Public opinion of drug treatment policy: exploring the public's attitudes, knowledge, experience and willingness to pay for drug treatment strategies.

BACKGROUND: Research evidence is strong for opiate replacement treatment (ORT). However, public opinion (attitudes) can be at odds with evidence. This study explored the relationships between, attitudes, knowledge of drugs and a range of socio-demographic variables that potentially influence attitude. This is relevant in the current policy arena in which a major shift from harm reduction to, rehabilitation is underway. METHODS: A cross sectional postal questionnaire survey in Scotland was conducted where the drug, treatment strategy has changed from harm-reduction to recovery-based. A random sample (N=3000), of the general public, >18 years, and on the electoral register was used. The questionnaire was largely structured with tick box format but included two open questions for qualitative responses. Valuation was measured using the economic willingness-to-pay (WTP) method. RESULTS: The response rate was 38.1% (1067/2803). Less than 10% had personal experience of drug, misuse but 16.7% had experience of drug misuse via a friend/acquaintance. Regression modelling revealed more positive attitudes towards drug users in those with personal experience of drug misuse, (p<0.001), better knowledge of drugs (p=0.001) and higher income (those earning >£50,000 per, annum compared to <£15K; p=0.01). Over half of respondents were not willing to pay anything for drug treatment indicating they did not value these treatments at all. Respondents were willing-to-pay most for community rehabilitation and least for methadone maintenance treatment. Qualitative analysis of open responses indicated many strong negative attitudes, doubts over the efficacy of methadone and consideration of addiction as self-inflicted. There was ambivalence with respondents weighing up negative feelings towards treatment against societal benefit. CONCLUSIONS: There is a gap between public attitudes and evidence regarding drug treatment. Findings suggest a way forward might be to develop and evaluate treatment that integrates ORT with a community rehabilitative approach. Evaluation of public engagement/education to improve knowledge of drug treatment effectiveness is recommended.

Asthma leaflets for patients: what do asthma nurses use?

This study investigated patient information leaflets used by trained asthma nurses, and nurses' satisfaction with these. Main outcome measures were frequency of use, sources of material, and rating of reliability and readability. A total of 775 practice nurses with a diploma in asthma working in the general practice setting were surveyed using a postal questionnaire. Forty two percent of questionnaires (326) were returned. The provision of asthma information is an integral part of patient care by the trained asthma nurse. Most nurses (260, 83%) gave out between one and ten leaflets per week. An abundance of diverse information is available from a variety of sources, main sources used were Glaxo-Wellcome (cited by 47% of respondents), National Asthma Campaign (NAC) (19% of respondents) and Astra (19%). Pharmaceutical company material was considered more easily available, free of charge and more attractively presented. NAC material was viewed as more accurate. Assessment of NAC, Glaxo-Wellcome and Astra booklets revealed that they conformed to British Thoracic Society Guidelines for acute asthma. Thus, nurses stated a preference for charity information but in practice used a predominance of pharmaceutical company information. This appears to be because pharmaceutical company information was more readily available and free of charge. Nurses felt unease with self-perceived over-reliance on pharmaceutical company information.