Initiating Persons into Injection Drug Use in Rural West Virginia, USA

Abstract

Background: While prior research has explored factors associated with people who inject drugs (PWID) initiating others into drug injection in urban settings, very little work has been done to understand this behavior among rural PWID in Appalachia. Objectives: We aim to identify factors associated with PWID initiating injection-naïve individuals into drug injection in a rural community in West Virginia (WV). Methods: Data were derived from a cross-sectional survey of 420 rural PWID (163 women) in Cabell County, WV in June-July 2018 who indicated recent (past 6 months) injection drug use. Individuals completed a survey that included measures on socio-demographics and injection socialization behaviors. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with PWID recently initiating someone for their first injection. Results: A minority (17%) reported recently initiating someone for their first injection. In multivariable regression, recent injection initiation was independently associated with number of injections per day (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.07,1.25), recent injection in front of an injection-naïve person (aOR 2.75; 95% CI: 1.25,6.04), recent describing how to inject drugs to an injection-naïve person (aOR 5.83; 95% CI: 2.71,12.57), and recent encouragement of an injection-naïve person to inject (aOR 7.13; 95% CI: 2.31,21.87). Conclusion: Injection initiation was independently associated with several injection socialization behaviors involving injection-naïve individuals. PWID who recently initiated injection-naïve individuals had higher odds of frequent injection. Educating rural PWID about how their behaviors can influence others and the importance of engaging in safe injection practices could carry significant public health utility.

Keywords:

• Injection drug use
• rural health
• injection initiation
• people who use drugs
• harm reduction

Funding/Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant from the Bloomberg American Health Initiative at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health to Dr. Sean T. Allen. This research has been facilitated by the infrastructure and resources provided by the Johns Hopkins University Center for AIDS Research, an NIH funded program (P30AI094189). STA is also supported by the National Institutes of Health (K01DA046234). Support for Drs. Bluthenthal and Kral was provided by NIH (R01DA038965). The funders had no role in study design, data collection, or in analysis and interpretation of the results, and this paper does not necessarily reflect views or opinions of the funders. We are grateful to the collaboration of the Cabell-Huntington Health Department without whom this project would not have been possible. We are especially grateful to Thommy Hill, Tyler Deering, Kathleen Napier, Jeff Keatley, Michelle Perdue, Chad Helig, and Charles “CK” Babcock for all their support throughout the study implementation. We are also grateful for the hard work of the West Virginia COUNTS! research team: Megan Keith, Anne Maynard, Aspen McCorkle, Terrance Purnell, Ronaldo Ramirez, Kayla Rodriguez, Lauren Shappell, Kristin Schneider, Brad Silberzahn, Dominic Thomas, Kevin Williams, and Hayat Yusuf. We gratefully acknowledge the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources. We also wish to acknowledge Josh Sharfstein, Michelle Spencer, Dori Henry, and Akola Francis for their support throughout each phase of the study. Most importantly, we are grateful to our study participants.

Author contributions

STA, SGS, and AO oversaw the study implementation and data collection. RHW, STA, and AO conducted the analyses. STA and RHW drafted the paper, and all other authors provided critical feedback, revisions, and interpretations of findings.

Declaration of interest

Dr. Sherman is an expert witness for plaintiffs in opioid litigation. The other authors have no competing interests to declare.

Data availability

The data are not publicly available due to privacy concerns for study participants.