Center for Drug Use and HIV Research, Rory Meyers College of Nursing, New York University, 433 First Avenue, New York, NY, 10010, United States; National Development & Research Institute, Center on Community and Health Disparities Research, 71 W. 23rd St, 4th Fl, New York, NY, 10010, United States.
Center for Drug Use and HIV Research, Rory Meyers College of Nursing, New York University, 433 First Avenue, New York, NY, 10010, United States; National Development & Research Institute, Center on Community and Health Disparities Research, 71 W. 23rd St, 4th Fl, New York, NY, 10010, United States.
Int J Drug Policy. 2018 Dec;62:67-73. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.08.016. Epub 2018 Oct 22.
Approximately 100 supervised injection facilities (SIFs) operate in 66 cities around the world to reduce overdose deaths, the spread of disease and public disorder, though none legally exist in the United States. Public bathrooms are among the most common public places for injection reported by people who inject drugs in New York City (NYC) and service industry employees (SIEs) inadvertently become first-responders when overdoses occur in business bathrooms. The goal of this study was to assess SIE acceptability of SIFs and the perceived effects that SIFs would have on them, their colleagues, their businesses and communities.
Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 SIEs recruited through convenience sampling throughout NYC. Participants were provided with peer-reviewed scientific evidence prior to discussing SIFs. Data were analysed using a hybrid deductive and inductive approach.
Most SIEs had encountered drug use (93%, n = 14/15) and syringes (73%, n = 11/15) in their business bathrooms and three had encountered unresponsive individuals. Nearly all workers (93%, n = 14/15) were supportive of SIFs and believed SIFs would reduce injection drug use in their business bathrooms. Participants also believed that 'not in my backyard' arguments from community boards may impede SIF operation.
Service industry employees are critical stakeholders due to their exposure to occupational health hazards related to public injection. Those interviewed were amenable to SIF operation as a form of occupational harm reduction and their experiences provide an important dimension to the political debate surrounding SIFs.
在全球 66 个城市中,约有 100 个监督注射设施(SIF)运营,以减少过量死亡、疾病传播和公共秩序混乱,尽管在美国没有合法的 SIF。在纽约市(NYC),人们报告的最常见的注射地点是公共浴室,而服务业员工(SIE)在商业浴室发生过量用药时,无意中成为了第一响应者。本研究的目的是评估 SIE 对 SIF 的接受程度,以及他们认为 SIF 对他们、他们的同事、他们的企业和社区可能产生的影响。
通过方便抽样,在整个 NYC 招募了 15 名 SIE 进行半结构式定性访谈。在讨论 SIF 之前,向参与者提供了同行评议的科学证据。使用演绎和归纳相结合的方法分析数据。
大多数 SIE 都在他们的商务浴室中遇到过药物使用(93%,n=14/15)和注射器(73%,n=11/15),有三人遇到过没有反应的人。几乎所有的工人(93%,n=14/15)都支持 SIF,并认为 SIF 将减少他们商务浴室中的注射吸毒行为。参与者还认为,社区委员会的“不在我后院”的论点可能会阻碍 SIF 的运作。
由于服务业员工接触与公共注射有关的职业健康危害,因此他们是重要的利益相关者。接受采访的人愿意接受 SIF 的运作,将其作为职业危害减少的一种形式,他们的经验为围绕 SIF 的政治辩论提供了一个重要的维度。