A comparison of privileged access interviewing and traditional interviewing methods when studying drug users in treatment

Abstract

Aims: Privileged Access Interviewing (PAI) has traditionally been used to reach illicit drug users and other 'hidden' populations. How PAI data compare to other self-reported data has seldom been discussed. We compare data from patients in opioid substitution treatment (OST), gathered through PAI and researcher interviews, respectively, to investigate whether PAIs and researchers are reaching comparable populations, and whether differences in answers are due to the sensitive nature of the questions.Methods: Structured interviews were conducted with 368 patients from nine OST clinics in three Swedish cities. 237 interviews were carried out by researchers, and 131 by nine PAIs (OST patients). Data were analyzed with χ 2 test, Fisher's exact test, t-test, and logistic regression analysis.Results: PAIs and researchers recruited comparable populations, with few differences in terms of individual, treatment, and social factors. However, self-reported behaviors revealed several significant differences. Alcohol consumption and drinking to intoxication was more commonly reported among patients interviewed through PAI (p<0.001 and p=0.001, respectively). Furthermore, the PAI group reported selling medication (p<0.001 last month, p<0.001 during treatment episode), and snorting buprenorphine (p=0.010 last month, p=0.001 during treatment episode) more frequently.Conclusions: PAI is a useful method in studies of illicit drug use and a valuable complement to more traditional interviewing methods. Specifically as regards revelations of a sensitive or controversial nature, PAI seems to produce different results than researcher interviews, and possibly also more truthful responses. PAI may have considerable potential as a datagathering method also when studying other, more easily accessible populations.

Patient choice as a means of empowerment in opioid substitution treatment: a case from Sweden

“…At recruitment, we strove to achieve a reasonably representative gender and age distribution. About 30% of the patients in substitution treatment in Sweden are women and the average age of the patients is around 40 (Socialstyrelsen, 2015;Johnson & Richert, 2016). The interviewees were aged between 27 and 59, with an average age of 41 (age is not shown in the table due to the risk of identification); one third were women.…”

HIV prevention and crack harm reduction using projection mapping in Mexico City

“…The successful implementation of this type of work requires staff to have good communication skills, tact, persistence and problem-solving abilities in order to be maximally effective (Valdez et al, 2016). Future research should take into consideration the co-implementation of projection mapping techniques with privileged access interviewing (PAI) data-gathering methods to reach some of the most marginalised and hard–to-reach populations of persons who use drugs (Johnson and Richert, 2016).…”

Non-prescribed use of methadone and buprenorphine prior to opioid substitution treatment: lifetime prevalence, motives, and drug sources among people with opioid dependence in five Swedish cities

“…The peer-to-peer-interviews ( n = 131) were conducted in the two largest cities—Göteborg and Malmö—through “privileged access interviewing” [89–91] by nine specially trained patients. The interviewers, five women and four men, had a stable lifestyle and had large contact networks in different patient groups.…”

“…Before the data collection began, both the peer interviewers and the project assistants were trained on the contents of the interview itself and on the interviewing technique. We have discussed in detail the method of privileged access interviewing and the process of recruiting interviewers in a previous article [91].…”