Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Combating the Methamphetamine Epidemic: Education alone is Insufficient

View through CrossRef
Objectives: As in many other areas of the country, methamphetamine use and dependence has been perceived by [blinded for peer review] County as a significant and progressively worsening, yet unmeasured scourge to the community. In an attempt to combat this epidemic, [blinded for peer review] County decided to study the efficacy of education on diminishing the impact of methamphetamine on our community. Our goal was to study the prevalence of methamphetamine use in patients seeking emergency medical care and what impact, if any, education would have. Methods: As a part of a county-wide program in [blinded for peer review] County to study the impact of methamphetamine use on our community, a cross-sectional study in 2008 measured the prevalence of methamphetamine use as well as other epidemiologic factors of the users in our emergency department. An educational campaign was subsequently launched across the county and focused primarily on raising public awareness in order to prevent abuse and recruit more abusers into existing treatment programs. The educational campaign targeted businesses, media, family-wellbeing, and school-aged children. A post-intervention study was once again conducted in 2014 to assess the effectiveness of the educational campaign. Results: Between 2008 and 2014, the prevalence of patients who self-reported methamphetamine usage at least once during their lifetime remained relatively unchanged at 31.5% (107/340, 95% CI: 26.8%-36.6%) vs. 31.8% (55/173, 95% CI: 25.3%-39.1%) respectively. The largest group admitting to having used methamphetamine in both surveys was Caucasian males in the 26-45 year old category. The only difference seen between the two years was a decrease in the prevalence of methamphetamine users having sought treatment (42/107, 39.3% to 15/55, 27.3%, p=0.3). However, this change was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Education alone is likely insufficient to affect the prevalence of methamphetamine use. In the future, a multifaceted approach including a greater emphasis on treatment and rehabilitation programs will likely be more effective. In addition, future studies aimed specifically at populations at risk of methamphetamine abuse may give us a deeper understanding of this epidemic.
Title: Combating the Methamphetamine Epidemic: Education alone is Insufficient
Description:
Objectives: As in many other areas of the country, methamphetamine use and dependence has been perceived by [blinded for peer review] County as a significant and progressively worsening, yet unmeasured scourge to the community.
In an attempt to combat this epidemic, [blinded for peer review] County decided to study the efficacy of education on diminishing the impact of methamphetamine on our community.
Our goal was to study the prevalence of methamphetamine use in patients seeking emergency medical care and what impact, if any, education would have.
Methods: As a part of a county-wide program in [blinded for peer review] County to study the impact of methamphetamine use on our community, a cross-sectional study in 2008 measured the prevalence of methamphetamine use as well as other epidemiologic factors of the users in our emergency department.
An educational campaign was subsequently launched across the county and focused primarily on raising public awareness in order to prevent abuse and recruit more abusers into existing treatment programs.
The educational campaign targeted businesses, media, family-wellbeing, and school-aged children.
A post-intervention study was once again conducted in 2014 to assess the effectiveness of the educational campaign.
Results: Between 2008 and 2014, the prevalence of patients who self-reported methamphetamine usage at least once during their lifetime remained relatively unchanged at 31.
5% (107/340, 95% CI: 26.
8%-36.
6%) vs.
31.
8% (55/173, 95% CI: 25.
3%-39.
1%) respectively.
The largest group admitting to having used methamphetamine in both surveys was Caucasian males in the 26-45 year old category.
The only difference seen between the two years was a decrease in the prevalence of methamphetamine users having sought treatment (42/107, 39.
3% to 15/55, 27.
3%, p=0.
3).
However, this change was not statistically significant.
Conclusion: Education alone is likely insufficient to affect the prevalence of methamphetamine use.
In the future, a multifaceted approach including a greater emphasis on treatment and rehabilitation programs will likely be more effective.
In addition, future studies aimed specifically at populations at risk of methamphetamine abuse may give us a deeper understanding of this epidemic.

Related Results

Gray-matter structure in long-term abstinent methamphetamine users
Gray-matter structure in long-term abstinent methamphetamine users
Abstract Background Previous studies of brain structure in methamphetamine users have yielded inconsistent findings, possibly reflecting small sampl...
Methamphetamine‐related Emergency Department Utilization and Cost
Methamphetamine‐related Emergency Department Utilization and Cost
AbstractObjective:  To quantify the frequency, cost, and characteristics associated with emergency department (ED) visits that are related to methamphetamine use.Methods:  This was...
Impaired Arterial Smooth Muscle Cell Vasodilatory Function In Methamphetamine Users
Impaired Arterial Smooth Muscle Cell Vasodilatory Function In Methamphetamine Users
Objectives: Methamphetamine use is a strong risk factor for stroke. This study was designed to evaluate arterial function and structure in methamphetamine users ultrasonographicall...

Back to Top