4.5 Article

Substance abuse and high-risk needle-related behaviors among homeless youth in Minneapolis:: Implications for prevention

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1093/jurban/78.4.690

Keywords

adolescence; hepatitis B virus; hepatitis C virus; human immunodeficiency virus; substance use

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [1RO3CA/DA79388-01] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Homeless and runaway youth face a variety of health risks, including those related to substance abuse and use of unsterile needles. During 1998-1999, we recruited 201 Minneapolis homeless youths aged 15-22 years; these youths were interviewed by experienced street outreach workers from settings where street youth were known to congregate. Respondents spent a median of 6 months in the previous year living on the streets or couch hopping. There were 37% who reported having IS or more alcoholic drinks per week, 41% smoked 1 pack or more of cigarettes per day, and 37% used marijuana 3 or more times a week; 15% reported lifetime injection drug use, including 6% who used injection drugs within the previous month. Twenty percent bad received a tattoo, and 18% body piercing with a needle that bad not been sterilized or bad been used by someone else. There were 68% who bad been tested for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), 52% for hepatitis B, and 25% for hepatitis C. There were 44% who said they did not have enough information about hepatitis B and C. Less than half (43%) received hepatitis B vaccine; however, 51 % of unvaccinated youths indicated that they would receive vaccination if offered. These Midwestern homeless youths face multiple health risks, including those related to substance use and exposure to unsterile needles. Despite unsafe behaviors, many of these youths were interested in methods to protect their health, including education, knowing their HIV or viral hepatitis serostatus, and obtaining hepatitis B immunization.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available