Drug Consumption Rooms in Rotterdam: An Explorative Description

Poel, Agnes van der; Barendregt, Cas; Mheen, Dike van de

doi:10.1159/000068807

Cited by 31 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overdose deaths may be reduced by SIF but the order of magnitude may be smaller than claimed. There is some evidence that behaviour change occurs and SIF users access treatment [106,114,117,118], but without comparators to other interventions it is difficult to estimate the direct effect of SIF.…”

Section: Supervised Injecting Facilities (Sif)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the efficacy and effectiveness of harm reduction strategies for alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs

Ritter

Cameron

2006

Drug and Alcohol Review

219

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Harm reduction is both a policy approach and used to describe a specific set of interventions. These interventions aim to reduce the harms associated with drug use. Employing a strict definition of harm reduction, evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drug harm reduction interventions were reviewed. Systematic searches of the published literature were undertaken. Studies were included if they provided evaluation data (pre-post, or control group comparisons). More than 650 articles were included in the review. The majority of the literature concerned illicit drugs. For alcohol, harm reduction interventions to reduce road trauma are well-founded in evidence. Otherwise, there is limited research to support the efficacy and effectiveness of other alcohol harm reduction interventions. For tobacco, the area is controversial but promising new products that reduce the harms associated with smoking are being developed. In the area of illicit drugs there is solid efficacy, effectiveness and economic data to support needle syringe programmes and outreach programmes. There is limited published evidence to date for other harm reduction interventions such as non-injecting routes of administration, brief interventions and emerging positive evidence for supervised injecting facilities. There is sufficient evidence to support the wide-spread adoption of harm reduction interventions and to use harm reduction as an overarching policy approach in relation to illicit drugs. The same cannot be concluded for alcohol or tobacco. Research at a broad policy level is required, especially in light of the failure by many policy makers to adopt cost-effective harm reduction interventions.

show abstract

Section: Supervised Injecting Facilities (Sif)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the efficacy and effectiveness of harm reduction strategies for alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs

Ritter

Cameron

2006

Drug and Alcohol Review

219

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Germany, a survey conducted in 2002 among clients of 18 DCRs in different cities found 80% of clients with more than 1 visit/week [23] ; another study conducted in Hamburg in the DCRs of the city and their immediate surroundings [12] found that one third of the clients were daily users, one third occasional users (one to several visits per week) and one third less than once a week or never. In the Netherlands an average of 6 visits/week was found among pass holders of DCRs in Rotterdam [11] , and in Switzerland, in a survey among the clients of the Biel DCR in 2002, 43% were daily visitors [24] , and in the DCRs of Zurich in 2002, the mean visit frequency was more than 5/week [1] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Typology of Injection Profiles of Clients of a Supervised Drug Consumption Facility in Geneva, Switzerland

Dubois-Arber¹,

Benninghoff²,

Jeannin³

2008

Eur Addict Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of a supervised drug consumption room (DCR) in a newly established low threshold facility in Geneva, Switzerland, in 2002 is analyzed. Two sources of routine data were used: data collected at the first visit by any new client (entry questionnaire) which included some personal details, and data collected on the substances injected at each visit to the DCR. A typology of injection profiles was constructed. Overall, the mean number of injections and days of visits per client over the year was low and cocaine was the main substance injected. However, an important heterogeneity in the use of the DCR was found and five types of clients identified: 1-day clients; standard clients; heroin-oriented clients; high cocaine consumption clients, and newcomers. Typology was associated with some characteristics at the first visit and the drug consumption pattern in the month preceding the first visit was in accordance with the subsequent use of the DCR. This heterogeneity in the use of the DCR highlights the diverse roles of the DCRs in harm reduction.

show abstract

“…In one Swiss study, two of 17 drug users interviewed attributed reductions in drug use to SCS utilization whereas three reported an increase in their use (Hedrich 2004;Benninghoff et al 2003). In a study of 67 clients from the Netherlands, 8 (12%) self-reported reductions in drug use while 11 (16%) reported using more frequently after registering with the facility (Hedrich 2004;van der Poel, Barendregt, and van de Mheen 2003).…”

Section: Changes In Drug Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In one sample of 168 SCS clients in Germany, 60% had received medical services, mostly for small wounds and abscesses, and two-thirds had participated in at least one general counselling session with staff (Poschadel et al 2003). Studies of SCSs in Hamburg and Rotterdam report that about a third of surveyed clients reported regularly receiving medical care services offered at an SCS (Heike Zurhold et al 2003;van der Poel, Barendregt, and van de Mheen 2003). When surveyed, clients reported improvements in their health after seeking basic outreach services from an SCS (Linssen, de Jong, and Wolf 2001;.…”

Section: Social Outreach and Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Evidence on Supervised Drug Consumption Sites

Pardo¹,

Caulkins²,

Kilmer³

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

show abstract

Drug Consumption Rooms in Rotterdam: An Explorative Description

Cited by 31 publications

References 1 publication

A review of the efficacy and effectiveness of harm reduction strategies for alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs

A review of the efficacy and effectiveness of harm reduction strategies for alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs

Typology of Injection Profiles of Clients of a Supervised Drug Consumption Facility in Geneva, Switzerland

Assessing the Evidence on Supervised Drug Consumption Sites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About