Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2006. / Adviser: William T. Trent. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Bowling Green State University, 2005. / Document formatted into pages; contains viii, 134 p. Includes bibliographical references.

Nurses who work with people who use drugs in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver (DTES), British Columbia are on the forefront in advancing a harm reduction framework in very controversial, cutting-edge practice environments. The purpose of this study was to explore how these nurses, using the framework of harm reduction, make sense of their nursing practice. It is hoped that the results of this study may advance adopting a harm reduction framework in nursing practice, education and policy development and serve as the foundation for further nursing research. This study utilized a qualitative interpretive descriptive methodology to gather data from eight nurses who work with people who use drugs in harm reduction practice environments. The nurses were divided into two focus groups and data was collected through a semi-structured focus group interview. Following initial data analysis, each focus group was reconvened and a second semi-structured group interview was held to clarify and to further discuss the emerging themes. The data analysis proceeded simultaneously with the interviews utilizing a process of constant comparative analysis. I completed the thematic analysis as I moved between the transcripts and identified commonalties and variations within the emerging themes. Ultimately, I described one overarching theme, which encapsulated the range of experiences described by the nurses. The theme that I identified was: meeting people where they are at. The importance to the nurses of both the therapeutic nurse-client relationship and a commitment to praxis were apparent. In conclusion, the value the nurses placed on "meeting people where they are at" was integral in gaining an understanding of how they make sense of their nursing work.

Despite thirty published evaluation reports citing the effectiveness of Vancouver’s safe injection site (Small 2008), the Canadian federal government refuses to endorse safe injection sites as a health service option available to injection drug users (IDUs). Insite’ s evaluation results are undergoing debate, because two communicative spheres of knowledge, each with a unique authoritative language, are conflicting as each is attempting to gain moral authority over the right to recontextualize drug users. Drawing on a literature review of two harm reduction programs in Vancouver, Insite and Sheway, and expert interviews with evaluators, I show that what constitutes “evidence” is in fact subjective, determined by spheres of communicability that are built upon social, professional and political contexts. To confront the problematic nature of this issue, I suggest that evaluators and overseers need to treat program evaluation as a process of negotiation, best approached in a fluid manner. By obscuring multiple user experiences in the evaluation of harm reduction programs, evaluators and overseers risk imposing their communicative ideologies on what it means to be a drug user.

Nurses who work with people who use drugs in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver (DTES), British Columbia are on the forefront in advancing a harm reduction framework in very controversial, cutting-edge practice environments. The purpose of this study was to explore how these nurses, using the framework of harm reduction, make sense of their nursing practice. It is hoped that the results of this study may advance adopting a harm reduction framework in nursing practice, education and policy development and serve as the foundation for further nursing research. This study utilized a qualitative interpretive descriptive methodology to gather data from eight nurses who work with people who use drugs in harm reduction practice environments. The nurses were divided into two focus groups and data was collected through a semi-structured focus group interview. Following initial data analysis, each focus group was reconvened and a second semi-structured group interview was held to clarify and to further discuss the emerging themes. The data analysis proceeded simultaneously with the interviews utilizing a process of constant comparative analysis. I completed the thematic analysis as I moved between the transcripts and identified commonalties and variations within the emerging themes. Ultimately, I described one overarching theme, which encapsulated the range of experiences described by the nurses. The theme that I identified was: meeting people where they are at. The importance to the nurses of both the therapeutic nurse-client relationship and a commitment to praxis were apparent. In conclusion, the value the nurses placed on "meeting people where they are at" was integral in gaining an understanding of how they make sense of their nursing work.

Despite thirty published evaluation reports citing the effectiveness of Vancouver’s safe injection site (Small 2008), the Canadian federal government refuses to endorse safe injection sites as a health service option available to injection drug users (IDUs). Insite’ s evaluation results are undergoing debate, because two communicative spheres of knowledge, each with a unique authoritative language, are conflicting as each is attempting to gain moral authority over the right to recontextualize drug users. Drawing on a literature review of two harm reduction programs in Vancouver, Insite and Sheway, and expert interviews with evaluators, I show that what constitutes “evidence” is in fact subjective, determined by spheres of communicability that are built upon social, professional and political contexts. To confront the problematic nature of this issue, I suggest that evaluators and overseers need to treat program evaluation as a process of negotiation, best approached in a fluid manner. By obscuring multiple user experiences in the evaluation of harm reduction programs, evaluators and overseers risk imposing their communicative ideologies on what it means to be a drug user.

No description available.

Vapour products (e-cigarettes) have rapidly grown in sales. While competing claims about the effects of vaping are fiercely debated within the public health community, no studies have examined the claims accepted in the regulatory arena. In the first article of this manuscript-based dissertation, my co-authors and I utilized narrative policy framework to identify the claims about vapour devices in legislation recommendation reports from Queensland Australia, Canada, and the European Union, and the United States. The vast majority of claims represented vapour devices as a threat, while the potential benefits were very rarely presented, resulting in bans and strict regulations. Evidence on two claims, youth vaping as a risk for nicotine dependence, and vapour products as a cessation aid, was evaluated with systematic reviews. For the youth claim, we retrieved population surveys on (1) the first product used, (2) non-nicotine vaping, (3) the prevalence of infrequent users among past-30-day users, and (4) cannabis vaping. Surveys indicated that a near majority of students who were past-30-day users vaped only once or twice a month, and an appreciable number, 25% and more, reported consuming non-nicotine liquids. Furthermore, 80% to 90% of ever-users tried cigarettes first. Far fewer youth are at a risk for nicotine addiction than indicated by any past-30-day use. On the other hand, vaping as a mode of administration of other drugs has received little attention, and presents an unknown risk to youth. We evaluated the claims about cessation with a review of systematic reviews (umbrella review). Three reviews, Hartmann-Boyce et al. (2016), Malas et al. (2016) and El-Dib et al. (2017) received the better quality ratings. They were unable to reach a definitive conclusion due to the limited number of randomized controlled trials and the low quality of most of the studies. We considered the reviewers’ tentative statements on their findings, the findings of the quality cohort studies, the potential underestimation of effectiveness in the studies, and the improved nicotine delivery of newer models. The weight of the evidence allowed us to state our optimism that vapour products have potential as a cessation aid. In the jurisdictions studied in this dissertation, vapour products have been claimed to be a threat by leading youth to smoking and impeding cessation. Does the evidence support the claims? The possible risk of youth becoming dependent on nicotine from vaping is substantially lower than indicated by the metric of any past-30-day use. There is reasonable evidence that vapour products may be an effective cessation aid. With a better understanding of these two claims, we in public health should revisit the regulations, policies, and interventions for vapour products so that they are in line with the evidence, not unsupported claims. / Graduate / 2019-04-02

Nurses who work with people who use drugs in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver (DTES), British Columbia are on the forefront in advancing a harm reduction framework in very controversial, cutting-edge practice environments. The purpose of this study was to explore how these nurses, using the framework of harm reduction, make sense of their nursing practice. It is hoped that the results of this study may advance adopting a harm reduction framework in nursing practice, education and policy development and serve as the foundation for further nursing research. This study utilized a qualitative interpretive descriptive methodology to gather data from eight nurses who work with people who use drugs in harm reduction practice environments. The nurses were divided into two focus groups and data was collected through a semi-structured focus group interview. Following initial data analysis, each focus group was reconvened and a second semi-structured group interview was held to clarify and to further discuss the emerging themes. The data analysis proceeded simultaneously with the interviews utilizing a process of constant comparative analysis. I completed the thematic analysis as I moved between the transcripts and identified commonalties and variations within the emerging themes. Ultimately, I described one overarching theme, which encapsulated the range of experiences described by the nurses. The theme that I identified was: meeting people where they are at. The importance to the nurses of both the therapeutic nurse-client relationship and a commitment to praxis were apparent. In conclusion, the value the nurses placed on "meeting people where they are at" was integral in gaining an understanding of how they make sense of their nursing work. / Applied Science, Faculty of / Nursing, School of / Graduate

Despite thirty published evaluation reports citing the effectiveness of Vancouver’s safe injection site (Small 2008), the Canadian federal government refuses to endorse safe injection sites as a health service option available to injection drug users (IDUs). Insite’ s evaluation results are undergoing debate, because two communicative spheres of knowledge, each with a unique authoritative language, are conflicting as each is attempting to gain moral authority over the right to recontextualize drug users. Drawing on a literature review of two harm reduction programs in Vancouver, Insite and Sheway, and expert interviews with evaluators, I show that what constitutes “evidence” is in fact subjective, determined by spheres of communicability that are built upon social, professional and political contexts. To confront the problematic nature of this issue, I suggest that evaluators and overseers need to treat program evaluation as a process of negotiation, best approached in a fluid manner. By obscuring multiple user experiences in the evaluation of harm reduction programs, evaluators and overseers risk imposing their communicative ideologies on what it means to be a drug user. / Arts, Faculty of / Anthropology, Department of / Graduate