How do drug users define their progress in harm reduction programs? Qualitative research to develop user-generated outcomes

Most recent entries

  • How do drug users define their progress in harm reduction programs? Qualitative research to develop user-generated outcomes

Archives

  • August 2004

How do drug users define their progress in harm reduction programs? Qualitative research to develop user-generated outcomes

Terry Ruefli, Susan J Rogers Thursday, August 26th, 2004 Posted in Articles, English Comments Off

Abstract

Background

Harm reduction is a relatively new and controversial model for treating drug users, with little formal research on its operation and effectiveness. In order to advance the study of harm reduction programs and our understanding of how drug users define their progress, qualitative research was conducted to develop outcomes of harm reduction programming that are culturally relevant, incremental, (i.e., capable of measuring change), and hierarchical (i.e., capable of showing how clients improve over time).

Methods

The study used nominal group technique (NGT) to develop the outcomes (phase 1) and focus group interviews to help validate the findings (phase 2). Study participants were recruited from a large harm-reduction program in New York City and involved approximately 120 clients in 10 groups in phase 1 and 120 clients in 10 focus groups in phase 2.

Results

Outcomes of 10 life areas important to drug users were developed that included between 10 to 15 incremental measures per outcome. The outcomes included ways of 1) making money; 2) getting something good to eat; 3) being housed/homeless; 4) relating to families; 5) getting needed programs/benefits/services; 6) handling health problems; 7) handling negative emotions; 8) handling legal problems; 9) improving oneself; and 10) handling drug-use problems. Findings also provided insights into drug users' lives and values, as well as a window into understanding how this population envisions a better quality of life. Results challenged traditional ways of measuring drug users based solely on quantity used and frequency of use. They suggest that more appropriate measures are based on the extent to which drug users organize their lives around drug use and how much drug use is integrated into their lives and negatively impacts other aspects of their lives.

Conclusions

Harm reduction and other programs serving active drug users and other marginalized people should not rely on institutionalized, provider-defined solutions to problems in living faced by their clients.

Full text | Read the complete article »

Recent Comments

Meta

  • Log in

About | Terms of Use | Privacy | harmreductionjournal.com

Creative Commons License: Attribution 3.0 Unported

Built by the Center for Digital Research and Scholarship.