No abstract

HIV infection continues to decline in this population of IDUs in New York City, suggesting the possibility of bringing very high prevalence epidemics under control. Risk elimination may not be required; rather, multiple forms of risk reduction may be effective in reducing HIV transmission within a local population of IDUs.

The programs clearly differ in the extent to which they are attracting unstably housed IDUs as participants. The consistency of more frequent injection risk behavior among unstably housed exchange participants and the lack of significant variation in the odds ratios for increased injection risk suggests that none of the programs were "better" or "worse" at reducing injection risk behavior among unstably housed participants. Reduction in injecting risk behavior among syringe exchange participants may require greater efforts to provide stable housing or the development of dramatically new interventions to reduce injecting risk behavior among IDUs with persistent unstable housing.

The goal of this study was to compare HIV risk behaviors of amphetamine and non-amphetamine injectors at syringe exchange programs (SEP) in the United States and to identify factors associated with injection risk. This analysis is based on data from a random cross-section of participants at 13 SEPs in different parts of the country. All interviews were done using Audio Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing technology. Amphetamine injectors differ from other SEP participants in that they are younger and more likely to be White, to have had a recent same sex partner, and to be homeless. Rates of injection risk behavior are higher among amphetamine injectors than other SEP participants, but rates of condom use are similar. Factors associated with injection risk behavior are amphetamine injection, homelessness, depression, and having a recent same-gender sexual partner (for both men and women). SEPs have been repeatedly demonstrated to reduce injection risk behavior, but some groups of program participants continue to be at elevated risk. SEPs may need to develop new approaches to outreach and education to address the needs of amphetamine injectors and other populations at persistent risk.

We examined the diffusion of the D.A.R.E program to reduce use of illicit drugs among school-aged children and youths and the diffusion of syringe exchange programs to reduce HIV transmission among injection drug users. The D.A.R.E program was diffused widely in the United States despite a lack of evidence for its effectiveness; there has been limited diffusion of syringe exchange in the United States, despite extensive scientific evidence for its effectiveness. Multiple possible associations between diffusion and evidence of effectiveness exist, from widespread diffusion without evidence of effectiveness to limited diffusion with strong evidence of effectiveness. The decision theory concepts of framing and loss aversion may be useful for further research on the diffusion of public health innovations.