Haw S, Higgins K
Health Education Board for Seotland, Edinburgh, UK.
Addiction. 1998 Jun;93(6):855-63. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.1998.9368557.x.
To compare the prevalence of HIV infection and injecting risk behaviour among injecting drug users from urban and rural areas.
Two samples of injecting drug users were recruited using a multi-site sampling strategy. Respondents were first interviewed by trained interviewers then specimens of saliva were collected for anonymous testing for antibodies to HIV.
Respondents were recruited from drug treatment services and street sites.
Respondents were eligible for inclusion in the study if they had "ever" injected a drug and were currently using drugs.
Measurements taken included self-reported patterns of drug use and injecting risk behaviour. Specimens of saliva were tested for the presence of HIV infection using GACELISA with reactive specimens confirmed by Western blot analysis.
Our data indicate that there are two separate populations which are geographically discrete but broadly similar in profile and current injecting risk behaviour. The prevalence of HIV infection among IDUs from Dundee city was found to be 26.8% (95% CI, 20.2%-33.0%) compared with 3.7% (95% CI, 0.13%-15.8%) for IDUs from rural Tayside. This marked difference in prevalence of HIV infection we attribute to a high level of injecting risk among urban IDUs between 1980 and 1984, limited migration from the urban epicentre of infection and a reluctance among rural IDUs to share with IDUs outside their immediate social and kinship networks.
Although current levels of injecting risk behaviour are similar in our urban and rural samples, rural IDUs may be less likely to contract HIV from their fellow injectors because of the lower prevalence of HIV infection and more closed sharing networks within the rural population. The implications of this for the development and expansion of drug services are considered.
比较城乡地区注射吸毒者中艾滋病毒感染率及注射风险行为。
采用多地点抽样策略招募了两组注射吸毒者样本。首先由经过培训的访谈人员对受访者进行访谈,然后采集唾液样本进行艾滋病毒抗体匿名检测。
从戒毒服务机构和街头场所招募受访者。
“曾经”注射过毒品且目前正在吸毒的人符合纳入本研究的条件。
所进行的测量包括自我报告的吸毒模式和注射风险行为。使用GACELISA检测唾液样本中是否存在艾滋病毒感染,反应性样本通过蛋白质印迹分析进行确认。
我们的数据表明,存在两个地理上分散但概况和当前注射风险行为大致相似的独立人群。发现邓迪市注射吸毒者中的艾滋病毒感染率为26.8%(95%可信区间,20.2%-33.0%),而泰赛德农村地区注射吸毒者的感染率为3.7%(95%可信区间,0.13%-15.8%)。我们将艾滋病毒感染率的这一显著差异归因于1980年至1984年间城市注射吸毒者的高注射风险水平、来自感染城市中心的有限迁移以及农村注射吸毒者不愿与他们直接社交和亲属网络之外的注射吸毒者共用注射器。
尽管我们的城乡样本中当前的注射风险行为水平相似,但由于艾滋病毒感染率较低以及农村人口内部共用注射器网络更为封闭,农村注射吸毒者从其注射同伴那里感染艾滋病毒的可能性可能较小。文中考虑了这一点对毒品服务发展和扩展的影响。