Search

Background While drug user organizations (DUO) have received public health attention as a means to potentially reduce the harms associated with drug use, there is a lack of research on the compensation and structural forces that promote or inhibit participation in DUO. Against the backdrop of structural vulnerability experienced by people who use drugs (PWUD), we examined the impact of monetary ‘volunteer stipends' provided through a DUO and explore their role in providing low-threshold employment opportunities and shaping participation in DUO. Methods Participants were purposively sampled to reflect a range of perspectives and experiences volunteering at Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU) and receiving stipends. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 23 members of VANDU. Interview transcripts were coded in Atlas.ti 7 for key a priori themes and emergent categories from the data and analyzed thematically. Results Stipends provided participants with symbolic and material recognition of the time, effort, and expertise they contribute to the organization, and functioned to facilitate ongoing participation. Payments that rewarded, skills, labour and drug-related knowledge reduced participant's perception of stigma against PWUD. Paid work in VANDU further provided participants with non-material benefits commonly attributed to regular employment, including social connections and a sense of purpose. Participants also identified the low level of pay as a limitation of VANDU's paid participation program. The daily demands of survival (accessing shelter, food, and drugs) posed more complex structural vulnerabilities to participate in VANDU, as small stipends were not sufficient to address these needs. Conclusion Low threshold employment opportunities within DUO may provide significant individual and public health benefits. However, these benefits are constrained by the small size of stipends. Therefore, to ensure better inclusion of PWUD, our findings recommend the development and expansion of equitable, accessible, well-paying employment programs for PWUD.

OBJECTIVES: Globally, engaging people who have used drugs, or peers, in decision-making has been increasingly touted as a best practice approach to developing priorities, programs, and policies. Peer engagement ensures decisions are relevant, appropriate, and effective to the affected community. However, ensuring that inclusion is accessible and equitable for those involved remains a challenge. In this study, we examined the perspectives of people who use or have used illicit drugs (PWUD) on peer engagement in health and harm reduction settings across British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS: The Peer Engagement and Evaluation Project used a participatory approach to conducting 13 peer-facilitated focus groups (n = 83) across BC. Focus group data were coded and analyzed with five peer research assistants. Themes about the nature of peer engagement were generated. From this analysis, peer engagement barriers and enablers were identified. RESULTS: Barriers to peer engagement included individual, geographical, systemic, and social factors. Issues related to stigma, confidentiality, and mistrust were intensely discussed among participants. Being “outed” in one’s community was a barrier to engagement, particularly in rural areas. Participants voiced that compensation, setting, and the right people help facilitate and motivate engagement. Peer networks are an essential ingredient to engagement by promoting support and advocacy. CONCLUSION: PWUD are important stakeholders in decisions that affect them. This cross-jurisdictional study investigated how PWUD have experienced engagement efforts in BC, identifying several factors that influence participation. Meaningful engagement can be facilitated by attention to communication, relationships, personal capacity, and compassion between peers and other professionals.

Many cities around the globe have experienced substantial increases in crack cocaine use. Public health programmes have begun to address crack smoking, primarily through the distribution of safer crack use equipment, but their impacts have been limited. More comprehensive safer environmental interventions, specifically safer smoking rooms (SSR), have been implemented only in select European cities. However, none have been subjected to rigorous evaluation. This ethnographic study was undertaken at an 'unsanctioned' SSR operated by a drug user-led organization in Vancouver, Canada, to explore how this intervention shaped crack smoking practices, public crack smoking, and related harms.Ethnographic fieldwork was undertaken at this SSR from September to December 2011, and included approximately 50 hours of ethnographic observation and 23 in-depth interviews with people who smoke crack. Data were analyzed by drawing on the 'Risk Environment' framework and concepts of 'symbolic', 'everyday', and 'structural' violence.Our findings illustrate how a high demand for SSRs was driven by the need to minimize exposure to policing (structural violence), drug scene violence (everyday violence), and stigma (symbolic violence) that characterized unregulated drug use settings (e.g., public spaces). Although resource scarcity and social norms operating within the local drug scene (e.g., gendered power relations) perpetuated crack pipe-sharing within unregulated drug use settings, the SSR fostered harm reduction practices by reshaping the social-structural context of crack smoking and reduced the potential for health harms.Given the significant potential of SSRs in reducing health and social harms, there is an urgent need to scale up these interventions. Integrating SSRs into public health systems, and supplementing these interventions with health and social supports, has potential to improve the health and safety of crack-smoking populations.

Background: The role of peers (former or current drug users) in reducing risky behavior within methamphetamine and crack smokers has not been well described or researched. The current study not only explores the role of peers in reducing risk factors for morbidity within the illicit drug smoking population in the Downtown Eastside (DTES) community of Vancouver but it also investigates the changes in the nature of drug use after the closure of an unsanctioned smoking facility. Methods: The data pertain to qualitative interviews with 10 peers and 10 illicit drug smokers. The semi-structured interviews were conducted through community-based research, and the digital transcripts were analyzed via NVivo 10 software. Results: The results indicate that peers (former and current drug users who are employed as educators) are instrumental in transferring risk reduction knowledge within crack and methamphetamine smokers. For example, these peers have been able to teach users about the risk of sharing pipes, using brillo, and using public drug. Furthermore, the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users provides employment for crack and methamphetamine users in Vancouver who tend to have scarce sources of employment. However, since the closure of the unsanctioned inhalation facility, there has been significantly more public drug use and pipe sharing in the vicinity of the facility, placing drug smokers at significant risk of arrest, violence, and blood-borne infections. Conclusions: The current study recommends expanding the harm reduction peer network for people who smoke illicit drugs in the DTES community of Vancouver who have historically been underserved.

Background Injecting drugs safely almost always includes the presence of one's social network, especially for the prevention of overdose. Yet, the systematic analysis of users' social networks has yet to be established as a focal method in harm reduction research, and interventions. Methods This study draws from 200 interviews with persons who inject drugs recruited from North America's first sanctioned supervised injection facility and a drug user's advocacy group. Respondents were asked about the individuals they personally considered as facilitators of harm reduction, and the relations between them. Collectively, these 200 respondents provided over 900 individuals whom they considered as members of their harm reduction network. The aim was to locate individuals that would potentially make the network denser (harm reduction champions) and users that were situated in the "periphery" of the network, and in practice, further away from the harm reduction core. Results Of the 1135 network members, 63 individuals formed the "core" of the harm reduction network, collectively reaching approximately 70% of individuals in the network. We also uncovered 31 individuals that acted as "articulation points"– these individuals were not as connected, but were more effective at reaching peripheral individuals. Conclusion Former or current injecting drug users that were sampled were surrounded by a relatively rich harm reduction network, but the network approach showed that only a minority of individuals were true harm reduction "champions". Recruitment of a combination of well-connected harm reduction champions, and strategically connected articulation points, would be most effective in planning network interventions that encourage harm reduction behaviors among this population.