Promoting Safe Injection Practices, Substance Use Reduction, Hepatitis C Testing, and Overdose Prevention Among Syringe Service Program Clients Using a Computer-Tailored Intervention: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)
Authors: Hochstatter Karli R , Hull Shawnika J , Sethi Ajay K , Burns Marguerite E , Mundt Marlon P , Westergaard Ryan P 
Published: May 2020

BACKGROUND

Syringe service programs (SSPs) are safe, highly effective programs for promoting health among people who inject drugs. However, resource limitations prevent the delivery of a full package of prevention services to many clients in need. Computer-tailored interventions may represent a promising approach for providing prevention information to people who inject drugs in resource-constrained settings.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to assess the effect of a computer-tailored behavioral intervention, called Hep-Net, on safe injection practices, substance use reduction, overdose prevention, and hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing among SSP clients.

METHODS

Using a social network–based recruitment strategy, we recruited clients of an established SSP in Wisconsin and peers from their social networks. Participants completed a computerized baseline survey and were then randomly assigned to receive the Hep-Net intervention. Components of the intervention included an overall risk synthesis, participants’ selection of a behavioral goal, and an individualized risk reduction exercise. Individuals were followed up 3 months later to assess their behavior change. The effect of Hep-Net on receiving an HCV screening test, undergoing Narcan training, reducing the frequency of drug use, and sharing drug equipment was assessed. The individual’s readiness to change each behavior was also examined.

RESULTS

From 2014 to 2015, a total of 235 people who injected drugs enrolled into the Hep-Net study. Of these, 64.3% (151/235) completed the follow-up survey 3-6 months postenrollment. Compared with the control group, individuals who received the Hep-Net intervention were more likely to undergo HCV testing (odds ratio [OR] 2.23, 95% CI 1.05-4.74; <i>P</i>=.04) and receive Narcan training (OR 2.25, 95% CI 0.83-6.06; <i>P</i>=.11), and they shared drug equipment less frequently (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.55-0.65; <i>P</i><.001). Similarly, individuals who received the intervention were more likely to advance in their stage of readiness to change these 3 behaviors. However, intervention participants did not appear to reduce the frequency of drug use or increase their readiness to reduce drug use more than control participants, despite the fact that the majority of the intervention participants selected this as the primary goal to focus on after participation in the baseline survey.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing computer-based risk reduction interventions in SSPs may reduce harms associated with the sharing of injection equipment and prevent overdose deaths; however, brief computerized interventions may not be robust enough to overcome the challenges associated with reducing and ceasing drug use when implemented in settings centered on the delivery of prevention services.

CLINICALTRIAL

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02474043; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02474043

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT

RR1-10.2196/resprot.4830