Suchergebnisse

Injection drug use is an ongoing urban health crisis in China and one of the largest drivers of the transmission of HIV/AIDS. Sentinel surveillance sites in Yunnan province show upwards of 20% of injection drug users (IDUs) are HIV positive. Though the Ministry of Health has scaled-up needle exchange programs (NEPs), they have not received official government recognition nor have they been extensively evaluated to explore factors influencing their acceptability and feasibility. Using in-depth qualitative interviews conducted from February to July 2008 with 35 participants consisting of IDUs and other key stakeholders, we explored facilitators and barriers to accessing needle exchange programs in Kunming, the capital of Yunnan province. Content analysis was conducted to identify themes including attitudes toward NEPs and harm reduction, barriers to access, and suggestions for improvement. Themes that emerged included fears of breached confidentiality and police interference at the exchange sites and tensions between the public health and law enforcement perspective. Low levels of NEP-related knowledge and awareness were uniformly reported among interviewees. Suggestions to facilitate an increase in NEP acceptance included raising awareness of harm reduction and HIV more generally, offering services such as psychological counseling, job training and behavioral therapy at NEPs, and increasing communication between police, government, and public health officials. High rates of HIV infection among injection drug users in China have prompted rapid scale up of NEPs. Additional adaptations are necessary, however, to increase needle exchange use among injection drug users. This study finds that an urgent need to raise awareness of NEPs among policy makers and IDUs and act upon identified steps for developing social-structural interventions to create enabling environments that facilitate increased access to NEPs among injection drug users in Kunming.

Emerging evidence links structural sexism and structural discrimination against lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) populations to poor health outcomes, but studies have yet to examine the combined effects of these mutually reinforcing systems of inequality. Therefore, we developed a composite measure of structural heteropatriarchy—that includes state-level LGB-policies, family planning policies, and indicators of structural sexism (e.g., women's political and economic position relative to men)—and examined its relationship to birth outcomes using data from Waves I to V of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adults Health (n=11,473). Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated that higher levels of heteropatriarchy were associated with an increased risk of preterm birth and decreased birth weight, net of important covariates. There was no association between clinical low birthweight and heteropatriarchy. There was no evidence of interactions between heteropatriarchy and individuals' race/ethnicity or sexual identity, suggesting a negative effect of heteropatriarchy on birth outcomes for all pregnant people. This study demonstrates the importance of considering gender and sexuality as mutually reinforcing systems of oppression that impact population health. Future research should examine the impact of heteropatriarchy on additional health outcomes and in conjunction with other structural inequalities such as racism and transgender oppression.

There has been a great deal of state-level legislative activity focused on immigration and immigrants over the past decade in the United States. Some policies aim to improve access to education, transportation, benefits, and additional services while others constrain such access. From a social determinants of health perspective, social and economic policies are intrinsically health policies, but research on the relationship between state-level immigration-related policies and Latino health remains scarce. This paper summarizes the existing evidence about the range of state-level immigration policies that affect Latino health, indicates conceptually plausible but under-explored relationships between policy domains and Latino health, traces the mechanisms through which immigration policies might shape Latino health, and points to key areas for future research. We examined peer-reviewed publications from 1986–2016 and assessed 838 based on inclusion criteria; 40 were included for final review. These 40 articles identified four pathways through which state-level immigration policies may influence Latino health: through stress related to structural racism; by affecting access to beneficial social institutions, particularly education; by affecting access to healthcare and related services; and through constraining access to material conditions such as food, wages, working conditions, and housing. Our review demonstrates that the field of immigration policy and health is currently dominated by a "one-policy, one-level, one-outcome" approach. We argue that pursuing multi-sectoral, multi-level, and multi-outcome research will strengthen and advance the existing evidence base on immigration policy and Latino health.

BACKGROUND: Medical cannabis laws (MCL) have received increased attention as potential drivers of cannabis use (CU), but little work has explored how the broader policy climate, independent of MCL, may impact CU outcomes. We explored the association between state-level policy liberalism and past-year cannabis use (CU) and cannabis use disorder (CUD). METHODS: We obtained state-level prevalence of past-year CU and CUD for ages 12-17, 18-25, and 26+ from the 2004-2006 and 2010-2012 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health. States were categorized as liberal, moderate, or conservative based on state-level policy liberalism rankings in 2005 and 2011. Linear models with random state effects examined the association between policy liberalism and past-year CU and CUD, adjusting for state-level social and economic covariates and medical cannabis laws. RESULTS: In adjusted models, liberal states had higher average past-year CU than conservative states for ages 12-17 (+1.58 percentage points; p=0.03) and 18-25 (+2.96 percentage points; p=0.01) but not for 26+ (p=0.19). CUD prevalence among past year users was significantly lower in liberal compared to conservative states for ages 12-17 (−2.87 percentage points; p=0.045) and marginally lower for ages 26+ (−2.45 percentage points; p=0.05). CONCLUSION: Liberal states had higher past-year CU, but lower CUD prevalence among users, compared to conservative states. Researchers and policy makers should consider how the broader policy environment, independent of MCL, may contribute to CU outcomes.