BackgroundDrug checking is a harm reduction strategy which allows users to check the content and purity of illicit drugs. Although drug checking has been trialled internationally, with demonstrated value as a harm reduction and health promotion strategy, the use of such services in Australia remains a contentious issue.This study aimed to investigate the proportion and patterns of illicit drug use among young people, their attitudes towards drug checking at festivals and the potential impact of drug checking on intended drug use behaviour.MethodsThe survey was conducted at a major Australian music festival in 2016. Data was collected from a sample of festival attendees (n = 642) aged between 18 and 30 years. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed.ResultsNearly three-quarters (73.4%) of participants reported that they had used illicit drugs in the past 12 months, most commonly cannabis (63.9%) and ecstasy (59.8%). A large proportion of participants believed ‘somewhat’ or ‘a lot’ that drug checking services could help users seek help to reduce harm (86.5%) and that drug checking services should be combined with harm reduction advice (84.9%). However, two thirds of the participants agreed ‘somewhat’ or ‘a lot’ that drug sellers may use this service as a quality control mechanism (68.6%). Approximately half (54.4%) indicated they would be highly likely and a third (32.7%) would be somewhat likely to utilise free drug checking services should they be available at music festivals. When asked whether the results of drug checking would influence their drug use behaviour, participants reported that they would not take substances shown to contain methamphetamine (65.1%), ketamine (57.5%) or para-methoxyamphetamine (PMA) (58.4%).ConclusionThe majority of festival attendees aged 18–30 participating in this study reported a history of illicit drug use and were in favour of the provision of free drug checking at festivals. A considerable proportion reported that the results of drug checking would influence their drug use behaviour. The findings of this study can contribute to the debate regarding whether drug checking services could potentially play a major role in harm reduction and health promotion programming for young people attending festivals.
Introduction:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has accelerated the move towards home spirometry monitoring, including in children.The aim of this study is to determine whether the remote supervision of spirometry by a physiologist improves the technical quality and failure rate of the maneuvers.Method: Children with cystic fibrosis who had been provided with NuvoAir home spirometers were randomly allocated to either supervised or unsupervised home spirometry following a detailed training session. Home spirometry was performed every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. Tests were assigned a quality factor (QF) using our laboratory grading system as per American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society standards, with tests marked from A to D, or Fail. In our laboratory, we aim for QF A in all spirometry tests, but report results of QF B or C with a cautionary note. QF A was, therefore, the primary outcome, and QF A-C, the secondary outcome.Results: Sixty-one patients were enrolled; 166 measurements were obtained in the supervised group, and 153 in the unsupervised group. Significantly more measurements achieved QF A in the supervised compared to unsupervised group (89% vs. 74%; p = <0.001), while proportions reaching Grade A-C were similar (99% vs. 95%; p = 0.1). All significant declines in spirometry results had a clinical rather than technical reason. Family/patient feedback for both arms was very positive. Conclusion:These results suggest that home spirometry in children should ideally be remotely supervised by a physiologist, but acceptable results can be obtained if resources do not allow this, provided that training is delivered and results monitored according to our protocol.
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the move towards home spirometry monitoring, including in children. Our aim was to determine whether the remote supervision of spirometry by a physiologist improves the technical quality and failure rate of the manoeuvres. Method: Children with cystic fibrosis who had been provided with NuvoAir home spirometers were randomly allocated to either supervised or unsupervised home spirometry following a detailed training session. Home spirometry was performed every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. Tests were assigned a quality factor (QF) using our laboratory grading system as per ATS/ERS standards, with tests marked from A to D, or Fail. In our laboratory we aim for QF A in all spirometry tests, but report results of QF B or C with a cautionary note. QF A was therefore the primary outcome, and QF A-C the secondary outcome. Results: 61 patients were enrolled; 166 measurements were obtained in the supervised group, and 153 in the unsupervised group. Significantly more measurements achieved QF A in the supervised compared to unsupervised group (89% vs 74%; p= <0.001) whilst proportions reaching grade A-C were similar (99% vs 95%; p=0.1). All significant declines in spirometry results had a clinical rather than technical reason. Family/patient feedback for both arms was very positive. Conclusion: These results suggest that home spirometry in children should ideally be remotely supervised by a physiologist, but acceptable results can be obtained if resources do not allow this, provided that training is delivered and results monitored according to our protocol.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.