Health Protection Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Addiction. 2010 May;105(5):844-59. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02888.x. Epub 2010 Mar 2.
To review the evidence on the effectiveness of harm reduction interventions involving the provision of sterile injecting equipment in the prevention of hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission among injecting drug users (IDUs). The interventions assessed were needle and syringe programmes (NSP), alternative modes of needle/syringe provision (pharmacies, vending machines and outreach) and the provision of injecting equipment other than needles/syringes.
Systematic searches of the English language literature to March 2007 were undertaken to identify systematic, narrative or meta-analytical reviews (also known as a review of reviews) of the impact of interventions on HCV transmission, HIV transmission or injecting risk behaviour (IRB). Critical appraisal criteria classified the reviews as either high quality ('core') or supplementary: a framework based on the quality of reviews, the reviewers' conclusions and the designs/findings of the primary studies was used to derive evidence statements.
Three core and two supplementary reviews of injecting equipment interventions were identified. According to the proposed framework, this study found (a) insufficient evidence to conclude that any of the interventions are effective in preventing HCV transmission; (b) tentative evidence to support the effectiveness of NSP in preventing HIV transmission; (c) sufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of NSP (and tentative evidence of an additional impact of pharmacy NSP) in reducing self-reported IRB; and (d) little to no evidence on vending machines, outreach or providing other injecting equipment in relation to any of the outcomes.
The evidence is weaker than given credit for in the literature. The lack of evidence for effectiveness of NSP vis-à-vis biological outcomes (HCV and HIV incidence/prevalence) reflects the limitations of studies that have been undertaken to investigate these associations. Particularly for HCV, low levels of IRB may be insufficient to reduce high levels of transmission. New studies are required to identify the intervention coverage necessary to achieve sustained changes in blood-borne virus transmission.
综述减少伤害干预措施的有效性证据,这些措施涉及为注射吸毒者(IDU)提供无菌注射设备,以预防丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)和人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)的传播。评估的干预措施包括针具交换计划(NSP)、替代针具/注射器提供模式(药房、自动售货机和外展服务)以及提供除针具/注射器以外的注射设备。
系统检索了截至 2007 年 3 月的英文文献,以确定关于干预措施对 HCV 传播、HIV 传播或注射风险行为(IRB)影响的系统评价、叙述性评价或荟萃分析评价(也称为综述的综述)。评价标准将评价分为高质量(“核心”)或补充性:使用基于评价质量、评价者结论和主要研究设计/发现的框架来得出证据陈述。
确定了 3 项核心和 2 项补充性的注射设备干预措施评价。根据提出的框架,本研究发现:(a)没有足够的证据可以得出任何干预措施都能有效预防 HCV 传播的结论;(b)有初步证据支持 NSP 可预防 HIV 传播;(c)有足够的证据支持 NSP 的有效性(并有初步证据表明药房 NSP 具有额外的影响),可降低自我报告的 IRB;(d)关于自动售货机、外展服务或提供其他注射设备,没有或几乎没有任何证据可以证明其与任何结果相关。
该证据比文献中所给予的评价更弱。缺乏 NSP 在生物学结果(HCV 和 HIV 发病率/流行率)方面有效性的证据,反映了为研究这些相关性而进行的研究的局限性。特别是对于 HCV,低水平的 IRB 可能不足以降低高传播水平。需要开展新的研究,以确定实现持续性血液传播病毒传播变化所需的干预覆盖范围。