Search

Background: In 2015, Bristol (South West England) experienced a large increase in cases of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection in people who inject drugs (PWID). Aim: We aimed to characterise and estimate the prevalence of MRSA colonisation among PWID in Bristol and test evidence of a clonal outbreak. Methods: PWID recruited through an unlinked-anonymous community survey during 2016 completed behavioural questionnaires and were screened for MRSA. Univariable logistic regression examined associations with MRSA colonisation. Whole-genome sequencing used lineage-matched MRSA isolates, comparing PWID (screening and retrospective bacteraemia samples from 2012-2017) with non-PWID (Bristol screening) in Bristol and national reference laboratory database samples. Results: The MRSA colonisation prevalence was 8.7% (13/149) and was associated with frequently injecting in public places (odds ratio (OR): 5.5; 95% confidence interval (CI):1.34–22.70), recent healthcare contact (OR: 4.3; 95% CI: 1.34–13.80) and injecting in groups of three or more (OR: 15.8; 95% CI: 2.51–99.28). People reporting any one of: injecting in public places, injection site skin and soft tissue infection or hospital contact accounted for 12/13 MRSA positive cases (sensitivity 92.3%; specificity 51.5%). Phylogenetic analysis identified a dominant clade associated with infection and colonisation among PWID in Bristol belonging to ST5-SCCmecIVg. Conclusions: MRSA colonisation in Bristol PWID is substantially elevated compared with general population estimates and there is evidence of clonal expansion, community-based transmission and increased infection risk related to the colonising strain. Targeted interventions, including community screening and suppression therapy, education and basic infection control are needed to reduce MRSA infections in PWID.

In the UK, needle and syringe programmes (NSP) are delivered via community pharmacies or substance misuse services (SMSNSP). Understanding the profile of drug injectors primarily using different sources of injecting equipment can help service design.Blood spot samples and behavioural data were collected from drug injectors and tested for antibodies to hepatitis C and hepatitis B. Data were analysed in relation to NSP use by multivariate logistic regression.Of 700 eligible individuals interviewed, 657 provided information on their main source of equipment; 26% reported pharmacy NSP, 56% SMSNSP and 18% secondary distribution. In the adjusted analysis, individuals whose main source was SMSNSP were more likely to report markers of increased risk (homelessness, groin injection, having injected16 days/month) and had a higher hepatitis B antibody prevalence than individuals primarily using pharmacy NSP. Individuals whose main source was secondary distribution had a different profile (e.g. they were younger, more likely to be recent onset injectors than main source SMSNSP users and less likely to report being in drug treatment).Differences exist in the populations primarily accessing different NSP and commissioning of services must reflect these differences. Injecting drug users relying on secondary exchange should be targeted to improve health service contact.

Objective: To present and update available national and subnational estimates of injecting drug users (IDUs) in developing/transitional countries, and provide indicative estimates of gender and age distribution. Methods: Literature review of both grey and published literature including updates from previously reported estimates on estimates of IDU population and data sources giving age and gender breakdowns. The scope area was developing/transitional countries and the reference period was 1998–2005. Results: Estimates of IDU numbers were available in 105 countries and 243 subnational areas. The largest IDU populations were reported from Brazil, China, India, and Russia (0.8 m, 1.9 m, 1.1 m, and 1.6 m respectively). Subnational areas with the largest IDU populations (35 000–79 000) are: Warsaw (Poland); Barnadul, Irtkustk, Nizhny-Novgorod, Penza, Voronez, St Petersburg, and Volgograd (Russia); New Delhi and Mumbai (India); Jakarta (Indonesia), and Bangkok (Thailand). By region, Eastern Europe and Central Asia have the largest IDU prevalence (median 0.65%) (min 0.3%; max 2.2%; Q1 0.79%; Q3 1.74%) followed by Asia and Pacific: 0.24% (min 0.004%; max 1.47%; Q1 0.37%; Q3 1.1%). In the Middle East and Africa the median value equals 0.2% (min 0.0003%; max 0.35%; Q1 0.09%; Q3 0.26%) and in Latin America and the Caribbean: 0.12% (min 0.002%; max 7.04%; Q1 1.76%; Q3 5.28%). Greater dispersion of national IDU prevalences was observed in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and Asia and Pacific (IQR 1.91 and 1.47 respectively). Subnational areas with the highest IDU prevalence among adults (8–14.9%) were Shymkent (Kazakhstan), Balti (Moldova), Astrakhan, Barnadul, Irtkustk, Khabarovsk, Kaliningrad, Naberezhnyje Chelny, Penza, Togliatti, Volgograd, Voronez, and Yaroslavl (Russia), Dushanbe (Tajikistan), Ashgabad (Turkmenistan), Ivano-Frankivsk and Pavlograd (Ukraine) and Imphal, Manipur (India). 66% (297/447) of the IDU estimates were reported without technical information. Data on the IDU age/gender distributions are also scarce or unavailable for many countries. In 11 Eastern European and Central Asian countries the age group ⩽20–29 represented >50% of the total. The proportion of IDU men was 70%–90% in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and there was a marked absence of data on women outside this region. Conclusion: Unfortunately data on IDU prevalence available to national and international policymakers is of an unknown and probably yet to be tested quality. This study provide baseline figures but steps need to be taken now to improve the reporting and assessment of these critical data.

Summary Background Use of illicit drugs, particularly cannabis, by young people is widespread and is associated with several types of psychological and social harm. These relations might not be causal. Causal relations would suggest that recreational drug use is a substantial public health problem. Non-causal relations would suggest that harm-reduction policy based on prevention of drug use is unlikely to produce improvements in public health. Cross-sectional evidence cannot clarify questions of causality; longitudinal or interventional evidence is needed. Past reviews have generally been non-systematic, have often included crosssectional data, and have underappreciated the extent of methodological problems associated with interpretation. Methods We did a systematic review of general population longitudinal studies reporting associations between illicit drug use by young people and psychosocial harm. Findings We identified 48 relevant studies, of which 16 were of higher quality and provided the most robust evidence. Fairly consistent associations were noted between cannabis use and both lower educational attainment and increased reported use of other illicit drugs. Less consistent associations were noted between cannabis use and both psychological health problems and problematic behaviour. All these associations seemed to be explicable in terms of noncausal mechanisms. Interpretation Available evidence does not strongly support an important causal relation between cannabis use by young people and psychosocial harm, but cannot exclude the possibility that such a relation exists. The lack of evidence of robust causal relations prevents the attribution of public health detriments to illicit drug use. In view of the extent of illicit drug use, better evidence is needed.

Background National and local monitoring of policies on illicit drug use requires information on the number of problematic drug users in a country. This article reports the findings from a study that estimated the number of problematic and injecting drug users for all Drug Action Teams (DATs) in England for 2001. Methods The Multiple Indicator Method (MIM) is a statistical technique for using aggregated data to estimate numbers of drug users across a large number of areas. The MIM was used to combine eight indicators available for all DATs, with prevalence estimates available from a small number of DATs. The indicators were drug possession and supply offences, arrest referrals, people recorded in drug treatment databases, methadone prescriptions, drug-related hospital episodes, drug-related deaths and DATs’ Townsend score. The latter is a measure of material deprivation. A three-stage process involved, (i) factor analysis of the drug indicators, (ii) regression linking factor scores to known prevalence estimates and (iii) imputation of estimates to all other DATs. Results Factor analysis yielded two statistically significant factors underlying the drug indicators in 150 DATs in England. The estimated prevalence rate of problematic drug use in the DATs varied from 0.2 to 1.5 per cent of the population. The estimated average number of problematic drug users per DAT was 1943 (standard deviation = 1300). The estimated average number of injecting drug users per DAT was 627 (standard deviation = 572). The estimates for England in 2001 were 287 670 (population rate = 0.64 per cent) problem drug users, and 93 185 (population rate = 0.23 per cent) injecting drug users. Conclusions Although the model cannot take account of specific local factors, the results are likely to be accurate in areas that do not have these idiosyncrasies. The estimated prevalence figures provide a basis for all DATs to assess their contact rates with problematic and injecting drug users.

Starting from a phenol screening hit (6), three series of benzopyranone selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) have been designed, synthesized, and analyzed for both estrogen receptor alpha binding affinity and in vitro activity in two cell assays. The lead compound identified, SP500263 (13), was more potent than raloxifene and tamoxifen in a cell-based assay measuring inhibition of interleukin-6 release.

Aims. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) has produced methodological guidelines for national drug prevalence estimation. This paper pilots the methods to estimate prevalence for Great Britain and provides a commentary on the methods and resulting estimates. Design. Three types of methodology were used to estimate prevalence: (a) the multiple indicator (MI) method, (b) multipliers applied to (i) drug-treatment records (ii) HIV estimates and (iii) mortality statistics and (c) the British/Scottish Crime Surveys. Setting. England, Scotland and Wales. Participants. Aggregated data on people recorded on databases and respondents in household surveys. Measurements. Prevalence estimates of different forms of problematic drug use. Findings. The estimates are 161 133 (range: 120 850-241 700) for people at risk of mortality due to drug overdose; 161 000-169 000 for people who have ever injected drugs; 202 000 (range: 162 000-244 000) problem opiate users and 268 000 problem drug users (all types). Conclusions. The multiple indicator method offers a comprehensive approach to estimating the prevalence of problematic drug use in the United Kingdom. Simple multiplier methods and household surveys also provide a range of estimates corresponding to different types of drug use in the United Kingdom. The current study suggests that previous national estimates of 100 000-200 000 were conservative. The new estimate of 161 000-266 000 should enable a more focused response. For further development of this method, reliable and timely estimates of anchor points are required for specific geographical areas such as cities or Drug Action Teams (DAT), as well as routine aggregation of drug indicators for these areas.

Background Regional Drug Misuse Databases (RDMDs) are considered the main source of intelligence on problem drug takers in England. Originally intended to provide trend data on visible drug use, a recent strategic review concluded that their purpose should be to monitor treatment targets for the Government’s latest 10 year strategy to tackle drug misuse. The aim of this analysis was to explore whether the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) could supplement RDMDs. Methods A retrospective analysis was carried out using the GPRD and the RDMD in the West Midlands from 1993 to 1997. Results Extrapolation of GPRD data indicates 6574 drug misusing or dependent diagnosed patients in primary care in 1997 compared with 3643 clients reported by all agencies including general practitioners (GPs) to the RDMD. From 1993 to 1997, the RDMD notification rate fluctuated whereas the GPRD rate has increased steadily since 1995. Half of all drug misusing or dependent patients recorded on the GPRD had psychiatric co-morbidity and 10 per cent had been referred to hospital for a drug overdose. Conclusions As the GPRD has been unaffected by the demise of statutory notification of drug dependence in 1997, interpretation of trends may be more reliable than on the RDMD. There is also considerable potential for analysis of prescribing patterns, co-morbidity and drug-related hospitalization. As the Department of Health’s Strategic Review of RDMDs recommends GPs as ‘core reporters’ for providing data to the national system, there is a need for a strategy to ensure valid and comprehensive reporting from GPs.

Recreational use of illicit drugs (i.e. use not associated with a diagnosed drug problem) may cause psychological and social harm. A recent systematic review found that evidence for this was equivocal. Extensive evidence was only available in relation to cannabis use. This was relatively consistently associated with lower educational attainment and greater use of other drugs. However whether this association was causal was not clear. Cannabis use was less consistently associated with mental illness and antisocial behaviour. Causal relations between cannabis use and psychosocial harm could plausibly be mediated through either neurophysiological effects of cannabis or through social mechanisms related to use of an illegal substance. These different mechanisms might have different implications for harm-reduction policy. Alternatively associations may arise through non-causal pathways such as reverse causation, bias and confounding. In this latter situation, even effective reduction of cannabis use would be u...