Infectious Diseases Physicians’ Perspectives Regarding Injection Drug Use and Related Infections, United States, 2017
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

Infectious Diseases Physicians’ Perspectives Regarding Injection Drug Use and Related Infections, United States, 2017

Filetype[PDF-1.80 MB]


English
Details Supporting Files You May Also Like

Details:

  • Alternative Title:
    Open Forum Infect Dis
  • Personal Author:
  • Description:
    Background

    In the context of the opioid epidemic, injection drug use (IDU)–related infections are an escalating health issue for infectious diseases (ID) physicians in the United States.

    Methods

    We conducted a mixed methods survey of the Infectious Diseases Society of America’s Emerging Infections Network between February and April 2017 to evaluate perspectives relating to care of persons who inject drugs (PWID). Topics included the frequency of and management strategies for IDU-related infection, the availability of addiction services, and the evolving role of ID physicians in substance use disorder (SUD) management.

    Results

    More than half (53%, n = 672) of 1273 network members participated. Of these, 78% (n = 526) reported treating PWID. Infections frequently encountered included skin and soft tissue (62%, n = 324), bacteremia/fungemia (54%, n = 281), and endocarditis (50%, n = 263). In the past year, 79% (n = 416) reported that most IDU-related infections required ≥2 weeks of parenteral antibiotics; strategies frequently employed for prolonged treatment included completion of the entire course in the inpatient unit (41%, n = 218) or at another supervised facility (35%, n = 182). Only 35% (n = 184) of respondents agreed/strongly agreed that their health system offered comprehensive SUD management; 46% (n = 242) felt that ID providers should actively manage SUD.

    Conclusions

    The majority of physicians surveyed treated PWID and reported myriad obstacles to providing care. Public health and health care systems should consider ways to support ID physicians caring for PWID, including (1) guidelines for providing complex care, including safe provision of multiweek parenteral antibiotics; (2) improved access to SUD management; and (3) strategies to assist those interested in roles in SUD management.

  • Subjects:
  • Source:
    Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018; 5(7).
  • Pubmed ID:
    30018999
  • Pubmed Central ID:
    PMC6041812
  • Document Type:
    Journal Article
  • Place as Subject:
    United States
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov