IDU motivations for research involvement appear to be multi-dimensional, rarely motivated by economic gain alone, and not necessarily defined by direct benefits or gains to themselves. These findings are relevant to the question of IDU research payment ethics.
Given the significant health harms associated with intravenous buprenorphine use (e.g. vein damage, abscesses and infections, precipitated withdrawal, blood-borne virus transmission, hospitalization and death), routine monitoring of the misuse of buprenorphine in Melbourne is warranted. These results suggest the need for development of effective countermeasures to address diversion and injection of buprenorphine in this setting.
We demonstrate the value of a new methodology to explore heroin overdose, as well as discussing its limitations and ways to overcome them in future. In terms of our findings, overdose prevention messages need to highlight the impact of these transient changes in behaviour and to emphasize the risks of using higher doses of heroin as well as continuing to emphasize the risks of combining heroin with other central nervous system (CNS) depressants. Safer environments for heroin use, such as injecting rooms, may also reduce the chances of overdose.
THE PAYMENT OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS raises ethical and empirical questions that have special importance in addictions research involving drugdependent participants. Despite a now large literature on human subjects payment, what is still needed is practical guidance for investigators and ethics committees. This paper reviews the literature on: current payment practices and guidelines; defining features of undue and due incentives and fair reimbursement; and the significance of risks and harms that may arise from paying drug using participants. We conclude that research payments are ethically acceptable in most circumstances of addictions research, but should be closely scrutinized in situations where these may exacerbate existing harms or create additional risks for participants and investigators. General principles, key questions and procedural options are highlighted for an applied approach to ethical research payments. Future research directions are identified.
Background: Smartphone technologies and mHealth applications (or apps) promise unprecedented scope for data collection, treatment intervention, and relapse prevention when used in the field of substance abuse and addiction. This potential also raises new ethical challenges that researchers, clinicians, and software developers must address. Aims: This paper aims to identify ethical issues in the current uses of smartphones in addiction research and treatment. Methods: A search of three databases (PubMed, Web of Science and PsycInfo) identified 33 studies involving smartphones or mHealth applications for use in the research and treatment of substance abuse and addiction. A content analysis was conducted to identify how smartphones are being used in these fields and to highlight the ethical issues raised by these studies. Results: Smartphones are being used to collect large amounts of sensitive information, including personal information, geo-location, physiological activity, self-reports of mood and cravings, and the consumption of illicit drugs, alcohol and nicotine. Given that detailed information is being collected about potentially illegal behaviour, we identified the following ethical considerations: protecting user privacy, maximising equity in access, ensuring informed consent, providing participants with adequate clinical resources, communicating clinically relevant results to individuals, and the urgent need to demonstrate evidence of safety and efficacy of the technologies. Conclusions: mHealth technology offers the possibility to collect large amounts of valuable personal information that may enhance research and treatment of substance abuse and addiction. To realise this potential researchers, clinicians and app-developers must address these ethical concerns to maximise the benefits and minimise risks of harm to users.
The review suggests treatment providers may endorse disease and other models while strategically deploying the DMA for presumed therapeutic benefits. Varying DMA support across workforces indicated service users may experience multiple and potentially contradictory explanations of addiction. Future policy development will benefit by considering how treatment providers adopt disease concepts in practice.
This paper examines population trends in morphine prescriptions in Australia, and contrasts them with findings from annual surveys with regular injecting drug users (IDU). Data on morphine prescriptions from 1995 to 2003 were obtained from the Drug Monitoring System (DRUMS) run by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Data collected from regular IDU as part of the Australian Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS) were analysed (2001 - 2004). The rate of morphine prescription per person aged 15 - 54 years increased by 89% across Australia between 1995 and 2003 (from 46.3 to 85.9 mg per person). Almost half (46%) of IDU surveyed in 2004 reported illicit morphine use, with the highest rates in jurisdictions where heroin was less available. Recent morphine injectors were significantly more likely to be male, unemployed, out of treatment and homeless in comparison to IDU who had not injected morphine. They were also more likely to have injected other pharmaceutical drugs and to report injection related problems. Among those who had injected morphine recently, the most commonly reported injecting harms were morphine dependence (38%), difficulty finding veins into which to inject (36%) and scarring or bruising (27%). Morphine use and injection is a common practice among regular IDU in Australia. In some cases, morphine may be a substitute for illicit heroin; in others, it may be being used to treat heroin dependence where other pharmacotherapies, such as methadone and buprenorphine, are perceived as being unavailable or undesirable by IDU. Morphine injection appears to be associated with polydrug use, and with it, a range of problems related to drug injection. Further research is required to monitor and reduce morphine diversion and related harms by such polydrug injectors.
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.