Effects of Motivational Interviewing on Risky Injecting Practices Among Injecting Drug Users (IDUs)

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Hepatitis C; HIV
• Interventions: Behavioral: Motivational interviewing; Behavioral: Educational intervention

• Registration Number: NCT00794391
• Lead Sponsor: Université de Sherbrooke

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of a brief motivational intervention in reducing risky injection practices among injecting drug users (IDUs). The investigators hypothesis is that motivational intervention will be more effective than educational intervention in reducing risky injection practices among IDUs.

Detailed Description

Injecting drug users (IDUs) are among the most vulnerable populations at risk to contract human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). Among Canadian cities, Montreal holds one of the higher HIV and HCV contraction rates in the IDU population. Results from SurvUDI, a population survey among IDUs conducted in the province of Quebec (Canada), show that in Montreal 18% of IDUs are infected with HIV and 67% are infected with HCV. The cornerstone of HIV and HCV prevention strategies is to give information on safe injection practices and to make available sterile syringes and other injection equipment. However, the SurvUDI survey reveals that a large proportion of IDUs recruited in community programs offering sterile injection equipment and information on safe injection practices are still sharing needles with other IDUs. Indeed, it seems that information dissemination and distribution of sterile injection equipment are not sufficient in order to control the HIV and HCV epidemic among IDUs. As a matter of fact, it is obvious that complementary interventions such as behavioural interventions are required. Motivational interviewing is an intervention technique centered on the individual. It aims to enhance intrinsic motivation to change behavior by helping the individual to resolve ambivalence. The scientific literature indicates that brief motivational intervention is a significantly effective intervention in order to reduce drug use problems and other related health problems. Furthermore, motivational intervention is well adapted for IDUs' resistance to change and their difficulties related with involvement in long-term therapeutic process. The present study's hypothesis is that IDUs assigned to the experimental group (brief motivational intervention) will present a greater diminution of their risky injection practices in comparison with IDUs assigned to the control group (educational intervention).

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2008-11
• Study First Submitted: 2008-11-19
• Study First Submitted QC: 2008-11-19
• Study First Posted: 2008-11-20
• Primary Completion: 2011-08
• Study Completion: 2011-08
• Status Verified: 2014-04
• Last Update Submitted: 2014-04-02
• Last Update Posted: 2014-04-04

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 219

Inclusion Criteria

• In the last month, at least one cocaine injection
• In the last month, at least one injection with a syringe or another piece of injection equipment that has been used by someone else
• 16 years old or more
• French speaking
• Being able to give informed consent

Exclusion Criteria

Not provided

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Motivational interviewing	Motivational interviewing	Motivational interviewing is a client-centered, directive method for enhancing intrinsic motivation to change by exploring and resolving ambivalence (Miller \& Rollnick. 1993). This 45 minutes individual motivational intervention focuses on risky injection practices.
Educational intervention	Educational intervention	The educational intervention is a 45 minutes individual intervention based on a document written by the Québec ministry of health (Québec, Canada). The aim is to inform participants about safe injection practices and to show them how to use sterile injection equipment.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Risky injecting practices	3 and 6 month follow-ups

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Drug use (including injecting frequency)	3 and 6 months follow-ups
Stages of change for risky injecting practices (adapted from Prochaska & DiClemente)	3 and 6 month follow-ups

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Université de Sherbrooke, service de toxicomanie (Campus Longueuil); 🇨🇦 Montreal, Quebec, Canada