Why are some people who have received overdose education and naloxone reticent to call Emergency Medical Services in the event of overdose?
Why are some people who have received overdose education and naloxone reticent to call Emergency Medical Services in the event of overdose?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.06.008
复制
发表时间：
2017-10
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Binswanger IA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Koester S;Mueller SR;Raville L;Langegger S;Binswanger IA
针对注射吸毒者的过量用药教育和纳洛酮分发（OEND）培训强调了召集紧急医疗服务的重要性。为了鼓励PWID这样做，科罗拉多州颁布了一项“好撒玛利亚人法”，规定过量服用的受害者和善意提供紧急援助的证人因拥有受管制物质和/或毒品用具而免于起诉的有限豁免权。本文通过描述OEND培训的PWIDs扭转过量用药的经验和他们决定呼叫EMS支持来检查法律的影响。两项补充性研究的结果进行了三角分析，以描述和解释参与者要求紧急医疗服务的决定。一项定性研究是基于对接受过OEND培训的、逆转了一次或多次过量服药的PWID进行的半结构化访谈，另一项是正在进行的基于实地工作的项目，该项目检查了PWID自我认定的健康问题。在大多数药物过量逆转中，没有急救电话。与会者报告了不这样做的几个原因。最常见的是担心尽管有《好撒玛利亚人法》，但警察的反应会导致受害者和/或证人因未执行的逮捕令或违反判决而被捕。恐惧是基于个人和集体的经验，而丹佛市通过加强对轻罪的执法和实施最近的法令（包括禁止露营）来控制空间，来管理无家可归者的积极方法，又强化了这种恐惧。这个城市的无家可归者危机也反映在被安置的PWID所表达的担忧中，他们担心EMS的干预会危及他们的公共住房。结果表明，《好撒玛利亚人法》所提供的豁免并没有解决PWIDs的恐惧，即他们目前的法律地位以及受害者的法律地位将导致逮捕和监禁。按照目前的设想，《好撒玛利亚人法》并没有为已经陷入刑事司法体系或担心失去住房的PWID提供豁免权。
Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) training for persons who inject drugs (PWID) underlines the importance of summoning emergency medical services (EMS). To encourage PWID to do so, Colorado enacted a Good Samaritan law providing limited immunity from prosecution for possession of a controlled substance and/or drug paraphernalia to the overdose victim and the witnesses who in good faith provide emergency assistance. This paper examines the law’s influence by describing OEND trained PWIDs’ experience reversing overdoses and their decision about calling for EMS support. Findings from two complementary studies, a qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with OEND trained PWID who had reversed one or more overdoses, and an on-going fieldwork-based project examining PWIDs’ self-identified health concerns were triangulated to describe and explain participants’ decision to call for EMS. In most overdose reversals described, no EMS call was made. Participants reported several reasons for not doing so. Most frequent was the fear that despite the Good Samaritan law, a police response would result in arrest of the victim and/or witness for outstanding warrants, or sentence violations. Fears were based on individual and collective experience, and reinforced by the city of Denver’s aggressive approach to managing homelessness through increased enforcement of misdemeanors and the imposition of more recent ordinances, including a camping ban, to control space. The city’s homeless crisis was reflected as well in the concern expressed by housed PWID that an EMS intervention would jeopardize their public housing. Results suggest that the immunity provided by the Good Samaritan law does not address PWIDs’ fear that their current legal status as well as the victim’s will result in arrest and incarceration. As currently conceived, the Good Samaritan law does not provide immunity for PWIDs’ already enmeshed in the criminal justice system, or PWID fearful of losing their housing.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Bohnert, Amy S. B.;Nandi, Arijit;Galea, Sandro
通讯作者：
Galea, Sandro
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
Blankenship, KM;Koester, S
通讯作者：
Koester, S
DOI：
10.1007/s11524-011-9600-7
发表时间：
2011-12-01
影响因子：
6.6
作者：
Bennett, Alex S.;Bell, Alice;Kral, Alex H.
通讯作者：
Kral, Alex H.
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Bourgois, P
通讯作者：
Bourgois, P
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Broadhead, RS;Kerr, TH;Altice, FL
通讯作者：
Altice, FL