Search

Abstract: Background: Internationally, there are ongoing efforts to increase access to hepatitis C (HCV) assessment and treatment to counter a generally low uptake of treatment among people with a history of injecting drug use. The aim of this qualitative study was to examine client and staff attitudes towards and experience of co-location of HCV and opioid substitution treatment (OST) services. Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 57 clients and 19 staff from four NSW clinics participating in the Australian ETHOS study. Results: Client and staff participants typically welcomed integrated treatment, citing issues of convenience, reduced travel time and costs, persistent cues to engagement and immediacy of access to care. Positive attitudes towards the initiative were expressed even by clients who had not engaged with HCV care. Providing co-located care largely avoided the negative, stigmatising or discriminatory experiences that participants reported encountering in settings less familiar with people who use drugs. A minority of client participants expressed concerns about the lack of privacy and/or confidentiality available in the co-located model, preferring to seek HCV care elsewhere. Conclusions: The co-location of HCV care in OST clinics was welcomed by the large majority of participants in this study. Besides issues of convenience, the appeal of the co-located service centred on the familiarity of existing relationships between clients and staff in the OST setting. While some clients remained distrustful of OST and chose not to take up HCV care in this setting, the co-located treatment model was overwhelmingly successful amongst both client and staff participants. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Assessment and uptake of treatment for hepatitis C among people who inject drugs (PWID) is low and strategies to enhance hepatitis C care in this group are needed. Knowledge of hepatitis C and its treatment is one precursor to decisions about treatment. Methods: We conducted a cross-section study designed to evaluate treatment considerations in participants with self-reported hepatitis C infection in New South Wales, Australia. Participants were recruited from needle and syringe programs, opiate substitution clinics, pharmacies that dispensed opiate substitution treatment and from the mailing list of a community-based hepatitis C organisation and completed a self-administered survey. Knowledge of hepatitis C was assessed by a 48-item scale addressing the natural history and treatment of hepatitis C. Factors associated with knowledge were assessed by ordinal regression. Results: Among the 997 participants recruited, 407 self-reported acquiring hepatitis C through injecting drug use and had never received hepatitis C treatment. Knowledge about hepatitis C was overall poor and the effects of the long term consequences of hepatitis C were over-estimated. Higher knowledge scores were associated with recruitment site, higher education levels and recent contact with a general practitioner. One-third of participants indicated that they did not intend to have treatment and one-fifth did not answer this question. Conclusion: Knowledge is a precursor to informed decisions about hepatitis C treatment. These results indicate that efforts to support those less engaged with hepatitis C care (and specifically those on opiate substitution treatment) and those with lower literacy are required. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Clinical trials of interferon-based treatments for hepatitis C infection show decrements in patients' health-related quality of life due to side effects of therapy. The impact of side effects on patients' overall quality of life still remains unclear. To explore this issue, the authors interviewed people living in New South Wales, Australia, who had undergone treatment for hepatitis C. Their aim in this article is to report participants' experiences of treatment side effects. In Australia, this information is important, because a new interferon-based regimen has been adopted as the mainstay of hepatitis C treatment, and it is predicted that many more people will seek treatment. The authors argue for further qualitative research to enhance knowledge of the impact of this therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Direct-Acting Antiviral (DAA) treatments for hepatitis C have been widely promoted by health promotion professionals and medical clinicians as being 'side-effect free'. In this paper, we draw on data that troubles this approach. We used a mixed method design to collect data from people who inject drugs, and who were DAA treatment naïve, in New South Wales, Australia. We describe knowledge about and perceptions of DAA treatment. We found that concerns about side effects were commonplace - for example, one-third (37%) of participants who had not taken up treatment worried "a lot" about 'side effects' - and that these concerns were underpinned by a general distrust and suspicion of medical institutions and their technologies, including widespread negative associations linked to interferon treatment. In trying to make sense of this, we draw on the concept of counterpublic health and its recognition that the everyday health needs, knowledges and aspirations of subordinated citizens frequently contradict the normative frameworks governing public health interventions. We suggest that failing to engage with concerns about 'side effects' could hinder elimination efforts. Our analysis suggests that addressing the issue of 'side effects' within the 'public' discourse of DAAs will not dampen or damage elimination efforts, as some might fear, but rather it will legitimate the concerns of people who inject, decrease their suspicion of medical interventions, and better support the uptake of DAA treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historic models of hepatitis C treatment have not been suitably adapted for people who inject drugs (PWIDs). With the availability of highly effective direct acting antivirals (DAAs) and the possibility to eliminate hepatitis C as a public health threat, there is an urgency to improve treatment provision and uptake among PWID. This commentary explores the role of needle and syringe programs (NSPs) in providing hepatitis C treatment to PWID through an exploration of Positively Hep, a peer-referral, incentive-based project in Sydney, Australia. Positively Hep uses peer-networks to engage clients and introduce them to hepatitis C education, screening, and treatment. Within the first 26 months of operation, Positively Hep has provided education about hepatitis C and DAA treatments to 326 individuals, and has tested 145 people, 44% (n = 64) of whom have tested positive. Of these individuals, 21 (33%) have begun treatment, and 18 (28%) have successfully completed treatment. Positively Hep highlights the benefits of having trustworthy, timely, convenient, and client-friendly services to engage PWID and support them throughout hepatitis C treatment. This commentary is intended to prompt discussion about incorporating hepatitis C treatment into NSP service delivery, which could increase treatment uptake among PWID and support progress toward elimination targets. [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]