Geo-spatial analysis of individual-level needle and syringe coverage in Melbourne, Australia

O’Keefe, Daniel; Wilkinson, Anna L.; Aitken, Campbell; Dietze, Paul

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209280

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Physical access to mental health services was analysed using the area-based measure, PPR, by examining the total number of mental health nurses per 100,000 persons and used ARIA + to define remoteness areas. Another article published in 2018, analysed access to needle and syringe dispensing outlets across Melbourne, Victoria, for participants recruited into the Melbourne injecting drug user cohort (MIX) study [ 83 ]. Physical access to needle and syringe dispensing outlets was analysed using Euclidean distance.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The application of spatial measures to analyse health service accessibility in Australia: a systematic review and recommendations for future practice

Wood

Alston

Beks

et al. 2023

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Australia's inequitable distribution of health services is well documented. Spatial access relates to the geographic limitations affecting the availability and accessibility of healthcare practitioners and services. Issues associated with spatial access are often influenced by Australia's vast landmass, challenging environments, uneven population concentration, and sparsely distributed populations in rural and remote areas. Measuring access contributes to a broader understanding of the performance of health systems, particularly in rural/remote areas. This systematic review synthesises the evidence identifying what spatial measures and geographic classifications are used and how they are applied in the Australian peer-reviewed literature. Methods A systematic search of peer-reviewed literature published between 2002 and 2022 was undertaken using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Search terms were derived from three major topics, including: [1] Australian population; [2] spatial analysis of health service accessibility; and [3] objective physical access measures. Results Database searches retrieved 1,381 unique records. Records were screened for eligibility, resulting in 82 articles for inclusion. Most articles analysed access to primary health services (n = 50; 61%), followed by specialist care (n = 17; 21%), hospital services (n = 12; 15%), and health promotion and prevention (n = 3; 4%). The geographic scope of the 82 articles included national (n = 33; 40%), state (n = 27; 33%), metropolitan (n = 18; 22%), and specified regional / rural /remote area (n = 4; 5%). Most articles used distance-based physical access measures, including travel time (n = 30; 37%) and travel distance along a road network (n = 21; 26%), and Euclidean distance (n = 24; 29%). Conclusion This review is the first comprehensive systematic review to synthesise the evidence on how spatial measures have been applied to measure health service accessibility in the Australian context over the past two decades. Objective and transparent access measures that are fit for purpose are imperative to address persistent health inequities and inform equitable resource distribution and evidence-based policymaking.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The application of spatial measures to analyse health service accessibility in Australia: a systematic review and recommendations for future practice

Wood

Alston

Beks

et al. 2023

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These challenges represented multiple risks for people who inject drugs when trying to obtain sterile equipment, such as the risk of police interaction as a result of travelling to NSPs. Added to this is the financial burden of purchasing syringes from pharmacies (which has been associated with insufficient needle and syringe coverage [ 24 ]) and the sharing of used injecting equipment. Similar observations were reported in UK‐based research, where shortages in supply of injecting equipment led to an increased prevalence of sharing and re‐using injecting equipment [ 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health service utilisation and access for people who inject drugs during COVID‐19

Efunnuga

Higgs

Walker

et al. 2022

Drug and Alcohol Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The wide‐spread implementation of interventions to limit transmission and public health consequences of COVID‐19 in the Australian state of Victoria had flow‐on consequences for people who use and inject drugs. Consequences included the interruption of illicit drug supply and drug procurement, and the disruption to the delivery of health services. To inform strategies that can minimise the adverse outcomes of similar future disruptive events, this study explored how COVID‐19 restrictions impacted access to harm reduction and drug treatment services for people who inject drugs in Melbourne, Victoria. Methods Qualitative semi‐structured interviews were conducted via an online calling app, with 11 participants of a broader cohort study (the SuperMIX study) in April 2020. Interviews were focused on participants experiences of accessing and using harm reduction and drug treatment services. Data were thematically analysed using a process of blended coding. Results Findings revealed how disruptions in the delivery of harm reduction and drug treatment services—in response to COVID‐19 restrictions—created barriers accessing sterile injecting equipment, increased risk of arrest by police and exacerbated social isolation. Participants reported difficulties adapting to changes in services access, with some increases in injecting risk behaviours. However, improvements in opioid agonist therapy prescriptions were noted as a beneficial outcome. Discussion By examining the impacts of COVID‐19 and the resultant restrictions on people who inject drugs' access to health services in Melbourne, Victoria, findings provide guidance for future responses to the unanticipated large‐scale effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic, and similar disruptive events.

show abstract

“…In addition, from a psychosocial perspective, engagement in syringe services programs is associated with an increased likelihood of procuring stable housing and a reduced likelihood of future legal issues (Ashford et al, 2018). At this point, there are geographic disparities in syringe services program access, and many individuals who use substances globally might be unable to access these services (O'Keefe et al, 2018; Whiteman et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing Harm Reduction Services to Reduce the Burden of Substance Use

Kameg,

Lepore,

Burkart

et al. 2023

UJAN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geo-spatial analysis of individual-level needle and syringe coverage in Melbourne, Australia

Cited by 4 publications

References 34 publications

The application of spatial measures to analyse health service accessibility in Australia: a systematic review and recommendations for future practice

The application of spatial measures to analyse health service accessibility in Australia: a systematic review and recommendations for future practice

Health service utilisation and access for people who inject drugs during COVID‐19

Prioritizing Harm Reduction Services to Reduce the Burden of Substance Use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About