Historique
Rapport
Cocaine and crack-cocaine risk and transmission. Part 3/5
Titre de série :
Systematic literature review on stimulant use and HIV
Auteur(s) :
ONUDC / UNODC (Office des Nations Unies contre la drogue et le crime / United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime)
Année
2017
Page(s) :
82 p.
Sous-type de document :
Revue de la littérature
Langue(s) :
Anglais
Éditeur(s) :
Vienna : UNODC
Domaine :
Drogues illicites
Discipline :
MAL (Maladies infectieuses / Infectious diseases)
Thésaurus mots-clés
VIH
;
HEPATITE
;
FACTEUR DE RISQUE
;
INFECTION
;
HSH
;
COCAINE
;
INJECTION
;
CRACK
;
PROSTITUTION
;
CONDUITE A RISQUE
;
PRISON
;
STIMULANTS
Résumé :
The objective of this review is to carry out a review of published and grey literature on the evidence of injecting and non-injecting stimulant use (particularly crack, cocaine and ATS) and their possible link to HIV, HCV & HBV vulnerability and transmission. To identify:
- The extent of HIV, HCV and HBC infection among stimulant users;
- Specific subgroups of stimulant users at greater risk of HIV, HCV and HBV infection;
- Temporal and geographical patterns of HIV, HCV and HBV infection among stimulant users.
The present review identified several studies assessing the association between HIV and cocaine and crack-cocaine use. The evidence gathered was mostly from North and South America. The majority of the studies had a cross-sectional design, which is less able to explain the relationship between exposure and outcome than longitudinal cohort studies. There is a dearth of evidence on minority groups, such as sex workers and prison-based populations.
- The extent of HIV, HCV and HBC infection among stimulant users;
- Specific subgroups of stimulant users at greater risk of HIV, HCV and HBV infection;
- Temporal and geographical patterns of HIV, HCV and HBV infection among stimulant users.
The present review identified several studies assessing the association between HIV and cocaine and crack-cocaine use. The evidence gathered was mostly from North and South America. The majority of the studies had a cross-sectional design, which is less able to explain the relationship between exposure and outcome than longitudinal cohort studies. There is a dearth of evidence on minority groups, such as sex workers and prison-based populations.