Search results

AbstractIntroductionThere are limited data on young people who inject drugs (PWID) from low‐ and middle‐income countries where injection drug use remains a key driver of new HIV infections. India has a diverse injection drug use epidemic and estimates suggest that at least half of PWID are ≤30 years of age. We compared injection and sexual risk behaviours and HIV incidence between younger and older PWID and characterized uptake of HIV testing and harm reduction services to inform targeted HIV prevention efforts.MethodsWe analysed cross‐sectional data from 14,381 PWID recruited from cities in the Northeast and North/Central regions of India in 2013 using respondent driven sampling (RDS). We compared "emerging‐adult" (18 to 24 years, 26% of sample) and "young‐adult" PWID (25 to 30 years, 30% of sample) to older PWID (>30 years, 44% of sample) using logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with three recent risk behaviours: needle‐sharing, multiple sexual partners and unprotected sex. We estimated age‐stratified cross‐sectional HIV incidence using a validated multi‐assay algorithm.ResultsCompared to older adults, emerging‐adults in the Northeastern states were significantly more likely to share needles (males adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.82; females aOR 2.29, p < 0.01), have multiple sexual partners (males aOR 1.56; females aOR 3.75, p < 0.01), and engage in unprotected sex (males aOR 2.29, p < 0.01). In the North/Central states, young‐adult males were significantly more likely to needle‐share (aOR 1.23, p < 0.05) while emerging‐adult males were significantly more likely to have multiple sexual partners (aOR 1.74, p < 0.05). In both regions, emerging‐adults had the lowest HIV testing. Participation in harm reduction services was low across all age groups. Annual HIV incidence was higher in emerging‐ and young‐adult PWID in the North/Central region: emerging‐adults: 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.0, 5.6); young‐adults: 4.9% (95% CI 3.7, 6.2); older adults: 2.1% (95% CI 1.4, 2.8).ConclusionsHigher HIV incidence and engagement in risky behaviours among younger PWID compared to older PWID, coupled with low utilization of harm reduction services highlight the importance of targeting this population in HIV programming. Age‐specific interventions focused on addressing the needs of young PWID are urgently needed to curb the HIV epidemic in this vulnerable population.

AbstractIntroductionInjection drug networks may influence their network members' health‐seeking behaviours. Using data from a sociometric injecting partner network of people who inject drugs (PWID) in New Delhi, India, we assessed the role of injecting partner (alter) behaviours on individual engagement in HIV prevention services.MethodsWe enumerated injecting partner linkages among 2512 PWID using coupon referrals and biometric data from November 2017 to March 2020. Participants completed interviewer‐administered questionnaires and provided information on injection behaviours, injecting partners, HIV/hepatitis C (HCV) testing and service engagement. Multilevel multiple‐membership models (MMMM) evaluated individual PWID HIV testing, medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and syringe service engagement as a function of alter attributes, accounting for membership across multiple ego‐networks. Logistic regression models assessed parallel associations among socially proximal injecting peers, defined as PWID ≤3 path length from ego.ResultsMedian age was 26 years; 99% were male. PWID had median 2 injecting partners and 8 socially proximal peers; 14% reported HIV testing, 33% accessed MOUD and 13% used syringe services 6 months prior. In MMMM analyses, PWID with ≥1 versus 0 injecting partners who received HIV testing were significantly more likely to report HIV testing (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.68–3.16), MOUD (aOR: 1.99, 95% CI: 1.60–2.53) and syringe service use (aOR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.21–2.39). We observed similar findings for individual MOUD and syringe service use. Having ≥1 versus 0 HIV‐positive partners was associated with decreased HIV testing and MOUD but increased syringe service use (aOR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.09–2.17). PWID with ≥1 versus 0 socially proximal peers who used non‐sterile injection equipment reported increased HIV testing (aOR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.01–1.92), MOUD (aOR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.10–1.77) and syringe service use (aOR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.23–2.68).ConclusionsWe found differential associative relationships between individual HIV prevention service engagement and the health or risk behaviours of direct and indirect alters. Characterizing network exposure beyond direct injecting partnerships provided important context on possible mechanisms of behavioural influence. Findings could be leveraged to design peer‐based interventions that promote network diffusion of health‐seeking behaviours.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the effectiveness of integrated care centers (ICCs), which provided single-venue HIV testing, prevention, and treatment services for people who inject drugs (PWID) and men who have sex with men (MSM), in India. METHODS: We conducted baseline respondent-driven sampling (RDS) surveys in 27 sites across India, and selected 22 of these (12 PWID and 10 MSM) for a cluster randomised trial on the basis of high HIV prevalence and logistical considerations. We used stratified (PWID and MSM), restricted randomisation to allocate sites to either the ICC intervention or usual care (11 sites per arm). We implemented ICCs in 11 cities (6 PWID ICCs embedded within opioid agonist treatment centers and 5 MSM PWIDs embedded within locations of government-sponsored health services), with a single ICC per city in all but 1 city. After a 2-year intervention phase, we conducted evaluation RDS surveys of target population members 18 years or older at all sites. The primary outcome was self-reported HIV testing in the prior 12 months (recent testing) in the evaluation survey. We used a biometric identification system to estimate ICC exposure (visited an ICC at least once) among evaluation survey participants at intervention sites. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01686750). FINDINGS: ICCs provided HIV testing for 14,689 unique clients during the intervention phase. In the evaluation phase (August 2016 to May 2017) we surveyed 11,721 PWID and 10,005 MSM participants using RDS. In the primary population-level analysis, recent HIV testing was 31% higher in ICC than usual care sites (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1·31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0·95, 1·81, p=0·09). Among survey participants at intervention sites, ICC exposure was lower than expected (median exposure 40% at PWID sites and 24% at MSM sites). In intervention sites, survey participants who visited an ICC were 3·5-fold (95% CI 2·9, 4·1) more likely to report recent HIV testing than participants who had not. Post-hoc analyses ...