Specific harm reduction strategies employed by 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetmine/ ecstasy users in the United States and the United Kingdom
Alan K. Davis, Harold Rosenberg
Drug Science Policy and Law January 1, 2017 DOI: 10.1177/2050324517711069 via OpenAlex
Summary
Both recreational and problematic MDMA/ecstasy users could benefit from harm reduction interventions. A web-based survey assessed how often 104 American and 80 British ecstasy users employed 19 self-initiated harm reduction strategies over two months. At least 75% of participants used 11 of the 19 strategies at least once, regardless of country or frequency of use. When differences occurred, larger proportions of Americans used the strategies. Many less-used strategies are not applicable every time. Testing ecstasy for MDMA, other stimulants, and adulterants is recommended for all users, as it is not a diverted pharmaceutical of known quality.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Cross-sectional survey Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 184 |
| Population | Lower-frequency and higher-frequency ecstasy users in the United States and United Kingdom |
| Intervention | other stimulants |
| Duration | Two-month assessment period |
| Topics | MDMA |
| Keywords | Harm reduction Residence Psychological intervention |
| Citations | 22 |
| Key finding | At least 75% of participants used 11 of 19 harm reduction strategies at least once, regardless of country or frequency of use, with Americans more likely to use strategies when differences occurred. |
Abstract
Both recreational and problematic MDMA/ecstasy users could benefit from employing harm reduction interventions intended to preserve health and prevent negative consequences. To evaluate whether use of such interventions varied by country of residence and frequency of ecstasy use, we used web-based surveys to assess how often 104 lower-frequency and higher-frequency American ecstasy users and 80 lower-frequency and higher-frequency British ecstasy users employed each of 19 self-initiated harm reduction strategies when they used ecstasy during a two-month period. Several significant differences notwithstanding, at least 75% of participants had used 11 of the 19 strategies one or more times during the two-month assessment period, regardless of whether they lived in the United States or United Kingdom and whether they were lower-frequency or higher-frequency ecstasy users. When proportions of American and British participants using a strategy differed significantly, it was typically larger proportions of Americans using those strategies. Many of the less frequently employed strategies are not applicable on every occasion of ecstasy use. However, because ecstasy is not a diverted pharmaceutical of known quality/potency, testing for the presence of MDMA, other stimulants, and adulterants is a strategy that everyone should employ, regardless of country of residence or how frequently one consumes ecstasy.