs should be supervised periodically by
government authorities from the office of Civil
Surgeon/Deputy Commissioner.
Acknowledgement
I express my gratitude to all Project
Directors of Drug De-Addiction Centers for their
Co-operation and to all the patients undergoing
treatment at these Drug De-Addiction Centers, who
volunteered to participate in this study.
Source of Support: Nil
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 60
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
References
1. Suwanwela C, Poshyachinda V : “Drug abuse in
Asia” UNODC –Bulletin on Narcotics 1986 ; 1 :
41-53.
2. WHO World Health Report 2002 : “Reducing
risks, promoting healthy life” : Geneva, World
Health Organization, 2002.
3. WHO Global Health Risks 2004 : “Mortality
and burden of disease attributable to selected
major risks”; Available at:
http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_di
sease/GlobalHealthRisks_
report_full.pdf
4. WHO : “Burden and socioeconomic impact of
alcohol - the Banglore study” New Delhi ; 2006
: 1-5.
5. WHO Global status report on alcohol 2004.
Review table-3 & table-5.
6. National survey : “The extent, Pattern and
Trends of Drug Abuse in India”, Ministry of
Social Justice and Empowerment, Govt. of
India, 2004.
7. NACO 2006 : “National AIDS Control
Organization-HIV data”; Available at:
http://www.nacoonline.org/Quick_Links/
HIV_Data/.
8. DSM-IV TR : “Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders” Fourth Edition,
Text Revision. Washington, DC. Copyright
2000 American Psychiatric Association.
9. Scheme for Prevention of Alcoholism and
Substance (drugs) Abuse 1985 ; Ministry of
Social Justice and Empowerment (MJSE).
Government of India. Shastri Bhavan. New
Delhi.
10. Benegal and Velayudhan, Jain S : “Social Costs
of Alcohlism - A Karnatka Perspective”;
NIMHANS Journal , 2000 : 18 (1&2) ; 67-76.
11. Mohan C, Dhar V, Lal B : “A study of 1 de-
addiction clinic at GMC (Psychiatry hospital)
Jammu (J&K)”; Indian J Psychiatry abstract
supplement 2004 ; 34 : 23.
12. Saluja BS, Grove S, Tripathi AS, Matoo SK ,
Basu D : “Drug dependence in adolescents
1978-2003, a clinical-based observation of
North India”; Indian J Pediatrics 2007 ; 74 : 33-
36.
13. Kadri AM, Bhagyalakhsmi A, Kedia G : “A
study of Socio-demographic profile of substance
abusers attending a Deaddiction center in
Ahmedabad city”; Indian J Community Med
2003 ; 28 : 2.
14. DeSilva PV & Fonseka P : “Drug addicts and
their behaviour related to drug addiction among
the institutionalized addicts of the Galle
District”; Galle Medical Journal, September
2008 ; 13 (1) : 9-13.
15. Sachdev JS , Yakhmi RS, Sharma AK :
“Changing pattern of drug abuse among patients
attending de-addiction centre at Faridkot”;
Indian J of psychiatry 2002 ; 44 : 354-55.
16. Singh B, Singh V, Vij A : “Sociodemographic
profile of substance abusers attending a de-
addiction centre in Ghaziabad”; Ind Medica
2006 ; 6 (1) : 1-3.
17. Venkatesan J, Stelina : “Substance dependence
- Decades apart in a teaching hospital”; Indian J
Psychiatry 2008 ; 50 : 100-5.
18. Johnson JL, Leff M : “Children of substance
abusers - Overview of research findings” 1999 ;
103 (5) : 1085-99.
Access this article online
Corresponding Author:
Dr. Vikram Kumar Gupta,
Assistant Professor,
Department of Community Medicine,
Old Campus, Dayanand Medical College &
Hospital,
Ludhiana-141001, Punjab, India
Email: dr_vikramgupta@yahoo.co.in
Website: www.ijrhs.com
Submission Date:05-08-2013
Acceptance Date:18-08-2013
International Journal of Research in Health Sciences. (Supplement) July –Sept 2013; Volume- 1, Issue-2 61
44
Vikram Kumar Gupta – Profile of patients admitted in the drug de-addiction centers www.ijrhs.com
