Insite has been receiving negative attention since a change in government in Canada and recent critical review. Today, they released a report the value of Insite in moving users toward detox. They report that use of Insite is associated with a 30% increase in use of detox services. I’m not sure what to make of this. They previously reported that 18% of Insite users sought detox services over the course of a one year follow-up period.
- A 30% increase means that detox use went from what percentage to what percentage?
- What’s the road not taken? Could increased access to detox have improved usage? (Vancouver only has 3 detox facilities.) Could simple street outreach have produced similar results?
- They had a follow-up rate in the neighborhood of 80%, but the cohort is huge. Did they factor any assumptions about the lost subjects? Are these numbers good.
- These numbers are based on a lot of assumptions. Are these reasonable assumptions? Might someone who’s concerned enough about blood-borne pathogens to use Insite, be moving through the stages of change and be more likely to use detox services on their own? I don’t know.
- What were the numbers for community-wide use of detox. Did that increase over this period? Detox admissions increased in Ann Arbor without Insite.
- What do the clients report as their reasons for entering detox? Do they credit Insite?
All the numbers are in statistical terms that make me wish I paid more attention to stats in college. Any DF staff wanting the full text can email me.