Search

Background and aims: Mathematical modelling has demonstrated the theoretical feasibility of HCV treatment‐as‐prevention strategies in custodial settings, yet limited empirical data exists. The Australian 'Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C' study is the world's first trial of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment‐as‐prevention in prison. This study aimed to analyse how expert stakeholders involved in the Australian HCV response assessed the acceptability of HCV treatment‐as‐prevention in prison using interview data from the SToP‐C qualitative substudy. Design and setting: Qualitative analysis using semi‐structured interviews in Australia. Participants: Nineteen key HCV experts. Measurements Drawing upon Sekhon's theoretical framework of acceptability, data were organized thematically under four component constructs of acceptability: affective attitude; ethicality; opportunity costs; and perceived effectiveness. Findings Most differences in participant assessments of acceptability were a matter of relative emphasis and prioritization rather than absolute polarity. Nonetheless, a small minority of participants was overtly critical of the approach. Arguing against the focus on treatment, they instead advocated for prevention‐as‐prevention, including the improvement and expansion of existing harm reduction measures. Conclusions: Qualitative analysis of expert stakeholder assessments of the acceptability of hepatitis C virus treatment‐as‐prevention in Australian prisons found no opposition to the universal rollout of direct‐acting anti‐virals, but most voiced concern regarding the lack of effective primary prevention in Australian prisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent advent of new, highly effective, direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) is dramatically reshaping the hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment landscape and prisons are set to play an important role. While there is a substantial literature addressing the centrality of stigma to experiences of living with HCV in the community, including as a barrier to treatment, scant attention has been paid to documenting how HCV-stigma figures within the distinct sociality of prison life. This article focuses on initial, pretreatment interviews with prisoner participants (n = 32) from the first, real-world trial of HCV 'treatment-as-prevention' in prison: Australia's Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C (SToP-C) study. Drawing on recent developments in stigma theory alongside Goffman's original insights, we posit HCV-stigma as a relational, contingent and political process, materialised across the network of power relations in prison. Participant accounts describe a complex picture, with reports ranging from those suggesting the 'normalisation' of HCV to those detailing the potential effects of HCV-stigma, including additional disciplinary attention from officers and/or the rejection from peer networks by fellow prisoners. While acknowledging the limiting effects HCV-stigma may yet have on treatment-as-prevention efforts, we speculate that with committed political leadership, operational investment, sufficient prisoner engagement, interventions such as SToP-C may also afford opportunities for such effects to be challenged, disrupted, and even left behind. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent advances in the efficacy and tolerability of hepatitis C treatments and the introduction of a universal access scheme for the new Direct Acting Antiviral (DAA) therapies in March 2016, has resulted in a rapid increase in the uptake of hepatitis C treatment in Australia. Despite these positive developments, recent data suggest a plateauing of treatment numbers, indicating that more work may need to be done to identify and address ongoing barriers to hepatitis C treatment access and uptake. This paper aims to contribute to our understanding of the ongoing barriers to DAA therapies, with a focus on people who inject drugs. The paper draws on participant interview data from a qualitative research study based on a participatory research design that included a peer researcher with direct experience of both hepatitis C DAA treatment and injecting drug use at all stages of the research process. The study’s findings show that residual barriers to DAA treatment exist at personal, provider and system levels and include poor venous access, DAA treatments not considered ‘core-business’ by opioid substitution treatment (OST) providers, and patients having to manage multiple health and social priorities that interfere with keeping medical appointments such as childcare and poor access to transport services. Further, efforts to increase access to and uptake of DAA hepatitis C treatment over time will require a focus on reducing stigma and discrimination towards people who inject drugs as this remains as a major barrier to care for many people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemic is a significant public health challenge in Australia. Current initiatives to expand access to HCV treatment focus on opiate substitution therapy (OST) settings where the prevalence of hepatitis C among clients is high. In Australia, the provision of OST for many clients is via large clinics, with an estimated median of 150 clients per service. Conceptually informed by the work of Michel Foucault, our analysis of the proposed integrated treatment model focuses on the critical but overlooked question of organisational culture and power operating within OST. We argue that the specific context of OST not merely reflects but actively participates in the political economy of social exclusion via which the socio-spatial segregation and stigmatisation of the service user as ‘drug user’ is enacted. This paper analyses data collected from two samples during 2008/9: OST clients living in New South Wales, Australia and a range of OST health professionals working in Australian settings. In total, 27 interviews were conducted with current OST clients; 19 by phone and 8 face-to-face. One focus group and 16 telephone interviews were conducted with OST health professionals. Our analysis of key themes emerging from the interview data suggests that the successful introduction of HCV treatment within the OST clinic is not a given. We are concerned that particular areas of tension, if not explicit contradiction, have been overlooked in current research and debates informing the proposed combination treatment model. We question the appropriateness of co-locating a notoriously arduous, exacting treatment (HCV) within the highly surveillant and regulatory environment of OST. While applauding the intention to improve access to HCV care and treatment for people who inject drugs we caution against a treatment model that risks further entrenching (socio-spatial) stigmatisation amongst those already experiencing significant marginalisation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]