Strategies for recruiting injection drug users for HIV prevention services in Delhi, India

Harm Reduction Journal

Avina Sarna⁴  Ibou Thior²  Dean Lewis⁵  Samir Souidi³  Ira Madan⁵  Vartika Sharma⁴  Mary Philip Sebastian⁴  Waimar Tun¹ 

[1] Population Council, 4301 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 280, Washington DC 20008, USA;PATH, 455 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 1000, Washington DC 20001, USA;Population Council, 1 Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, New York 10017, USA;Population Council, Zone 5A, Ground Floor, India Habitat Centre, Lodi Road, New Delhi 110003, India;Sahara Centre for Residential Care and Rehabilitation, B-9/11, Chandan Singh Market, IGNOU Road, Saidulajab, New Delhi 110030, India

关键词: Harm-reduction;    Peer-referral;    Out-reach worker;    HIV prevention;    Injection drug user;   

Others  :  809863
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7517-10-16

 received in 2013-03-24, accepted in 2013-09-20,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

We utilized multiple recruitment approaches to recruit IDUs in a longitudinal cohort study to examine HIV incidence and behavior change pre- and post-introduction of comprehensive HIV prevention services.

Methods

IDUs were recruited through peer referral, targeted outreach by outreach workers (ORWs) and as walk-in clients at drop-in centers. Participants received monetary compensation for participation (USD 0.80). Participants were given recruitment coupons to recruit peers (regardless of recruitment method). For peer referral, participants received a food coupon, as secondary compensation, for each peer he/she successfully recruited. We report the profile of IDUs by recruitment method, based on the baseline behavioral survey and HIV test results. Cost per IDU recruited by recruitment method was also calculated.

Results

A total of 3,818 IDUs were recruited between May 2011 and October 2011. More than half of the study participants were recruited through targeted outreach (ORW: 53.6%; peer-referral: 26.3%; walk-ins: 20.1%). Of the participants who were given recruitment coupons, 92.7% recruited no peers. Those who successfully recruited at least one peer were significantly more likely to be in a stable living accommodation compared to those who did not recruit any peers (51.1% versus 42.7%; p < 0.05). Only 45.9% of the food coupons were claimed for successful recruitment of peers. Peer-referred IDUs were more likely to be living with family or relatives (50.7% versus ORW: 40.1% and walk-in: 39.8%; p < 0.001) rather than on the street or shared housings compared to the other two recruitment modes. Walk-ins were more likely than peer-referred and ORW-referred IDUs to be HIV-positive (walk-ins: 26.1%; peer-referred: 19.1%; ORW: 19.9%; p < 0.01) and have risky injection practices (walk-ins: 62.2%; ORW: 57.0%; peer-referred: 58.6%; p < 0.05). The cost per IDU recruited through ORW referral method was the most costly at USD 16.30, followed by peer-referral at USD 8.40 and walk-in at USD 7.50.

Conclusion

When recruiting a large number of IDUs, using multiple recruitment modes is ideal with regard to diversification of IDU characteristics and risk profile. Although it was the most costly, ORW recruitment was more effective than the other two methods. Lack of monetary compensation for successful recruitment of peers may have hampered peer-referral.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Tun et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]National AIDS Control Organization (NACO): Ministry of health and family welfare, government of india: annual report 2011–2012. New Delhi: NACO; 2012.
• [2]National AIDS Control Organization (NACO): Government of india: national AIDS control programme, phase III, state fact sheets. New Delhi: NACO; 2012.
• [3]Sarna A, Tun W, Bhattacharya A, Lewis D, Singh YS, Apicella L: Assessment of unsafe injection practices and sexual behaviors among male injecting drug users in two urban cities of India using respondent driven sampling. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 2012, 43(3):652-667.
• [4]Wiebel WW: The Indigenous Leader Outreach Model: Intervention Manual. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse; 1992.
• [5]Coyle S: The NIDA Standard Intervention Model for Injection Drug Users Not In Treatment: Intervention Manual. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse; 1993.
• [6]The NIDA Community-Based Outreach Model: A Manual To Reduce the Risk of HIV and Other Blood-Borne Infections in Drug Users. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse; 2000.
• [7]Coyle SL, Needle RH, Normand J: Outreach-based HIV prevention for injecting drug users: a review of published outcome data. Public Health Rep 1998, 113(Suppl 1):19-30.
• [8]Kumar MS, Mudaliar S, Daniels D: Community-based outreach HIV intervention for street-recruited drug users in Madras, India. Public Health Rep 1998, 113(Suppl 1):58-66.
• [9]Needle HR, Burrows D, Friedman SR, Dorabjee J, Touzé G, Badrieva L, Grund J, Kumar M, Nigro L, Manning G: Effectiveness of community-based outreach in preventing HIV/AIDS among injecting drug users. Int J Drug Policy 2005, 16(Supplement 1):45-57.
• [10]Broadhead RS, Heckathorn DD, Grund JC, Stern LS, Anthony DL: Drug users versus outreach workers in combating AIDS: preliminary results of a peer-driven intervention. J Drug Issues 1995, 25(3):531-564.
• [11]Broadhead RS, Heckathorn DD, Weakliem DL, Anthony DL, Madray H, Mills RJ, Hughes J: Harnessing peer networks as an instrument for AIDS prevention: results from a peer-driven intervention. Public Health Rep 1998, 113(Suppl 1):42-57.
• [12]Broadhead RS, Volkanevsky VL, Rydanova T, Ryabkova M, Borch C, van Hulst Y, Fullerton A, Sergeyev B, Heckathorn DD: Peer-driven HIV interventions for drug injectors in Russia: first year impact results of a field experiment. Int J Drug Policy 2006, 17:379-392.
• [13]Neaigus A: The network approach and interventions to prevent HIV among injection drug users. Public Health Rep 1998, 113(Suppl 1):140-150.
• [14]Sarna A, Tun W, Sharma V, Sebastian M, Madan I, Yadav A, Sheehy M, Lewis D, Thior I: High uptake of HIV testing in a cohort of male injection drug users in Delhi, India: prevalence and correlates of HIV infection. March: AIDS and Behavior; 2013. doi:10.1007/s10461-013-0442-z
• [15]Robinson WT, Risser JM, McGoy S, Becker AB, Rehman H, Jefferson M, Griffin V, Wolverton M, Tortu S: Recruiting injection drug users: a three-site comparison of results and experiences with respondent-driven and targeted sampling procedures. J Urban Health 2006, 83(6 Suppl):i29-i38.
• [16]Semaan S, Santibanez S, Garfein RS, Heckathorn DD, Des Jarlais DC: Ethical and regulatory considerations in HIV prevention studies employing respondent-driven sampling. Int J Drug Policy 2009, 20(1):14-27.