How do Research Ethics Committee Members Respond to Hypothetical Studies with Children? Results from the MESSI Study.

Hypothetical scenarios were used to assess the influence of the sensitivity of the study topic, payments, and study methods on research ethics committee (HREC) members' approval of social research studies involving children. A total of 183 Australian HREC members completed an online survey. The higher the perceived sensitivity of the study topic, the less likely the study would be approved by an HREC member. HREC members were most likely to approve each of the hypothetical studies if no payment was offered. Payment was the most common reason for not approving the low risk studies, while risks were the most common reasons for not approving the more sensitive studies. Face-to-face interviews conducted at home with children elicited substantially higher rates of approval from HREC members with more sensitive study topics. Both HRECs and researchers may benefit from additional guidance on managing risks and payments for children and young people in research.

Human Research Ethics Committee Experiences and Views About Children's Participation in Research: Results From the MESSI Study.

As part of a larger study, Australian Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) members and managers were surveyed about their decision-making and views about social research studies with child participants. Responses of 229 HREC members and 42 HREC managers are reported. While most HREC members had received ethical training, HREC training and guidelines specific to research involving children were rare. Most applications involving children had to go through a full ethical review, but few adverse events were reported to HRECs regarding the conduct of the studies. Revisions to study proposals requested by HRECs were mostly related to consent processes and age-appropriate language. One-third of HREC members said that they would approve research on any topic. Most were also concerned that the methodology was appropriate, and the risks and benefits were clearly articulated. Specific training and guidance are needed to increase HREC members' confidence to judge ethical research with children.

Are market mechanisms associated with alcohol and other drug treatment outcomes?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The configuration of alcohol and other drug treatment service systems has been influenced by the uptake of market mechanisms for treatment funding and purchasing. This study measured the impact of market mechanisms for funding and purchasing alcohol and drug treatment services on client outcomes. DESIGN: An observational cross-sectional study, employing multi-level analysis: episodes of care data, nested within person-level data, nested within treatment site and nested within organization. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and seventy-eight alcohol and other drug treatment service sites in Australia. MEASUREMENTS: Client outcome variables were length of stay and successful treatment completion. Predictor variables were competitive tendering, number of funding contracts, recurrent funding, the ratio of episodes to staff, type of professions, years of clinical experience, staff turnover and type of provider (government; non-government). Analyses controlled for drug type, type of treatment received and client characteristics. FINDINGS: There were no significant associations between the procurement and contracting variables and length of stay [incidence rate ratios (IRRs) ranged between 1.01 and 1.07, all P > 0.05; Bayes factors (BF) < 0.03], and inconclusive results for treatment completion [odds ratios (ORs) ranged between 1.04 and 1.15, all P > 0.05, BF = 0.51-0.63]. Having an alcohol and other drug (AOD) work-force relative to an 'other' work-force (IRR = 0.79, P = 0.021) and lower case-loads (IRR = 0.99, P = 0.047) may be associated with longer stay in treatment. Receiving services from a government compared to non-government provider may also be associated with less treatment completion (OR = 0.34, P = 0.023, BF = 2.14). CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be no association between client outcomes and procurement and funding contract arrangements for alcohol and drug treatment services.

Perceptions of purchasing and payment mechanisms in alcohol and other drug treatment services in Australia: A qualitative study involving alcohol and other drug service providers and purchasers of treatment.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Governments across the globe invest considerable amounts in funding alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment. Little attention however has been paid to the ways AOD service providers are chosen and how they are paid. This study sought to examine the perceptions of Australian AOD treatment purchasers and providers regarding different purchasing and payment mechanisms. DESIGN AND METHODS: Qualitative interviews with AOD treatment providers and purchasers (N = 197) were undertaken across the eight Australian states/territories and the Commonwealth. Data were collated against six main AOD treatment purchasing and payment mechanisms (as identified in the literature), then an inductive, comparative analysis to assign codes was conducted, followed by interpretive analysis to explore emergent themes. RESULTS: Five main themes were identified in relation to AOD treatment payment and purchasing mechanisms: (i) applying private sector principles to purchasing; (ii) innovation, sector stability and addressing client needs; (iii) performance monitoring and measuring outcomes; (iv) the threat to designated funding for AOD treatment; and (v) the costs and benefits of having multiple funding sources. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: In many countries reforms are taking place in the health sector consistent with New Public Management principles. These principles, when applied to AOD treatment, have included introducing competition, output and outcomes-based funding models, standards and accountability. Purchaser and providers identified both strengths and weaknesses and highlighted the overarching concern that implementation of any (mix) of these mechanisms should always be underpinned by a client-centred and not a finance-centred approach.

Children in Social Research: Do Higher Payments Encourage Participation in Riskier Studies?

The MESSI (Managing Ethical Studies on Sensitive Issues) study used hypothetical scenarios, presented via a brief online survey, to explore whether payment amounts influenced Australian children and young people to participate in social research of different sensitivity. They were more likely to participate in the lower sensitivity study than in the higher at all payment levels (A$200 prize draw, no payment, $30, or $100). Offering payments to children and young people increased the likelihood that they would agree to participate in the studies and, in general, the higher the payments, the higher the likelihood of their participating. No evidence of undue influence was detected: payments can be used to increase the participation of children and young people in research without concerns of undue influence on their behavior in the face of relatively risky research. When considering the level of payment, however, the overriding consideration should be the level of risk to the children and young people.

Key Considerations in Planning for Substance Use Treatment: Estimating Treatment Need and Demand.

OBJECTIVE: Estimates of the extent of treatment need (defined by the presence of a diagnosis for which there is an effective treatment available) and treatment demand (defined as treatment seeking) are essential parts of effective treatment planning, service provision, and treatment funding. This article reviews the existing literature on approaches to estimating need and demand and the use of models to inform such estimation, and then considers the implications for health planners. METHOD: A thematic review of the literature was undertaken, with a focus on covering the key concepts and research methods that have been used to date. RESULTS: Both need and demand are important estimates in planning for services but contain many difficulties in moving from the theory of measurement to the practicalities of establishing these figures. Furthermore, the simple quantum of need or demand is limited in its usefulness unless it is matched with consideration of different treatment types and their relative intensity, and/or explored as a function of geography and subpopulation. Modeling can assist with establishing more fine-tuned planning estimates, and is able to take into account both client severity and the various treatment types that might be available. CONCLUSIONS: Moving from relatively simplistic estimates of need and demand for treatment, this review has shown that although such estimation can inform national or subnational treatment planning, more sophisticated models are required for alcohol and other drug treatment planning. These can help health planners to determine the appropriate amount and mix of treatments for substance use disorders.

Measuring Unmet Demand for Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment: The Application of an Australian Population-Based Planning Model.

OBJECTIVE: The estimation of demand for treatment is one of the important elements in planning for alcohol and other drug treatment services. This article reports on a demand-projection model used in Australia to estimate the extent of unmet treatment demand by drug type. METHOD: The model incorporated the prevalence of substance use disorders (by drug type and age), with the application of a severity distribution, which distributed the substance abuse disorders into three disability categories: mild, moderate, and severe. The application of treatment rates derived from expert judgments reflecting the proportion of people within disability categories who would be suitable for, likely to seek, and benefit from treatment. Sensitivity analyses incorporating variations to the severity distributions and treatment rates were applied, along with adjustment for polydrug use. RESULTS: The estimate for treatment demand for Australia varied between a low of 411,740 people and a high of 755,557 people. The most sensitive parameter is the expected treatment-seeking rate. Given that approximately 200,000 to 230,000 people are currently in treatment, this represents a met demand of between 26.8% and 56.4%. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient alcohol and drug treatment available to meet the demand in Australia, despite Australia's relatively high met demand, when compared with other countries.

Increased prevalence of self-reported psychotic illness predicted by crystal methamphetamine use: Evidence from a high-risk population.

BACKGROUND: The potential of methamphetamine, and high-potency crystal methamphetamine in particular, to precipitate psychotic symptoms and psychotic illness is the subject of much speculation internationally. Established psychotic illness is disabling for individuals and costly to society. The aim of this study was to investigate whether use of crystal methamphetamine was associated with greater prevalence of self-reported psychotic illness, compared to use of other forms of methamphetamine. METHODS: The sample comprised participants interviewed as part of an annual cross-sectional survey of Australian people who inject drugs. Comparisons were made between groups according to the nature of their methamphetamine use: crystal methamphetamine or other forms of methamphetamine. Self-reported diagnoses of psychotic illness and other mental health problems were compared between groups. Predictors of self-reported psychotic illness were examined using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Self-reported psychotic illness was highly prevalent among users of crystal methamphetamine (12.0%), and significantly more so than among users of other forms of methamphetamine (3.9%) (OR=3.36; CI: 1.03-10.97). Significant predictors of self-reported psychosis in the cohort were: use of crystal methamphetamine; dependent use; lack of education beyond high school; and younger age. CONCLUSION: Highly increased prevalence of self-reported psychotic illness is associated with use of high-potency crystal methamphetamine in people who inject drugs, particularly where there is dependent use. There is an urgent need to develop effective interventions for dependent crystal methamphetamine use; and a need to monitor for symptoms of psychotic illness in drug-using populations.

The stigmatisation of 'ice' and under-reporting of meth/amphetamine use in general population surveys: A case study from Australia.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Stigmatisation of illicit drug use is known to discourage people from reporting their use of illicit drugs. In the context of Australia's two recent "ice-epidemics" this study examines whether rapid increases in community concern about meth/amphetamine concurrent with increased stigmatising media reporting about meth/amphetamine "epidemics" are associated with increased under-reporting of its use in population surveys. METHODS: We examined the relationship between general population trends in self-reported lifetime use of and attitudes towards meth/amphetamine between 2001 and 2013, contextualised against related stimulants and heroin, using five waves of Australia's National Drug Strategy Household Survey (NDSHS), alongside trends in print media reporting on meth/amphetamine from 2001 to 2014. RESULTS: Analysis of NDSHS data showed significant increases in community concern about meth/amphetamine between 2004 and 2007, and 2010 and 2013 in all birth cohorts and age groups. In both periods self-reported lifetime use of meth/amphetamine fell in many birth cohorts. The falls were only statistically significant in the first period, for birth cohorts from 1961-1963 to 1973-1975. Falls in lifetime use within a cohort from one period to the next are incongruous and we did not observe them in the other drugs considered. Equally, increases in concern were specific to meth/amphetamine. We counted substantial and rapid increase in the number of newspaper reports about meth/amphetamine in both periods, particularly reports including the term 'epidemic'. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid increases in the quantum of media reporting stigmatising a drug (through its construction as an 'epidemic') accompanying increased general public concerns about the drug may increase the tendency to under-report lifetime use. This may make it difficult to rely upon household surveys to observe trends in patterns of use and suggests that policy makers, media and others in the AOD sector should avoid stigmatisation of drugs, particularly during periods of heightened concern.

Estimating met demand for alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia.

AIMS: To estimate the amount of alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment provided and number of treatment recipients in Australia in 2011-12, and document an approach for future estimates internationally. DESIGN: We combined multiple data sources to estimate the amount of treatment received: administrative data on AOD treatment funded by the Australian and state/territory governments, survey data from treatment providers and programme evaluation data. The various data sources were reconciled, using published studies of treatment activity, to estimate the unique number of treatment recipients. SETTING: Treatment funded by the Australian and state/territory governments provided by general practitioners, specialist treatment services, hospitals, community- and hospital-based ambulatory mental health-care services and allied health professionals. PARTICIPANTS: People receiving AOD treatment in the above settings. MEASURES: Annual quantum of AOD treatment (encounters, episodes, consultations) and the number of unique treatment recipients. FINDINGS: In 2011/12 we estimated 1.6 million episodes of care, consultations or encounters, noting that measures of treatment are not comparable. Based on a range of conversion rates to account for people accessing treatment multiple times in that year, we estimated that the number of Australians in receipt of AOD treatment ranged from 202 168 to 232 419. This is an underestimate and subject to error. Using the upper range of the estimate, on average each treatment recipient made 4.7 visits to a general practitioner (GP) or allied health professional providing mental health services for AOD treatment, and had 1.2 treatment episodes with a specialist AOD treatment provider and/or hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Between 202 168 and 232 419 Australians are estimated to have received alcohol and other drug treatment in 2011-12. The comprehensive approach used to calculate this estimate, combining multiple independent data sets across treatment settings and programmes, can be replicated in other countries.

A conceptual schema for government purchasing arrangements for Australian alcohol and other drug treatment.

AIM: The aim of this study was to establish a conceptual schema for government purchasing of alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia which could encompass the diversity and variety in purchasing arrangements, and facilitate better decision-maker by purchasers. There is a limited evidence base on purchasing arrangements in alcohol and drug treatment despite the clear impact of purchasing arrangements on both treatment processes and treatment outcomes. METHODS: The relevant health and social welfare literature on purchasing arrangements was reviewed; data were collected from Australian purchasers and providers of treatment giving detailed descriptions of the array of purchasing arrangements. Combined analysis of the literature and the Australian purchasing data resulted in a draft schema which was then reviewed by an expert committee and subsequently finalised. RESULTS: The conceptual schema presented here was purpose-built for alcohol and other drug treatment, with its overlap between health and social welfare services. It has three dimensions: 1. The ways in which providers are chosen; 2. The ways in which services are paid for; and 3. How price is managed. Distinguishing between the methods for choosing providers (such as competitive or individually negotiated processes) from the way in which organisations are paid for their provision of treatment (such as via a block grant or payment for activity) provides conceptual clarity and enables closer analysis of each mechanism. CONCLUSIONS: Governments can improve health and wellbeing by making informed decisions about the way they purchase and fund alcohol and other drug treatment. Research comparing different purchasing arrangements can provide a vital evidence-base to inform funders; however a first step is to accurately and consistently categorise current approaches against a typology or conceptual schema.

Comparative policy analysis for alcohol and drugs: Current state of the field.

BACKGROUND: A central policy research question concerns the extent to which specific policies produce certain effects - and cross-national (or between state/province) comparisons appear to be an ideal way to answer such a question. This paper explores the current state of comparative policy analysis (CPA) with respect to alcohol and drugs policies. METHODS: We created a database of journal articles published between 2010 and 2014 as the body of CPA work for analysis. We used this database of 57 articles to clarify, extract and analyse the ways in which CPA has been defined. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the CPA methods employed, the policy areas that have been studied, and differences between alcohol CPA and drug CPA are explored. RESULTS: There is a lack of clear definition as to what counts as a CPA. The two criteria for a CPA (explicit study of a policy, and comparison across two or more geographic locations), exclude descriptive epidemiology and single state comparisons. With the strict definition, most CPAs were with reference to alcohol (42%), although the most common policy to be analysed was medical cannabis (23%). The vast majority of papers undertook quantitative data analysis, with a variety of advanced statistical methods. We identified five approaches to the policy specification: classification or categorical coding of policy as present or absent; the use of an index; implied policy differences; described policy difference and data-driven policy coding. Each of these has limitations, but perhaps the most common limitation was the inability for the method to account for the differences between policy-as-stated versus policy-as-implemented. CONCLUSION: There is significant diversity in CPA methods for analysis of alcohol and drugs policy, and some substantial challenges with the currently employed methods. The absence of clear boundaries to a definition of what counts as a 'comparative policy analysis' may account for the methodological plurality but also appears to stand in the way of advancing the techniques.

Poly-drug trafficking: Estimating the scale, trends and harms at the Australian border.

BACKGROUND: International drug law enforcement agencies have identified an apparent rise in high level drug traffickers choosing to deal in multiple different drugs. It is hypothesised that this may be a "deliberate modus operandi" and that the formation of "portfolios of trades" may make such traffickers more profitable, harmful and resilient to changes in drug supply and policing. In this paper we provide the first exploration of the extent, nature and harms of poly-drug trafficking at Australian borders. METHODS: Two different methods were used. First, we used Australian Federal Police (AFP) data on all commercial level seizures at the Australian border from 1999 to 2012 to identify the proportion of seizures that were poly-drug and trends over time. Second, we used unit-record data on a sub-set of 20 drug trafficking cases and linked-cases (defined as the original drug trafficking case and all other criminal cases that were connected via common offenders and/or suspects) to compare the profiles of poly-drug and mono-drug traffickers, including: the total weight and type of drug seized, the value of assets seized, and the level of involvement in other crime (such as money laundering and corruption). RESULTS: Between 5% and 35% of commercial importations at the Australian border involved poly-drug trafficking. Poly-drug trafficking occurred in almost every year of analysis (1999-2012), but it increased only slightly over time. Compared to mono-drug traffickers poly-drug traffickers were characterised by: larger quantities of drugs seized, larger networks, longer criminal histories and more involvement in other types of serious crime. CONCLUSION: Some fears about poly-drug traffickers may have been overstated particularly about the inherent escalation of this form of trafficking. Nevertheless, this suggests poly-drug traffickers are likely to pose added risks to governments and law enforcement than mono-drug traffickers. They may necessitate different types of policy responses.

Following the money: Mapping the sources and funding flows of alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The structures of health systems impact on patient outcomes. We present and analyse the first detailed mapping of who funds alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment and the channels and intermediaries through which funding flows from the funding sources to treatment providers. DESIGN AND METHODS: The study involved a literature review of AOD treatment financing and existing diagrammatic representations of the structure of the Australian health system. We interviewed 190 key informants to particularise the AOD treatment sector, and undertook two case examples of government funded non-government organisations providing AOD treatment. RESULTS: Funding sources include the Australian and state and territory governments, philanthropy, fund-raising and clients themselves. While funding sources align with the health sector generally and the broader social services sector, the complexity of flows from source to treatment service and the number of intermediaries are noteworthy. So too are the many sources of funding drawn on by some treatment providers. Diversification is both beneficial and disadvantageous for non-government treatment providers, adding to administrative workloads, but smoothing the risk of funding shortfalls. Government funders benefit from sharing risk. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Circuitous funding flows multiply the funding sources drawn on by services and put distance between the funding source and the service provider. This leads to concerns over lack of transparency about what is being purchased and challenges for the multiply funded service provider in maintaining programs and service models amid multiple and sometimes competing funding and accountability frameworks. [Chalmers J, Ritter A, Berends L, Lancaster K. Following the money: Mapping the sources and funding flows of alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:255-262].

Health expenditure on alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia (2012/2013).

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Analysis of the health expenditure on alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment provides important information regarding the funding sources and distribution of AOD treatment funds. This study aimed to provide an estimate of annual health expenditure on AOD treatment in Australia and document a methodology for future estimates. DESIGN AND METHODS: The study followed international standards for health accounts and calculated health expenditure for the federal government, state/territory governments and private expenditure for the year 2012/2013. Multiple data sources were used to generate the estimates. RESULTS: The total expenditure was estimated at AUD$1.2 billion in 2012/2013. The states/territories account for 51% of this total, the Commonwealth 31% and private sources 18%. In 2012/2013, AOD treatment represented 0.8% of total health-care spending. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The higher proportion of expenditure in AOD treatment programs outside hospitals is consistent with the community-focused models of care for AOD treatment. The Commonwealth's investment in AOD treatment funding resides predominantly in its dedicated AOD treatment grant programs. The analysis of health expenditure does not tell us whether the investment mix is effective in reducing AOD-related harm and producing positive health outcomes, but it provides the basis for analysis of the distributions of expenditure between funding sources and assessment of AOD treatment spending relative to all health areas, and creates a base for tracking trends over time.

Recreational drug use and binge drinking: stimulant but not cannabis intoxication is associated with excessive alcohol consumption.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Binge drinking is elevated among recreational drug users, but it is not clear whether this elevation is related to intoxication with recreational drugs. We examined whether stimulant intoxication and cannabis intoxication were associated with binge drinking among young adults. DESIGN AND METHODS: An online survey of 18- to 30-year-old Australians who had drunk alcohol in the past year (n = 1994) were quota sampled for: (i) past year ecstasy use (n = 497); (ii) past year cannabis (but not ecstasy) use (n = 688); and (iii) no ecstasy or cannabis use in the past year (alcohol-only group, n = 809). Binge drinking last Saturday night (five or more drinks) was compared for participants who took stimulants (ecstasy, cocaine, amphetamine or methamphetamine) or cannabis last Saturday night. RESULTS: Ecstasy users who were intoxicated with stimulants (n = 91) were more likely to binge drink than ecstasy users who were not (n = 406) (89% vs. 67%), after adjusting for demographics, poly-drug use and intoxication with cannabis and energy drinks (adjusted odds ratio 3.1, P = 0.007), drinking a median of 20 drinks (cf. 10 drinks among other ecstasy users). Cannabis intoxication was not associated with binge drinking among cannabis users (57% vs. 55%) or ecstasy users (73% vs. 71%). Binge drinking was more common in all of these groups than in the alcohol-only group (34%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Stimulant intoxication, but not cannabis intoxication, is associated with binge drinking among young adults, compounding already high rates of binge drinking among people who use these drugs.

Deconstructing alcohol use on a night out in England: promotions, preloading and consumption.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: To examine alcohol consumed during a drinking event (a single drinking occasion) by those attending public house/on-trade establishments on nights with standard pricing and nights with promotional prices. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data (n = 425) were collected in an ecological momentary assessment over eight nights in two locations (Midlands and London) on both promotional and standard (Saturday) nights. Multiple regression was used to predict event alcohol consumption by sex, age, type of night, alcohol preloading behaviour, marital and employment status, education, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test alcohol consumption questions separately or total AUDIT-C and social group size. RESULTS: Mean (UK) units consumed were 11.8 (London) and 14.4 (Midlands). In London, consumption was similar on promotional and standard nights, but in the Midlands, standard night consumption was three units higher. Preloading was reported by 30%; more common on standard nights. Regression analyses revealed being male, preloading and past-year total AUDIT-C were associated with higher event consumption. However, when AUDIT-C questions were added separately, being a standard night was associated with increased event consumption and different AUDIT-C questions were significantly associated with event consumption in each location. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Event consumption reflected heavy episodic drinking and was influenced by price. Promotional night consumption either matched standard Saturday night consumption or was slightly lower. In London, there was a significant preference for drinking at least one promotional beverage on promotional nights. On standard nights, consumption was over a wider range of venues, and preloading with off-trade alcohol was more likely.

Typologies of alcohol consumption on a Saturday night among young adults.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol policies and interventions seek to curtail risky single-occasion drinking (RSOD) and the negative health and public order consequences. Yet RSOD behaviors are not easily defined since people can drink excessively at a variety of locations and drink a range of products. The current study examines the presence and correlates of different typologies or classes of drinking behavior on 1 Saturday night to facilitate a nuanced policy response to harmful drinking. METHODS: Data from 1,883 adults aged 18 to 30 were collected using an online survey. Latent class analysis was used to categorize respondents into mutually exclusive classes based on the quantity, type, and unit cost of alcohol consumed plus location of alcohol consumption on the past Saturday night. Significant correlates and predictors of latent class membership were then identified using regression analysis. RESULTS: Seven distinct classes were identified that represent qualitatively distinct profiles of Saturday night drinking behavior among young adults. Multivariate analyses indicated that alcohol risk (measured using the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test), age, and recent (past 12 months) stimulant use were strong predictors of heavier drinking. The heaviest drinkers also consumed some of the cheapest alcohol and consumed alcohol at multiple locations over the course of the night. CONCLUSIONS: Given the large degree of heterogeneity among drinking behaviors, policy makers need to be cognizant that alcohol type and drinking location-specific policies may be less effective in targeting some groups of the population.