CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 27HIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesHomelessness and Social Issues

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

Assessing Drug Consumption Rooms and Longer Term (5 Year) Impacts on Community and Clients

Open access
Tran, Vincent, Reid, Sharon E, Roxburgh, Amanda, Day, Carolyn A·2021·Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
DOI 10.2147/rmhp.s244720PMC PMC8604650
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Drug consumption rooms (DCRs) and supervised injecting facilities (SIFs) provide a safe environment in which people who inject drugs (PWIDs) can inject under hygienic and supervised conditions. Numerous reviews have documented the benefits of these facilities; however, there is a lack of clarity surrounding their long-term effects. PURPOSE: To conduct, with a systematic approach, a literature review, of published peer-reviewed literature assessing the long-term impacts of DCRs/SIFs. METHODS: A systematic search of the PubMed and Embase database was performed using the keywords: ("SUPERVISED" OR "SAFE*") AND ("CONSUMPTION" OR "INJECT*" OR "SHOOTING") AND ("FACILITY*" OR "ROOM*" OR "GALLERY*" OR "CENTRE*" OR "CENTER*" OR "SITE*"). Included studies were original articles reporting outcomes for five or more years and addressed at least one of the following client or community outcomes; (i) drug-related harms; (ii) access to substance use treatment and other health services; (iii) impact on local PWID population; (iv) impact on public drug use, drug-related crime and violence; and (v) local community attitudes to DCRs. RESULTS: Four publications met our inclusion criteria, addressing four of the five outcomes. Long-term data suggested that while the health of PWID naturally declined over time, DCRs/SIFs helped reduce injecting-related harms. The studies showed that DCRs/SIFs facilitate drug treatment, access to health services and cessation of drug injecting. Local residents and business owners reported less public drug use and public syringe disposal following the opening of a DCR/SIF. CONCLUSION: Long-term evidence on DCRs/SIFs is consistent with established short-term research demonstrating the benefits of these facilities. A relative paucity of studies was identified, with most evidence originating from Sydney and Vancouver. The overall body of evidence would be improved by future studies following outcomes over longer periods and being undertaken in a variety of jurisdictions and models of DCRs/SIFs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2147/rmhp.s244720

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. Broadhead, 2002, J Drug Issues, 32, 329, 10.1177/002204260203200113 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 2017, Overview of International Literature - Supervised Injecting Facilities & Drug Consumption Rooms
  3. Kral, 2020, N Engl J Med, 383, 589, 10.1056/NEJMc2015435 · DOI
  4. Pauly, 2020, PLoS One, 15, e0229208, 10.1371/journal.pone.0229208 · DOI
  5. Dietze, 2012, Int J Drug Policy, 23, 257, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2012.02.006 · DOI
  6. Kimber, 2005, Drug Alcohol Rev, 24, 21, 10.1080/09595230500125047 · DOI
  7. Kerr, 2017, Harm Reduct J, 14, 28, 10.1186/s12954-017-0154-1 · DOI
  8. Gostin, 2019, J Am Med Assoc, 321, 745, 10.1001/jama.2019.0095 · DOI
  9. Young, 2018, Can J Public Health, 109, 227, 10.17269/s41997-018-0089-7 · DOI
  10. Van Den Boom, 2021, Am J Prev Med, 61, 217, 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.02.018 · DOI
  11. Stoltz, 2009, Addict Res Theory, 15, 63, 10.1080/16066350601081090 · DOI
  12. Reddon, 2011, AIDS Educ Prev, 23, 412, 10.1521/aeap.2011.23.5.412 · DOI
  13. Zurhold, 2003, J Drug Issues, 33, 663, 10.1177/002204260303300308 · DOI
  14. Kinnard, 2014, Harm Reduct J, 11, 29, 10.1186/1477-7517-11-29 · DOI
  15. Potier, 2014, Drug Alcohol Depend, 145, 48, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.10.012 · DOI
  16. 2014, Harm Reduction Interventions
  17. Hedrich, 2010, Harm Reduct Evidence, Impacts Challenges, 3, 305
  18. Kerr, 2007, Curr HIV/AIDS Rep, 4, 158, 10.1007/s11904-007-0023-8 · DOI
  19. Kimber, 2003, Drug Alcohol Rev, 22, 227, 10.1080/095952301000116951 · DOI
  20. Milloy, 2009, Addiction, 104, 620, 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02541.x · DOI
  21. Semaan, 2011, Drug Alcohol Depend, 118, 100, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.03.006 · DOI
  22. Petrar, 2007, Addict Behav, 32, 1088, 10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.07.013 · DOI
  23. Stoltz, 2007, J Public Health, 29, 35, 10.1093/pubmed/fdl090 · DOI
  24. Salmon, 2010, Addiction, 105, 676, 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02837.x · DOI
  25. Marshall, 2011, Lancet, 377, 1429, 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62353-7 · DOI
  26. Lloyd, 2017, J Subst Use, 22, 66, 10.3109/14659891.2016.1143049 · DOI
  27. Wood, 2008, Int J Drug Policy, 19, 220, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2007.11.001 · DOI
  28. 2017, Green Left Weekly
  29. Strike, 2014, Addiction, 109, 946, 10.1111/add.12506 · DOI
  30. Bayoumi, 2008, Can Med Assoc J, 179, 1143, 10.1503/cmaj.080808 · DOI
  31. Pinkerton, 2010, Addiction, 105, 1429, 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02977.x · DOI
  32. Andresen, 2009, Int J Drug Policy, 21, 70, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2009.03.004 · DOI
  33. Belackova, 2019, J Environ Res, 16, 2032
  34. Kennedy, 2019, J Preventive Med, 57, 330, 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.04.024 · DOI
  35. Salmon, 2007, Int J Drug Policy, 18, 46, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2006.11.010 · DOI
  36. Kerr, 2006, Int J Drug Policy, 17, 436, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2006.05.008 · DOI
  37. Kerr, 2007, Int J Drug Policy, 18, 37, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2006.12.008 · DOI
  38. Hser, 2001, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 58, 503, 10.1001/archpsyc.58.5.503 · DOI
  39. Darke, 2013, Addiction, 108, 659, 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.04001.x · DOI
  40. Dolan, 2000, Drug and Alcohol Rev, 19, 337, 10.1080/713659379 · DOI
  41. Kimber, 2010, BMJ, 341, c3172, 10.1136/bmj.c3172 · DOI
  42. DeBeck, 2011, Drug Alcohol Depend, 113, 172, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.07.023 · DOI
  43. Kimber, 2008, Drug Alcohol Rev, 27, 602, 10.1080/09595230801995668 · DOI
  44. Salmon, 2017, Drugs Alcohol Today, 17, 10.1108/DAT-06-2017-0026 · DOI
  45. Wood, 2006, N Engl J Med, 354, 2512, 10.1056/NEJMc052939 · DOI
  46. Tyndall, 2006, Drug Alcohol Depend, 83, 193, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.11.011 · DOI
  47. Wood, 2007, Addiction, 102, 916, 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.01818.x · DOI
  48. Gaddis, 2017, J Subst Abuse Treat, 82, 1, 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.08.003 · DOI
  49. Kerr, 2006, BMJ, 332, 220, 10.1136/bmj.332.7535.220 · DOI
  50. Xia, 2015, Drug Alcohol Depend, 151, 76, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.03.005 · DOI
  51. Galai, 2003, Am J Epidemiol, 158, 695, 10.1093/aje/kwg209 · DOI
  52. Genberg, 2011, Am J Epidemiol, 173, 829, 10.1093/aje/kwq441 · DOI
  53. Kerr, 2007, Am J Public Health (N Y), 97, 1228, 10.2105/AJPH.2006.086256 · DOI
  54. Wood, 2004, CMAJ, 171, 731, 10.1503/cmaj.1040774 · DOI
  55. Thein, 2005, Int J Drug Policy, 16, 275, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2005.03.003 · DOI
  56. van der Poel, 2003, Eur Addict Res, 9, 94, 10.1159/000068807 · DOI
  57. Fry, 1999, Aust N Z J Public Health, 23, 501, 10.1111/j.1467-842X.1999.tb01306.x · DOI
  58. Freeman, 2005, Drug Alcohol Rev, 24, 173, 10.1080/09595230500167460 · DOI
  59. Wood, 2006, Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy, 1, 1, 10.1186/1747-597X-1-13 · DOI
  60. White, 2016, Int J Drug Policy, 27, 121, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.05.010 · DOI
  61. Cruz, 2007, Int J Drug Policy, 18, 54, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2006.12.001 · DOI
  62. McGinty, 2018, Prev Med, 111, 73, 10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.02.026 · DOI
  63. Roxburgh, 2021, Harm Reduct J, 18, 20, 10.1186/s12954-021-00471-x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Tran, V., Reid, S. E., Roxburgh, A., & Day, C. A.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Day, Carolyn A
ORCID
Venue
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2021-11
Volume
Volume 14
Pages
4639-4647
ISSN
1179-1594 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2147/rmhp.s244720
PMC
PMC8604650
OpenAlex
W3211593360
Cited by
27
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Risk Management and Healthcare Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homelessness and Social Issues
Keywords
drug consumption rooms, supervised injecting facilities, people who inject drugs, long-term effects, public drug use, syringe disposal, community attitudes, harm reduction

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