Background: Prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody (Ab) on dried blood spot (DBS) samples in the Australian Needle and Syringe Program Survey (ANSPS) decreased nationally from 57 % in 2015 to 32 % in 2022. We aimed to investigate potential explanations for this decline.
Methods: Changes in DBS HCV Ab prevalence were investigated by redefining positive cases as those with those with either a positive HCV Ab test result or a self-reported history of ever having HCV treatment (modified prevalence), examining HCV Ab prevalence by birth and age cohorts, and assessing trends in key risk behaviours.
Results: Overall prevalence of DBS HCV Ab declined rapidly and significantly from 57 % in 2015 to 32 % in 2022 (p < 0.001) however modified HCV Ab prevalence remained stable over time (85 % and 88 % in 2015 and 2022, respectively, p = 0.357). The proportion of participants with negative HCV Ab and self-reported HCV infection increased from 20 % in 1995 to 40 % in 2022 (p < 0.001) and the proportion with negative HCV Ab and lifetime HCV treatment increased from 3 % in 1999 to 67 % in 2022 (p < 0.001). We also observed a decreasing trend in DBS HCV Ab prevalence in all birth and age cohorts with a noticeable acceleration in the decline commensurate with the advent of HCV DAA treatment. A long-term decreasing trend was also observed for key risk behaviours (p < 0.001) however the short-term trend was not significant for recent receptive syringe sharing.
Conclusion: The temporal decline in HCV Ab prevalence appears related to reduced sensitivity of DBS HCV Ab detection with viral clearance following treatment. Since 2016, HCV treatment uptake has increased markedly including among people who inject drugs. In this context, continuing to monitor HCV Ab prevalence by DBS testing is problematic, with a shift to surveillance of active infection the most relevant to guide policy and practice in this setting.
Globally, calls for drug law reform are growing. Importantly, many argue that reforms should be guided by human rights. These calls, while welcome, assume a shared understanding of and approach to human rights, and that human rights can effectively guide less punitive approaches to drugs. Such assumptions fail to recognise important critiques, including that human rights have not always protected the interests of those who fail to fit normative ideals of the ‘human’. Are human rights the best framework to repair drug policy injustices? This paper explores these issues, drawing on in-depth interviews conducted with 30 human rights experts – about half of whom openly identify as people who use drugs – from around the world. We find a variety of approaches to human rights, with both optimism and pessimism about their utility for drug policy. These perspectives incorporate reflections on the different ‘levels’ at which rights operate, the limitations of rights and the need to think and do rights relationally, or in more-than-human ways (e.g. Braidotti 2019; Schippers, 2019; Grear 2018; Barad 2007, 2003). This emphasis on relationality stems from identified entanglements between drug policy, animals, habitats, the environment, and humans. Combining Donna Haraway's work on ‘companion species’ (2003), ‘making kin and making kind’ (2016), with Suzanne Fraser's (Early online) call to trouble drugs, we consider ways to trouble human rights by making kin through them. We argue that rights are a potentially generative space within which to explore relationality and new kinds of kin-making. We argue for a ‘more-than-human rights’ approach, following the work of legal scholars such as Marie-Catherine Petersmann (Early online, 2022, 2021) and Emily Jones (2021). We argue that this approach allows us to be and become ‘response-able’ (that is, able to respond, following Haraway) to the world in which we live and the challenges our world faces.
This essay examines the combination of psychoanalytic therapy and psychedelic substances in mid-20th century Argentina. Through document analysis, it examines the intersection of psychedelics and psychoanalysis, drawing from historical texts and writings by local psychoanalysts to develop a comprehensive understanding of the distinctive clinical practices and therapeutic approaches in the Argentine context. It details the experimental use of these substances, the clinical practices developed, and the professional and societal challenges encountered. Notably, psychoanalysts Luisa de Álvarez de Toledo, Alberto Tallaferro, and Alberto Fontana conducted pioneering research, exploring the therapeutic potential of these substances and publishing their findings in academic papers and books. According to these psychoanalysts, the use of psychedelic drugs in therapy could enhance transference, catalyze catharsis, and circumvent unconscious defenses, allowing for a vivid exploration of the patient's psyche that necessitated interpretation. Despite the innovative nature of this work, resistance from within the Argentine Psychoanalytic Association led to the eventual cessation of psychedelic research in this country. The essay calls for a reconsideration of the psychoanalytic community's relationship with psychedelics, emphasizing the potential for renewed dialogue and incorporation of these substances in contemporary therapeutic practices. In conclusion, this article sheds light on an overlooked chapter of psychoanalysis in a local setting and serves as a call for future explorations in broader scenarios. The resurgence of interest in psychedelics for mental health treatment presents an opportunity for psychoanalysts to engage with emerging research, enriching both theory and practice.
Reversing declining rates of people initiating and completing hepatitis C (HCV) treatment, observed in many countries, is needed to achieve global HCV elimination goals. Providing financial incentives to increase HCV testing and treatment uptake among people at-risk of or living with HCV infection could be an effective intervention. We conducted a systematic review to assess evidence regarding the effectiveness of financial incentives to improve engagement and progression through the HCV care cascade.
We searched MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE for studies published from January 2013 to January 2023 that evaluated financial incentives offered to people living with and at-risk of HCV to increase HCV antibody and or RNA testing, linkage to care, treatment initiation, treatment adherence, treatment completion, and sustained viral load (SVR) testing. Open-label randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled non-randomised studies, cohort or observation studies and mixed-methods studies were included, whereas literature reviews, case series and studies which did not report data were excluded.
We identified 1,278 studies, with 21 included after full-text screening (14,913 participants); three randomised controlled trials and 18 non-randomised studies. Studies evaluated incentives aimed at improving test uptake (n = 11), engagement in care (n = 13), treatment initiation (n = 8), adherence (n = 3), completion (n = 3) and attainment of SVR (n = 5). Findings provided inconclusive evidence for the effectiveness of incentives in improving engagement in the HCV cascade of care. Determining incentive effectiveness to improve care cascade engagement was limited by low quality study designs, heterogeneity in type (cash or voucher), value (US$5 to $600) and cascade stage being incentivised. No randomised controlled trials assessed the effectiveness of incentives to promote HCV testing, and none showed an impact on treatment uptake. In non-randomised studies (observational comparative), some evidence suggested that incentives promoted HCV testing, but evidence of their role in promoting linkage to care, HCV treatment adherence and treatment completion were mixed.
Currently, there lacks high-quality evidence evaluating whether financial incentives improve HCV testing and treatment outcomes. Future research should seek to standardise methodologies, compare incentive types and values to enhance engagement in HCV care, and determine factors that support incentives effectiveness.
The North American continent has been battling a major health crisis defined by opioids like OxyContin and fentanyl for over two decades now. In that time, it seemed that Europe is rather resilient to a similar problem, and heroin retained its position as a the most problematic opioid. This does seem to be changing and European media, including in Poland, is starting to report on growing popularity of synthetic opioids like fentanyl.
We use official data showing the number of prescriptions for synthetic opioids; data showing the percentage of people entering treatment due to different opioids; police data on drug interceptions as well as lab closures, and data on opioid related poisonings.
The data demonstrates that although Polish physicians are increasingly more likely to prescribe synthetic opioids like OxyContin or Fentanyl, their problematic use remains low.
Poland currently does not seem to be in a position that resembles an early stage of an opioid crisis. With this article we want to calm a heated public debate that is currently taking place in Poland, and redirect attention to a much more substantial problem of synthetic cathinones.