Psychiatric Bulletin (2008) 32: 245-247. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.107.017301
© 2008 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kouimtsidis, C.
Right arrow Articles by Drabble, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Kouimtsidis, C.
Right arrow Articles by Drabble, K.

Drug Interventions Programme: clinical profile of service users v. attendees of standard services

Christos Kouimtsidis, Consultant Psychiatrist and Honorary Senior Lecturer

*Section of Addictive Behaviour, Division of Mental Health, St George’s University of London, CranmerTerrace, London SW17 0RE, e-mail: ckouimts{at}sgul.ac.uk

Jo Edwards, Psychiatric Nurse and Christine Wallis, Psychiatric Nurse

Clinical Team, Drug Interventions Programme, Hertfordshire Partnership Trust

Karen Drabble, Psychiatric Nurse

North-West Herts Community Drug and Alcohol Team, Hertfordshire Partnership Trust

Declaration of interest

None.

AIMS AND METHOD

We conducted a retrospective survey of all cases referred to the Drug Interventions Programme in Hertfordshire for the first 9 months in order to compare them with those referred to one of the community drug and alcohol teams.

RESULTS

The Drugs Interventions Programme had significantly more White British clients and clients who had dropped out from previous treatment. Compared with community team clients, the Programme had a higher percentage of clients with an opioid problem (92%), of whom a high percentage also misused other substances (78%) and injected drugs (30%, half of whom shared needles).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

More chaotic clients who had failed previous treatment have entered treatment with the Drug Interventions Programme.