Who receives heroin-assisted treatment? A comparison of patients receiving opioid maintenance treatment in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Since 2010, heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) has been one of the treatment options available to people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in Denmark. This study aimed to characterize HAT patients at treatment start and compare their individual characteristics to those of patients entering traditional opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) with methadone or buprenorphine during the same period. METHODS: Patients who initiated HAT or OMT with methadone or buprenorphine in Denmark from 2010 to 2018 were included (n=6798). Multiple national registers were linked to compare treatment groups in terms of socio-demographic variables, previous OUD treatment episodes, hospital-based care, and criminal conviction history. RESULTS: Nearly all HAT patients had a history of methadone treatment (91%) and half had residential treatment experience (48%). In the year previous to admission, HAT patients recorded the highest percentages of non-fatal overdoses (12%) and chronic hepatitis C diagnoses (16%), and the lowest percentages of psychiatric disorders (11%) compared to traditional OMT patients. Criminal convictions were also common: 39% of the HAT group had committed a property crime and 18% a drug-related crime the year before HAT entry. During the study period, an overall reduction in OMT enrollments for each year was recorded. The HAT proportion to the total remained fairly stable (4%-10%), while the buprenorphine proportion increased. CONCLUSIONS: In Denmark, OMT patients exhibited numerous vulnerabilities at treatment start, and among the patient groups, HAT patients were the most burdened. HAT seems to reach the target group and adhere to formulated eligibility criteria.

Global patterns in small-scale cannabis growers' distribution practices: Exploring the grower-distributor nexus.

BACKGROUND: While the supply of cannabis is commonly assumed to be dominated by criminal gangs, a sizable share of the domestic cannabis supply is provided by small-scale growers. This article examines the nature and scope of small-scale growers' distribution practices, with a particular focus on cross-country differences and variations between different types of grower-distributors, i.e., "non-suppliers", "exclusive social suppliers", "sharers and sellers" and "exclusive sellers". METHODS: Based on a large convenience web survey sample of predominantly small-scale cannabis growers from 18 countries, this article draws on data from two subsamples. The first subsample includes past-year growers in all 18 countries who answered questions regarding their market participation (n = 8,812). The second subsample includes past-year growers in 13 countries, who answered additional questions about their supply practices (n = 2,296). RESULTS: The majority of the cannabis growers engaged in distribution of surplus products, making them in effect "grower-distributors". Importantly, many did so as a secondary consequence of growing, and social supply (e.g., sharing and gifting) is much more common than selling. While growers who both shared and sold ("sharers and sellers"), and especially those who only sold ("exclusive sellers"), grew a higher number of plants and were most likely to grow due to a wish to sell for profits, the majority of these are best described as small-scale sellers. That is, the profit motive for growing was often secondary to non-financial motives and most sold to a limited number of persons in their close social network. CONCLUSION: We discuss the implications of the findings on the structural process of import-substitution in low-end cannabis markets, including a growing normalization of cannabis supply.