Article Figures & Tables
Tables
- Table 1: Characteristics of Ontario Integrated Supervised Injection Services Feasibility Study participants in London, Ontario stratified by recent regular public injecting and bivariate associations
Characteristic No. (%) of participants*† OR
(95% CI)Full sample
n = 196Recent regular public injecting‡ Yes
n = 91No
n = 105Age, median (IQR), yr 39 (33-50) 36 (30-46) 43 (37-51) Per 1-yr increase 0.94 (0.91-0.97) Gender Female 75 (38.3) 29 (31.9) 46 (43.8) 0.60 (0.33-1.08) Male 121 (61.7) 62 (68.1) 59 (56.2) Ethnicity White 146 (74.5) 68 (74.7) 78 (74.3) 1.12 (0.58-2.16) Indigenous/person of colour 48 (24.5) 21 (23.1) 27 (25.7) Homeless/unstably housed§ Yes 111 (56.6) 64 (70.3) 47 (44.8) 2.93 (1.62-5.29) No 85 (43.4) 27 (29.7) 58 (55.2) Recent incarceration§ Yes 24 (12.2) 16 (17.6) 8 (7.6) 2.59 (1.05-6.37) No 172 (87.8) 75 (82.4) 97 (92.4) Sold drugs‡ Yes 63 (32.1) 30 (33.0) 33 (31.4) 1.07 (0.59-1.96) No 133 (67.8) 61 (67.0) 72 (68.6) Engaged in sex work§ Yes 38 (19.4) 16 (17.6) 22 (21.0) 0.81 (0.39-1.65) No 158 (80.6) 75 (82.4) 83 (79.0) Usually injected downtown§ Yes 51 (26.0) 32 (35.2) 19 (18.1) 2.46 (1.27-4.74) No 145 (74.0) 59 (64.8) 86 (81.9) Usually injected in Old East§ Yes 105 (53.6) 47 (51.6) 58 (55.2) 0.87 (0.49-1.52) No 91 (46.4) 44 (48.4) 47 (44.8) Frequent opioid injection§ Yes 104 (53.1) 62 (68.1) 42 (40.0) 3.21 (1.78-5.78) No 92 (46.9) 29 (31.9) 63 (60.0) Frequent crystal methamphetamine injection§ Yes 70 (35.7) 47 (51.6) 23 (21.9) 3.80 (2.05-7.07) No 126 (64.3) 44 (48.4) 82 (78.1) Usually injected alone§ Yes 106 (54.1) 54 (59.3) 52 (49.5) 1.49 (0.84-2.62) No 90 (45.9) 37 (40.6) 53 (50.5) Needed help injecting§ Yes 63 (32.1) 31 (34.1) 32 (30.5) 1.18 (0.65-2.15) No 133 (67.8) 60 (65.9) 73 (69.5) Shared syringe§ Yes 44 (22.4) 30 (33.0) 14 (13.3) 3.25 (1.59-6.63) No 151 (77.0) 60 (65.9) 91 (86.7) Ever overdosed unintentionally Yes 48 (24.5) 28 (30.8) 20 (19.0) 1.87 (0.97-3.63) No 145 (74.0) 62 (68.1) 83 (79.0) Any substance use treatment Yes 83 (42.3) 41 (45.0) 42 (40.0) 1.26 (0.71-2.23) No 110 (56.1) 48 (52.7) 62 (59.0) Note: IQR = interquartile range, OR = odds ratio.
*Except where noted otherwise.
†Columns not adding to total are due to missing values.
‡Includes "sometimes," "usually" or "always" injecting in public in the previous 6 months.
§Over the previous 6 months.
- Table 2: Multivariable logistic regression predicting recent regular public injecting in London (n = 194)
Variable Adjusted OR
(95% CI)Older age (1-yr increase) 0.97 (0.94-1.00) Homeless/unstably housed (yes v. no)* 2.04 (1.01-4.12) Recent incarceration (yes v. no)* 1.26 (0.45-3.54) Usually injected downtown (yes v. no)* 1.68 (0.79-3.61) Frequent opioid injection (yes v. no)* 2.27 (1.17-4.42) Frequent crystal methamphetamine injection (yes v. no)* 2.38 (1.18-4.79) Shared syringe (yes v. no)* 1.81 (0.80-4.13) Note: CI = confidence interval, OR = odds ratio.
*Over the previous 6 months.
Characteristic No. (%) of participants
n = 141Frequency of public injecting Always (100% of the time) 11 (7.8) Usually (75%-99%) 37 (26.2) Sometimes (25%-74%) 43 (30.5) Occasionally (< 25%) 50 (35.5) Public places injected* Public washroom 90 (63.8) Park 69 (48.9) Parking lot 66 (46.8) Alley/laneway 61 (43.3) Shelter 46 (32.6) Abandoned building 44 (31.2) Community organization/service provider 10 (7.1) Schoolyard 5 (3.5) Reason for public injecting*† Convenient to where I hang out 98 (69.5) Homeless 56 (39.7) Too far from home 43 (30.5) Nowhere to inject safely where I buy drugs 25 (17.7) Involved in drug selling 19 (13.5) Engaged in sex work 10 (7.1) Used outdoor water source to prepare drugs or rinse syringes 61 (43.3) *Participants could select all that applied.
†Includes reasons selected by ≥ 5% of respondents.