DCRs as an evidence-based intervention
The EMCDDA (since July 2024 EUDA) report on DCRs provides substantial evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of these interventions in various areas:
- Reduction in overdose incidents. Studies have consistently shown that DCRs are efficacious in reducing the frequency of overdose (OD) events. Data from these facilities suggest probable effectiveness in preventing fatal overdoses and decreasing the number of emergency department calls related to opioid overdoses (Hedrich et al., 2010; Potier et al., 2014; Milloy et al., 2009; Salmon et al., 2010).
- Improvement in injecting practices and hygiene. DCRs promote safer injection conditions, significantly reducing injecting-related harms. The facilities provide a clean environment and adequate drug equipment, which enhance health behaviors, improve injecting practices and reduce the transmission of infections such as HIV and Hepatitis C (HCV) (Kimber et al., 2003; Hedrich et al., 2010; Potier et al., 2014; Salmon et al., 2010).
- Public health benefits. DCRs contribute to public health by reducing the transmission of infectious diseases through the provision of sterile equipment and safer use advice. They also offer emergency interventions and take-home naloxone programs aimed at lowering overdose-related morbidity and mortality, thereby reducing the strain on ambulance services and hospital emergency rooms (Potier et al., 2014; Hedrich et al., 2010; Milloy et al., 2009).
- Access to healthcare and social services. DCRs facilitate access to primary healthcare, mental health treatment, and evidence-based drug treatment programs. They also improve social integration by promoting access to health and social services, including housing and economic support services (Hedrich et al., 2010; Potier et al., 2014; Kimber et al., 2003).
- Reduction in public drug use and nuisance. The presence of DCRs is associated with reduced levels of public drug injections and discarded syringes. Local residents and business owners report less public drug use and improved public amenities following the opening of a DCR (Hedrich et al., 2010; Potier et al., 2014; Kimber et al., 2003).
Overall, the evidence supports that DCRs are beneficial in improving individual health outcomes, enhancing public health, and addressing public order and safety concerns. Despite challenges in research methodologies, the consistent findings across various studies highlight the significant positive impacts of DCRs (Hedrich et al., 2010; Potier et al., 2014; Kimber et al., 2003; Milloy et al., 2009; Salmon et al., 2010).
-
Hedrich, D., Kerr, T. and Dubois-Arber, F. (2010), ‘Drug consumption facilities in Europe and beyond’, in Rhodes, T. and Hedrich, D. (eds), Harm reduction: evidence, impacts and challenges, EMCDDA Scientific Monograph Series No. 10, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, pp. 305–31
-
Kimber, J., MacDonald, M., van Beek, I., et al. (2003), ‘The Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre: client characteristics and predictors of frequent attendance during the first 12 months of operation’, Journal of Drug Issues 33, pp. 639–48.
-
Milloy, M. J. and Wood, E. (2009), ‘Emerging role of supervised injecting facilities in human immunodeficiency virus prevention’, Addiction 104(4), pp. 620–1.
-
Potier, C., Laprévote, V., Dubois-Arber, F., Cottencin, O. and Rolland, B. (2014), ‘Supervised injection services: what has been demonstrated? A systematic literature review’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 145, pp. 48–68.
-
Salmon, A. M., Van Beek, I., Amin, J., Kaldor, J. and Maher, L. (2010), ‘The impact of a supervised injecting facility on ambulance call-outs in Sydney, Australia’, Addiction 105, pp. 676–83.
- Prev: Module 3
- 3.2 (current)
- Next: Future directions and emergin…