Between April 1992 and March 1994 a low threshold centre named ''Aufenthalts- und Betreuungsraum Mr Drogenabhangige (ABfD)'' (''Common Care Room for Drug Addicts'') was run in the city of Lucerne which intended to help drug addicts to live and survive in terms of harm and risk reduction. The evaluation of the ABfD was conducted by the Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine on behalf of the Federal Office of Health. Combining qualitative and quantitative research methods its structure was evaluated regarding the realization of its own objectives. The results: the ABfD was frequented beyond expectation by an average of about 65 male and female drug addicts per evening. All of its facilities were used and appreciated. The clientele of the ABfD was characterized by a great diversity of sociodemographic factors such as age, sex and income as well as housing conditions. The majority were residents of the city (approx. 54%) and the canton of Lucerne (approx. 28%). In general, the ABfD had a positive effect on the physical condition of its users insofar as the distribution of sterile injecting material enabled them to behave more risk consciously Also, it gave Many drug addicts something like a home and the opportunity to experience an atmosphere of solidarity. In spite of isolated criticism the ABfD generally enjoyed great esteem. The evaluation has shown that there is a need for a care center for drug addicts such as the ABfD, that it had been widely made use of realized many Of its objectives and it had no attractive effect on other regions. The researchers concluded by recommending the establishment of an analogous institution within a sensible period of time since with the closing of the ABfD in the Lucerne area the help to live and survive, an important pillar of the drug policy was no longer warranted for.

Evaluation of the low threshold centre for drug users ABfD (''Aufenthalts- und Betreuungsraum'') in Lucerne

Ronco C;
1996

Abstract

Between April 1992 and March 1994 a low threshold centre named ''Aufenthalts- und Betreuungsraum Mr Drogenabhangige (ABfD)'' (''Common Care Room for Drug Addicts'') was run in the city of Lucerne which intended to help drug addicts to live and survive in terms of harm and risk reduction. The evaluation of the ABfD was conducted by the Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine on behalf of the Federal Office of Health. Combining qualitative and quantitative research methods its structure was evaluated regarding the realization of its own objectives. The results: the ABfD was frequented beyond expectation by an average of about 65 male and female drug addicts per evening. All of its facilities were used and appreciated. The clientele of the ABfD was characterized by a great diversity of sociodemographic factors such as age, sex and income as well as housing conditions. The majority were residents of the city (approx. 54%) and the canton of Lucerne (approx. 28%). In general, the ABfD had a positive effect on the physical condition of its users insofar as the distribution of sterile injecting material enabled them to behave more risk consciously Also, it gave Many drug addicts something like a home and the opportunity to experience an atmosphere of solidarity. In spite of isolated criticism the ABfD generally enjoyed great esteem. The evaluation has shown that there is a need for a care center for drug addicts such as the ABfD, that it had been widely made use of realized many Of its objectives and it had no attractive effect on other regions. The researchers concluded by recommending the establishment of an analogous institution within a sensible period of time since with the closing of the ABfD in the Lucerne area the help to live and survive, an important pillar of the drug policy was no longer warranted for.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/3293793
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact