Cited by 23

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Skin-cleaning among hospitalized people who inject drugs: a randomized controlled trial

Stein, Michael D., Phillips, Kristina T., Herman, Debra S., Keosaian, Julia, Stewart, Catherine, Anderson, Bradley J., Weinstein, Zoe, Liebschutz, Jane·2021·Addiction

Abstract

Aims: To test the hypothesis that among hospitalized people who inject drugs (PWID), a brief intervention in skin‐cleaning would result in greater reductions in follow‐up emergency department (ED) or hospitalization rates compared with a usual care condition. Design: Randomized, two‐group (intervention, n = 128; usual care, n = 124), single‐site clinical trial with12‐month follow‐up. Setting: Hospital inpatient services in Boston, Massachusetts, United States. Participants: People who injected drugs on at least 3 days each week prior to hospital admission (n = 252). Participants averaged 37.9 (± 10.7) years of age; 58.5% were male, 59.3% were white and 61.1% had a diagnosis related to skin infection at enrollment. Intervention and comparator: Intervention was a skin hygiene education and skills‐training behavioral intervention [short‐term efficacy data on a behavioral intervention (SKIN)] consisting of two education‐ and skills‐based skin‐cleaning sessions, one during hospitalization and another 4 weeks later. The comparator was treatment as usual: an informational brochure about substance use treatment options and needle exchange programs in the area and follow‐up clinical appointments as arranged by the inpatient medical staff. Measurements: Electronic medical records were reviewed and discharge diagnoses for each ED visit and hospital admission were categorized into injection‐related bacterial events (e.g. cellulitis) and non‐injection‐related events. Negative binomial regression was used to test the intervention effects for the primary outcome and total ED visits, as well as the secondary outcomes, total number of hospitalizations, injection drug use‐related (IDU‐related) ED visits and IDU‐related hospitalizations. We also tested whether the outcomes were moderated by whether the initial hospitalization was IDU‐related. Findings: Of people assigned to SKIN, 66 completed two sessions, 55 completed one session and seven completed zero sessions. Adjusting for baseline covariates, the mean rate of total ED visits in the next 12 months was non‐significantly higher [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.96, 1.33, P = 0.152] compared with usual treatment. The intervention did not significantly reduce total hospitalizations or IDU‐related hospitalizations. Adjusting for baseline covariates, the mean rate of injection drug use‐related ED visits in the next 12 months was lower (IRR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.35, 0.91, P = 0.019) compared with treatment as usual. Conclusions: A skin‐cleaning intervention for people who inject drugs delivered during a hospitalization did not significantly reduce either overall emergency department use or hospitalization. There was some evidence that it may have reduced injection drug use‐related emergency department visits.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/add.15236

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.04.009 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.11.029 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Vlahov D., 1992, Bacterial infections and skin cleaning prior to injection among intravenous drug users, Public Health Rep, 107, 595
  4. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04251.x · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.7326/M18-2124 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.08.016 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.15585/mmwr.mm6622a1 · DOI
  8. 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1424 · DOI
  9. 10.1093/cid/ciy632 · DOI
  10. 10.1186/s12879-018-3408-y · DOI
  11. 10.1093/ofid/ofw157 · DOI
  12. 10.1001/jamacardio.2018.1602 · DOI
  13. 10.1371/journal.pone.0129360 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1007/s11606-010-1311-3 · DOI
  15. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.2556 · DOI
  16. 10.12788/jhm.2736 · DOI
  17. 10.1007/s11606-016-3919-4 · DOI
  18. 10.7326/M17-1812 · DOI
  19. ChanB. KondoK. AyersC. FreemanM. MontgomeryJ.Pharmacotherapy for Stimulant Use Disorders: A Systematic Review. Washington DC:Department of Veterans Affairs; 2018.
  20. 10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.04.004 · DOI
  21. 10.1136/bmj.e5945 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000165 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.06.024 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/j.drugpo.2012.07.006 · DOI
  25. 10.1007/s10461-013-0593-y · DOI
  26. 10.1186/s12954-017-0139-0 · DOI
  27. 10.3109/10826084.2012.722159 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/j.jsat.2012.01.003 · DOI
  29. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.11.019 · DOI
  30. Miller T. M., 2012, Motivational Interviewing, 3rd edn. Helping People Change
  31. Access Harm Reduction Overdose Prevention and Education (AHOPE), 2017, Harm Reduction Participant Guide
  32. Harm Reduction Coalition, Getting Off Right: A Safety Manual for Injection Drug Users
  33. 10.1097/00005053-199202000-00007 · DOI
  34. 10.1016/0740-5472(92)90062-S · DOI
  35. Commonwealth of Massachussetts Health Policy Commission, 2016, Opioid Use Disorder in Massachusetts: An Analysis of its Impact on the Health Care System, Availability of Pharmacologic Treatment, and Recommendations for Payment and Care Delivery Reform
  36. 10.1016/j.amjmed.2015.09.024 · DOI · Paper page
  37. 10.1081/ADA-100103117 · DOI
  38. 10.1056/NEJMp1402780 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.mcna.2018.03.001 · DOI
  40. 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.05.007 · DOI
  41. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.12.043 · DOI
  42. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.107695 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Stein, M. D., Phillips, K. T., Herman, D. S., Keosaian, J., Stewart, C., Anderson, B. J., Weinstein, Z., & Liebschutz, J.
Affiliations
  • Behavioral Medicine and Addictions Research Butler Hospital Providence RI USA
  • Center for Integrated Health Care Research Kaiser Permanente Hawaii Honolulu HI USA
  • Boston University School of Public Health Boston MA, USA
  • Section of General Internal Medicine Boston University School of Medicine Boston MA USA
  • Division of General Internal Medicine, Center for Research on Health Care University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh PA USA
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-09-21
Volume
116
Issue
5
Pages
1122-1130
ISSN
  • 0965-2140
  • 1360-0443
Cited by
23
References
1
Language
en
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA034957)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review