Science topic

Harm Reduction - Science topic

Harm Reduction is the application of methods designed to reduce the risk of harm associated with certain behaviors without reduction in frequency of those behaviors. The risk-associated behaviors include ongoing and active addictive behaviors.
Questions related to Harm Reduction
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
3 answers
With Fentanyl already being detected in some countries in Europe, I believe many of us are not educated enough on special needs of injection drug users that use Fentanyl, due to its high strength and high amount of social damage it causes to the users.
Does anyone know of any Fentanyl harm reduction good practices please?
Relevant answer
Answer
Firstly the availability of fentanyl test strips, but these are not available in many countries. Then increasingly educate users not to consume alone and preferably someone to carry naloxone spray.
Best
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
2 answers
Hi I am supporting a lady doing research into young people and the use of drugs and what works in terms of harm reduction in Ireland and abroad.
Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you so much, we will follow it up.
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
7 answers
The above of our two research articles are two of our important efforts on how to conserve the soil and use it for the enhancement of reforestation to mitigate climate change impacts such as Urban Heat Island, loss of endemic species, scarcity of water and greenhouse gas emissions which are the leading concerns in urban built environment. Our articles have addressed a way to achieve the sustainable development goals such as SDG6, SDG12 and SDG 13.
Soil resources are most critical prerequisites those need to be conserved, utilized and given back to the earth to enhance the sustainable existence of living organisms. Current technological trends are mostly focusing on mining the soil resources and fulfilling the human needs using anthropogenic activities. This trend needs to revisit, addressed the research gaps and more interests need to be shown by researchers and stakeholders to enhance the optimum usage of soil resources with minimal harmful effects to nature.
I request the researchers to provide your opinions in this regard. Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
Carbon sequestration is one big use of soil.
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
7 answers
I'm part of a project creating a public atlas to document and map people's subjective experiences of extreme weather events. I've included information and a link to a short survey below. Feel free to fill this out yourself, and/or forward to your networks via email, social media, etc. Thanks!
Extreme Weather Events Survey
Ecologies of Harm: Mapping Contexts of Vulnerability in the Time of Covid-19 The University of British Columbia
This is a digital commons project intended to provide equitable access to knowledge.
COVID-19 presents the potential for people and groups to become exposed to harm in new ways. To see the overlapping ways in which these harms may be occurring, we’ve designed a survey for experiences of extreme weather events that are affecting people across the world.
This is a citizen / community observation survey, open to anyone 18 years of age and older who wishes to contribute. Your descriptions will upload directly to an interactive map of the world that is publicly accessible on this website: https://blogs.ubc.ca/ecologiesofharmproject
Your participation is entirely voluntary, and you do not have to answer every question. If you do wish to participate, you do not need to record your name. You may contribute as many observations as you like!
Please share widely, and keep in mind that re-posting, “liking,” or “following,” will be visible to others on public network platforms.
Link to survey: https://arcg.is/fvO4G0
Principal Investigator: Dr. Leslie Robertson
Relevant answer
Answer
Excellent! Thanks very much for contributing Christian.
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
5 answers
Buprenorphine (branded as Suboxone) pharmacological treatment for opioid use disorder (addiction) has been shown to reduce risks of adverse events including overdose and to increase treatment retention (Thomas et al. 2014). This post interrogates two Federal laws, the SUPPORT Act of 2018, and the Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000), which place patient caps on physicians who prescribe buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). The SUPPORT Act provides an improvement on DATA 2000 restrictions, but further work remains to improve regulations on prescribing. Under the SUPPORT Act, physicians must train for 8 hours to prescribe buprenorphine for addiction, they are initially limited to 30 patients and must complete another application to prescribe beyond 30 patients, unless they are board-certified in addiction medicine or addiction psychiatry or qualifying practitioners practicing in a qualified practice setting, in which case clinicians can immediately treat up to 100 patients with buprenorphine (SUPPORT Act). Physicians who have prescribed buprenorphine treatment to 100 patients for at least one year can apply to increase the limit to 275 patients. There is no process of appeal to expand patient caps beyond 275 patients, or obtain a waiver on the 8 hours of training, and in many rural counties in the US there are no providers available who are certified to prescribe buprenorphine. I contend that these regulatory restrictions on prescribers are contrary to the aims of treating OUD, and mainly serve to make manageable a system of discipline placed upon providers which limits providers' clinical discretion to the detriment of patients.
This post assumes that policies should conform with a harm reduction framework according to which policies should aim to reduce the negative consequences of drug use without prioritizing abstinence (Marlatt 1996). Harm reduction aims to save lives and improve outcomes by meeting people where they are. I contend that buprenorphine regulations should, at least, allow providers to appeal to expand patient caps beyond 275 patients, and to obtain a waiver on the 8 hours of training in cases of hardship or clinical urgency.
What do you think? Should the law abolish (or reduce) the 8 hour training requirement for buprenorphine prescribers, given that there is no equivalent requirement for oxycodone prescribing despite that oxycodone is far more lethal than buprenorphine, and is similarly subject to diversion?
Relevant answer
Answer
Recent JAMA Forum article on increasing access to opioid pharmacotherapy in the US;
"Avoiding future cases of opioid addiction, however, does little to address the harm that already exists. More than 2 million US residents now have an opioid use disorder. Yet the Surgeon General’s Report Facing Addiction in America found major gaps in access to effective treatment. The gaps go beyond financial and geographic barriers to include major quality concerns. In 2016, among those with opioid addiction who were able to receive specialty addiction care, only about 1 in 3 expected to receive treatment with medications. Yet it is the use of medications, particularly methadone and buprenorphine, that has the greatest potential to save lives. These treatments are associated with substantial reductions in the risk of death for individual patients and many fewer overdose fatalities at the population level.
Physician Training Needed
To save more lives from opioid addiction, physicians need training. That’s why we support a simple proposal: that the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) require all residents in clinical specialties to take a course on the appropriate use of buprenorphine and other medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of opioid addiction. This course is available for free. A second idea (put forward by Massachusetts addiction specialist Sarah Wakeman, MD) is for ACGME to require that all core faculty in these residency training programs apply for and receive the waiver needed to prescribe buprenorphine from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)."
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
3 answers
This U.S. Federal Government, specifically, the U.S. HHS, should be making housing available for all PLWH who are unable to provide such housing for themselves. This a basic concept that become a bioethical issue by promoting Testing and Prevention through Treatment campaigns and that those who have entered care should be kept in the best physical and mental as health as possible. Knowing that the system is failing these persons is tantamount abandonment. I would set up housing facilities spaced where most needed and offer food, hygiene, integrated health-care, medication compliance assistance, job training, substance use harm reduction, if needed, and a legal review of their cases to evaluate if thy have been the victims of some form of housing discrimination.
Relevant answer
Answer
I agree, integrated health and social service needs should be a priority for people diagnosed with HIV. Unfortunately, many communities simple do not have the funds to support housing needs for everyone who needs them. The majority of people who are homeless are in great need of behavioral health (mental health and substance abuse) treatment, or treatment for a physical condition, such as diabetes, or HIV.
Chronic illness impacts a persons ability to work, this leaves millions of people without a safe place to live and the number is growing. People who are homeless are often unable to access health care and treatment, unable to adhere to medication if they did have access, and unable to eat nutrition meals.
Our health care system is broken for the most vulnerable in our society. The health system functions well for some, but the cracks in the system for others are wide and getting deeper by the day.
System level changes are needed to impact the health and wellness of those in our society who need it most.
#Systemthinking
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
2 answers
Empower laypersons what they think is a life saving technique they are eagerly following a clinicians instructions increasing morbidity and mortality any respiratory emergency patient. Signs of OD proves the heart is beating and could be any of the 100’s of causes breathing emergency. Protocol increases mental and physical illness drug use and abuse loss of trust in the medical profession, addiction and harm reduction workers, dysfunctional society. Protocol you deny grade school science ‘How the Heart and Lungs work”
May 2, 2018 'Resuscitation in Motion 2018' No resolution at conference, chest compression's still being given ODs or any persons still alive!
Common quotes Pharmacists; EMS; MDs and RNs while crying "I know they are killing any respiratory emergency with chest compression's and/or oxygen deprivation"
Relevant answer
Answer
Wow - that is not smart public health policy . You may want to mention that oxygen is what matters most, esp. in OPIOID ODs which are currently the most lethal in US & UK & Canada (I think). SpO2% drops below 85 and it's over - chest compressions don't help. First-responders should be taught the difference between cardiac arrest and OD, and also reminded that the heart can keep beating for 5 minutes after the pt is (brain)dead from lack of oxygen, so reducing respiration is often not the way to go. In opioid ODs, they should administer naloxone STAT.
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
13 answers
A quick survey of the recent academic literature suggests that pregabalin may be quite useful for treating alcohol use disorder (AUD), benzodiazepine use disorder (BD) and opioid use disorder (OUD).  
Does anyone have first hand clinical experience or know of statistically significant research suggesting that pregabalin should be used in:
1) detoxification from alcohol, opioids or benzodiazepines (BZD)
2) long-term treatment of same to keep patients in remission from AUD, BD, or OUD?
Here are some cites suggesting the possible value of pregabalin therapy (again, not definitive!):
Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2012 Jul;21(7):1019-29. doi: 10.1517/13543784.2012.685651. Epub 2012 May 9.
Efficacy and safety of pregabalin in the treatment of alcohol and benzodiazepine dependence
Curr Pharm Des. 2013;19(35):6367-74.
The potential of pregabalin in neurology, psychiatry and addiction: a qualitative overview.
Martinotti G1, Lupi M, Sarchione F, Santacroce R, Salone A, De Berardis D, Serroni N, Cavuto M, Signorelli M, Aguglia E, Valchera A, Iasevoli F, Di Giannantonio M
Psychiatr Prax. 2012 Oct;39(7):351-2. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1305042. Epub 2012 Jun 11.
[Pregabalin for the reduction of opiate withdrawal symptoms].
[Article in German]
Kämmerer N1, Lemenager T, Grosshans M, Kiefer F, Hermann D.
Mixed results:
J Psychopharmacol. 2012 Apr;26(4):461-70. doi: 10.1177/0269881111405360. Epub 2011 Jun 21.
Relevant answer
Answer
Well, I wish your patient the best.  Have you seen Dr. Heather Ashton's Guide to Benzodiazepine Withdrawal - at http://www.benzo.org.uk/manual/ ?  She's at the Neuroscience Institute at the University of Newcastle in the UK, but the Guide is very practical - it is written for patients as well as physicians.  Interestingly, it advocates substituting diazepam for any other benzodiazepine and then VERY SLOWLY tapering off.  Of course, very few pts who have been on benzodiazepines long-term (years) ever manage to stop taking them.  In the US, at least as of a few years ago, diazepam was THE MOST PRESCRIBED controlled substance nationwide (measured by number of prescriptions written).  A really good Tx protocol is desperately needed for patients who want to withdraw from benzodiazepines -- I think that pregabalin will help, and that because pregabalin withdrawal causes much less discomfort than diazepam withdrawal, your patient may be able to stop taking any tranquilizer/neuroleptic after some months/years.  
  • asked a question related to Harm Reduction
Question
6 answers
I would like to know if its possible to compare the factor loadings obtained from a particular survey with mine using the same questionnaire. This is to enable me to establish the variables capable of explaining the observed variance in my study and to confirm if there are differences in the item loadings.  
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Olubusayo
It would be useful to know more details about what you are intending to do. But, generally speaking, comparing loadings values of two Principal Component Analysis does not seem very useful to me. Instead I would analyze:
1. If the factors of the second PCA are identical to the first one (If they have the same meaning).
2. If there is variation of the explained variability of each factor and of the whole model (which could me that some factors are more important in a given population)
3. If any particular item disappeared from a factor (because de loading was <0.3) – We may wonder why this item seem not to be relevant the our population.
Hope it helps.