Public Health Agency of Canada
Symbol of the Government of Canada
I-Track 2006

Enhanced Surveillance of Risk Behaviours among Injecting Drug Users in Canada

PHASE I REPORT

PDF Version PDF version
110 Pages - 907 KB

Cat. HP40-4/1-2006E
ISBN 0-662-43990-2
(On-line) Cat. HP40-4/1-2006E-PDF
ISBN 0-662-43991-0

PHASE I REPORT
August 2006


Table of Contents

Information to Readers
Acknowledgements
Executive Summary

Introduction

  • The need for behavioural surveillance among people who inject drugs in Canada
  • Background to IDU and HIV/HCV
  • Development of a system for surveillance of risk behaviours among IDU in Canada
  • Objectives of surveillance of risk behaviours among IDU
  • populations across Canada

Methods

  • Survey design
  • Eligibility criteria
  • Sample size
  • Survey staff and training
  • Sampling and recruitment
  • Data collection
  • HIV and hepatitis C testing: biological sample collection

Results

  • Socio-demographic characteristics of participants
  • Drug use behaviours
  • Borrowing and passing used needles/syringes
  • Borrowing and passing used injecting equipment (water, filter, and cooker)
  • Sexual behaviours
  • HIV and hepatitis C testing

Discussion

  • Representativeness of the study population
  • Demographics
  • Drug use pattern
  • Sharing of needles and other injecting equipment
  • Sexual behaviours
  • Testing patterns
  • HIV and HCV prevalence
  • Conclusions and recommendations

References

Appendix: Questionnaire


List of Tables

  1. Period of recruitment and number of participants in different sites
  2. Age distribution of participants
  3. Sex distribution of participants
  4. Residence of participants
  5. Residence in 6 months prior to recruitment
  6. Nature of housing of participants at the time of recruitment
  7. Places where participants lived in the previous 6 months
  8. Education level of participants
  9. Ethnicity background of participants
  10. Use of any needle exchange program services
  11. Use of services at recruitment NEP site
  12. Male IDU: age of initiation into injecting drugs
  13. Female IDU: age of initiation into injecting drugs
  14. Drugs injected in the previous 6 months
  15. Drug most commonly injected in the previous 6 months
  16. Drug most commonly injected in the previous 1 month
  17. Drugs taken by a non-injecting route in the previous 6 months
  18. Drug most commonly taken by a non-injecting route in the previous 6 months
  19. Places where injecting took place in the previous 6 months
  20. Place where injected most often in the previous 6 months
  21. Proportion who reported smoking in the previous 6 months
  22. Frequency of injection in the previous 1 month
  23. Number of times injected a day among those who injected every day
  24. Partners with whom the participants reported injecting in the previous 6 months
  25. People with whom the participants reported injecting most often
  26. Borrowing needles/syringes for injection in the previous 6 months
  27. People from whom needles/syringes were borrowed in the previous 6 months
  28. People from whom participants reported borrowing needles most often
  29. Frequency of borrowing needles/syringes in the previous 6 months
  30. Proportion of injections carried out by used needles/syringes in the previous 1 month
  31. Lending needles in the previous 6 months
  32. Frequency of passing used needles/syringes in the previous 6 months
  33. Proportion of used needles/ syringes lent to others in the previous 1 month
  34. Borrowing other injecting equipment for injection in the previous 6 months
  35. People from whom equipment was borrowed in the previous 6 months
  36. People from whom participants reported borrowing other equipment most often
  37. Frequency of borrowing other injecting equipment in the previous 6 months
  38. Proportion of injections carried out by used equipment in the previous 1 month
  39. Lending injection equipment in the previous 6 months
  40. Frequency of passing used injecting equipment in the previous 6 months
  41. Proportion of used injecting equipment lent to others in the previous 1 month
  42. Males: number of female sex partners in the previous 6 months
  43. Males: regular female sex partner in the previous 6 months
  44. Males: condom use with regular female sex partners during vaginal sex in the previous 6 months
  45. Males: condom use with regular female sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  46. Males: condom use with regular female sex partners during anal sex in the previous 6 months
  47. Males: casual female sex partners in the previous 6 months
  48. Males: condom use with casual female sex partners during vaginal sex in the previous 6 months
  49. Males: condom use with casual female sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  50. Males: condom use with casual female sex partners during anal sex in the previous 6 months
  51. Males: female client sex partners in the previous 6 months
  52. Males: condom use with female client sex partners during vaginal sex in the previous 6 months
  53. Males: condom use with female client sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  54. Males: clients of female sex partners in the previous 6 months
  55. Males: condom use with paid female sex partners during vaginal sex in the previous 6 months
  56. Males: condom use with paid female sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  57. Females: number of male sex partners in the previous 6 months
  58. Females: regular male sex partners in the previous 6 months
  59. Females: condom use with regular male sex partners during vaginal sex in the previous 6 months
  60. Females: condom use with regular male sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  61. Females: condom use with regular male sex partners during anal sex in the previous 6 months
  62. Females: casual male sex partners in the previous 6 months
  63. Females: condom use with casual male sex partners during vaginal sex in the previous 6 months
  64. Females: condom use with casual male sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  65. Females: condom use with casual male sex partners during anal sex in the previous 6months
  66. Females: male client sex partners in the previous 6 months
  67. Females: condom use with male client sex partners during vaginal sex in the previous 6 months
  68. Females: condom use with male client sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  69. Females: condom use with male client sex partners during anal sex in the previous 6 months
  70. Males: number of male sex partners in the previous 6 months
  71. Males: regular male sex partners in the previous 6 months
  72. Males: condom use with regular male sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  73. Males: condom use with regular male sex partners during anal sex in the previous 6 months
  74. Males: Casual male sex partners in the previous 6 months
  75. Males: condom use with casual male sex partners during oral sex in the previous 6 months
  76. Males: condom use with casual male sex partners during anal sex in the previous 6 months
  77. Results of HIV testing
  78. Results of HCV testing
  79. Proportion aware of their positive HIV status
  80. Proportion aware of their negative HIV status
  81. Proportion aware of their positive HCV status
  82. Proportion aware of their negative HCV status
  83. Proportion infected with either HIV or HCV or both
  84. Proportion reporting ever been tested for HIV
  85. Interval since last HIV test among those who reported ever being tested
  86. Proportion under the care of a doctor for HIV
  87. Proportion taking medication for HIV
  88. Proportion reporting ever been tested for HCV
  89. Interval since last HCV Test among those who reported having been tested
  90. Proportion under the care of a doctor for HCV
  91. Proportion taking medication for HCV

Information to Readers

The Surveillance and Risk Assessment Division, Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and
Control, Public Health Agency of Canada, together with its collaborators is pleased to present
the report on Phase I of the I-Track Enhanced Surveillance of Risk Behaviours among people
who inject drugs (IDU) in Canada, conducted between 2003 and 2005.

Phase I of the surveillance system was undertaken in Edmonton, Regina, Sudbury, Toronto,
Victoria, and Winnipeg and was linked with a separate study (by the SurvUDI group) at sites in
Ottawa and in the province of Quebec. This report presents the findings of the surveys
undertaken between 2003 and 2005 at selected sites.

The findings have been presented for all the participating sites and as an average of all sites. For
the purpose of presenting results, the Quebec site refers to selected sites in Quebec and Ottawa,
as the data for Quebec and Ottawa come from the ongoing study of the SurvUDI cohort.
One of the key components of the new Federal Initiative to Address HIV/AIDS in Canada is
knowledge development, which will enhance our understanding of the HIV epidemic and inform
the development of policies, programs, and interventions, such as new prevention technologies
and therapies. Knowledge development emphasizes improving population-specific surveillance,
including epidemiologic, socio-behavioural, ethnographic, and community-based research.
I-Track will provide important information to those engaged in developing policies and
programs for HIV prevention and control among IDU. The national surveillance system for
monitoring of risk behaviours in IDU populations has been established in Canada with the active
collaboration of local and provincial health authorities, researchers, and community-based
organizations. Special thanks must be given to the study participants themselves without whose
cooperation this study would not have been possible.

Phase II of the study is currently ongoing, and efforts are being made to recruit additional sites.
Further rounds of the survey will help us to better assess trends in the prevalence of HIV and
hepatitis C and risk behaviours among people who inject drugs.

Chris Archibald MDCM, MHSc, FRCPC Director
Chris Archibald MDCM, MHSc, FRCPC
Director
 Yogesh Choudhri MD, MPH HIV/AIDS Epidemiologist
Yogesh Choudhri MD, MPH
HIV/AIDS Epidemiologist

Executive Summary

Introduction

One of the key components of the new Federal Initiative to Address HIV/AIDS in Canada is knowledge development, which will enhance our understanding of the HIV epidemic and inform the development of policies, programs, and interventions, such as new prevention technologies and therapies. The knowledge development component emphasizes the improvement of population-specific surveillance, including epidemiologic, socio-behavioural, ethnographic, and community-based research. The Surveillance and Risk Assessment Division, Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, has established I-Track, which is an enhanced surveillance system to track risk behaviours associated with HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) in people who inject drugs (IDU) in urban and semi-urban centres across Canada. It forms a part of the second-generation HIV surveillance as advocated by the World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. Through this system, national and, to a certain extent, provincial and local trends in injecting and sexual risk behaviours among IDU can be assessed. Behavioural trend data obtained through the system will provide important information that can be triangulated with other data sources to assess the effects of prevention efforts and policies at the local, provincial, and national levels.

The surveillance system is being established in collaboration with local and provincial health departments, community-based organizations, and researchers. Within the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), internal collaborations involve the Community Acquired Infections Division, the National HIV and Retrovirology Laboratory, and the HIV/AIDS Policy, Coordination and Programs Division.

Objectives

The objectives of national surveillance of HIV/HCV-associated risk behaviours among IDU in Canada are to describe changing patterns in drug injecting practices, HIV-and HCV-testing behaviours, and sexual behaviours among IDU. Depending on the availability of testing technologies, there are additional objectives:

  • To describe changing patterns in the prevalence and incidence of HIV infections among IDU at the national and local level.
  • To describe changing patterns in the prevalence and incidence of HCV infections among IDU at the national and local level.

The specimens collected under I-Track would also help in the study of HCV genotypes circulating in Canada.

Phase I of I-Track

In collaboration with provincial, regional, and local health authorities, community stakeholders, and researchers, PHAC has established a surveillance system of IDU, I-Track, at sentinel sites across Canada to track HIV-and hepatitis C-associated risk. First, a pilot study of the I-Track surveillance system was undertaken between October 2002 and August 2003 in Victoria, Regina, Sudbury, Toronto, and in Quebec and Ottawa through linkages made with SurvUDI. Since then, Phase I of the I-Track study was completed between October 2003 and May 2005 with the addition of Edmonton and Winnipeg.

This report presents the findings of the surveys undertaken between 2003 and 2005 at selected sites.

Results of the Phase I study

There were 3031 participants, recruited from seven sites: Edmonton (276), Quebec (including Ottawa) (1591), Regina (250), Sudbury (150), Toronto (260), Victoria (254), and Winnipeg

(250) in 2003-2005. The biological surveillance was undertaken through collection of dried blood specimens at all sites except in Quebec and Ottawa, where oral fluid specimen was collected. In the results and discussion, the results referred to as being from Quebec are the findings of surveys undertaken in Quebec and Ottawa.

Recruitment: Recruitment was mainly carried out at the needle exchange program (NEP) centres or their mobile and outreach services and through word-of-mouth. At some sites, promotion of the survey was done through flyers and posters that were displayed at prominent sites being frequented by IDU.

Demographics of the study population: The study population comprised 2092 (65.0%) males, 903 (34.1%) females, and 18 (0.7%) transgender males (information on gender was missing for 18 participants). The mean age of the study population was 36.7 years, and was higher for males

(37.8 years) than females (34.5 years). Nearly all (99%) of the study population was living in the city of recruitment. In terms of level of education, three-quarters of them had achieved high school or less. Nearly 42% of the study participants identified themselves as Aboriginal, and the majority of them were recruited from Regina, Edmonton, and Winnipeg, where 87%, 70%, and 70% respectively reported themselves as Aboriginal. Over half of the study population reported having stable housing (living in their own house or apartment or parent's/relative's house). Among the study participants 26% reported living in shelters and 27% on the street in the previous 6 months.

Drug use: Nearly a quarter of the study population (26.0%) reported injecting drugs every day, and 23.1% injected drugs once in a while, not every week. Among males one-quarter (25.5%) and among females nearly one-third (29.9%) had started to inject by the age of 16 years. The commonly injected drugs included cocaine, used by 77.5% of IDU, morphine (non-prescribed) by 45.9%, Dilaudid by 32.9%, crack by 31.9%, and heroin by 27.6%. The drugs injected varied by city: for example, in Regina, the majority of IDU reported Ritalin alone (or in combination with Talwin) as the most commonly injected drug, whereas in Victoria it was cocaine. In Toronto, Edmonton, and Winnipeg, a large proportion of IDU reported injecting crack most often, but its use was limited in other cities. People reported injecting mostly in their home (65.1%), but over a half (50.7%) reported injecting in public places also.

Seroprevalence of HIV and hepatitis C: The seroprevalence of HIV (average of seven sites) among study participants was 13.2% and varied by city: Edmonton 23.8%, Quebec (including Ottawa) 17.3%, Regina 2.9%, Toronto 7.6%, Sudbury 12.2%, Victoria 15.4%, and Winnipeg 13.1%. The seroprevalence of hepatitis C was 65.7% (average of seven sites) and varied by city: Edmonton 65.8%, Quebec (including Ottawa) 64.7%, Regina 63.7%, Toronto 67.1%, Sudbury 68.5%, Victoria 68.5%, and Winnipeg 61.8%. The HIV/HCV co-infection rate among the study participants was found to be 11.7% (average of seven sites).

Sharing of needles and injecting equipment: When asked about sharing needles and other injecting equipment such as cookers, water, cotton, filters etc. within the 6 months before participating in the study, 14.5% of the study population reported borrowing needles for injection. Needles were mostly borrowed from a close friend or from regular sex partners. In terms of other injection equipment, 30.9% of the study population had borrowed cookers, water, cotton, filters etc., mostly from a close friend or regular sex partners. Almost a third of the study participants (32.0%) reported passing on injecting equipment that they had used to others, and in comparison 18.2% of participants reported passing used needles to someone else.

Sexual behaviours: A significant proportion of the study population (20.0% of males and 11.5% of females reported not having had a sexual partner of the opposite sex) across the seven sites reported engaging in some kind of sexual activity during the preceding 6 months. Nearly one-third (32.1%) of female IDU reported having male client sex partners, 2.8% of the males had female client sex partners, and 6.2% of the males reported having had a male sexual partner within 6 months before the study. Condom use during penetrative sex was higher than during oral sex. Condom use during penetrative and oral sex was more infrequent with regular sex partners than with casual or client sex partners.

Testing behaviours: In terms of HIV/ HCV testing, 88.0% and 85.2% of the study population who responded to this question reported that they had ever been tested for HIV and HCV respectively. The proportions varied by site, over 90% of the study population in Toronto, Edmonton, and Quebec reporting that they had been tested for HIV, as compared with Regina, where only 80.0% reported ever having been tested. The proportion of those who reported having ever been tested for HCV was similar at all sites. When asked about testing for HIV in the 6 months before the study, overall 39.9% reported being tested in that period; the proportions varied at each site.

Conclusions

The results of the study indicate that the prevalence of HIV and HCV remains unacceptably high in IDU populations in Canada. Although the risky behaviours have shown a decline in the two phases of the I-Track survey, the possibility for the spread of HIV and HCV in these populations of IDU still exists. Ongoing monitoring of risk behaviours in IDU populations in urban and semi-urban locales is essential for program planning and evaluation, and I-Track is able to provide such information at the national and local levels. Given the rapidly changing and varied drug culture in different cities, prevention measures must be tailored to reflect these differences within each community. Services should be directed to those IDU whose test results are negative for HIV and HCV to help them remain negative, and to IDU whose results are positive for these two infections to provide them with the care and counselling needed to avoid further transmission of HIV and HCV.

Phase II of the survey has been completed in Victoria, Sudbury, and Kingston and is ongoing in Quebec and Ottawa. Efforts are under way to recruit additional sites to the surveillance system.


Introduction

The need for behavioural surveillance among people who inject drugs in Canada

The Federal Initiative to Address HIV/AIDS in Canada commits the federal government to develop discrete approaches addressing the epidemic for eight specific target populations: people living with HIV/AIDS, gay men, people who inject drugs (IDU), Aboriginal people, prison inmates, youth, women and people from countries where HIV is endemic. One of the key components of the new Federal Initiative is knowledge development, which will enhance our understanding of the HIV epidemic and inform the development of policies, programs, and interventions, such as new prevention technologies and therapies. The knowledge development component emphasizes the improvement of population-specific surveillance, including epidemiologic, socio-behavioural, ethnographic, and community-based research. It advocates the establishment of sentinel surveillance programs for vulnerable populations, including those with co-infections and sexually transmitted infections, as appropriate. This is in line with the “Second Generation HIV Surveillance” being advocated by WHO and UNAIDS.1 Second-generation surveillance emphasizes the importance of using behavioural data in addition to routine surveillance data to help explain changes in HIV incidence and prevalence, and as an early warning system for HIV spread. In addition, since behaviour change is the goal of most prevention programs, second-generation surveillance supports more extensive use of behavioural information to inform program design and to help evaluate programs.

In collaboration with provincial, regional and local health authorities, community stakeholders and researchers, PHAC has established a surveillance system of IDU, I-Track, at sentinel sites across Canada to track HIV-and hepatitis C-associated risk. First, a pilot study of the I-Track surveillance system was undertaken between October 2002 and August 2003 in Victoria, Regina, Sudbury, Toronto, and in Quebec and Ottawa through linkages made with the SurvUDI. Since then, Phase I of the I-Track study was completed between October 2003 and May 2005 with the addition of Edmonton and Winnipeg.

Background to IDU and HIV/HCV

IDU are at risk of acquiring HIV and other blood-borne infections, such as hepatitis C virus (HCV), through contaminated needles and unsafe sex practices The current national HIV estimates indicate that the proportion of new infections among IDU had decreased to 14% of all new infections in 2005 (350-650 of a total of 2,300-4,500 new infections).2 A similar trend has occurred in the adult positive HIV tests reported to the Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control (CIDPC), Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC). Surveillance data as of December 31, 2005, indicate that in 2005, 19.5% of adult positive HIV tests reported to CIDPC were attributed to IDU, down from a peak of just over 33% in 1996 and 1997.3 Although the number of new HIV infections among IDU appears to be decreasing somewhat, the issue of HIV among IDU in Canada continues to be a serious problem that requires ongoing attention.

HIV prevalence at participating sites under I-Track (2002-2003) was quite variable, ranging from a low of 1.2% in Regina in 2002-2003 to a high of 19.6% at sites under SurvUDI (20032004).4 Available research indicates that HIV incidence and prevalence remain unacceptably high among Canadian IDU. HIV incidence in the ongoing SurvUDI study of people who inject drugs decreased from 5.1 per 100 person-years (PY) in 1995 to a range of 2.3–3.3 per 100 PY during 2001-04.5 Results from the Vancouver Injection Drug User Study (VIDUS) showed that HIV incidence was 1.5 per 100 PY in 2000, down from 10.3 in 1997 and 3.2 in 1999.6 Ongoing monitoring of the extent of HIV infection and trends in its spread among IDU from a variety of jurisdictions in Canada is needed given the worrisome levels of HIV infection that have been documented for this population.

The overall HCV prevalence rate for the I-Track study population in 2002-03 was 63.8% (average of four sites).7 The highest HCV prevalence rate was observed in Victoria at 79.3%, followed by Regina at 61.5%, Sudbury at 60.2%, and Toronto at 54.3%.7 Given the paucity of data on the extent of HCV among IDU, there is an urgent need to track HCV infection and trends in its spread among IDU from both large and small centres in Canada.

The pilot phase of I-Track4,7 and other studies in Canada5,8,9 have documented relatively high levels of needle sharing and multi-person use of other drug injecting paraphernalia, highlighting that the conditions exist for the spread of blood-borne viruses among networks of IDU. Ongoing monitoring of risk behaviours in IDU populations in urban and semi-urban locales would serve as an early warning system for HIV spread and would provide continuous data for prevention programming and evaluation.

Development of a system for surveillance of risk behaviours among IDU in Canada

Although several ongoing regional studies (VIDUS in Vancouver, SurvUDI in Quebec and Ottawa) collect risk behaviour data on IDU and a number of one-time cross-sectional surveys on risk-taking among IDU have been conducted (e.g. Regina Seroprevalence Study, RARE project Victoria, eastern project Cape Breton, Prince Albert seroprevalence study, etc.), it is challenging, if not impossible, to compare levels of risk behaviour between data sets. A national surveillance system that would track comparable HIV-and HCV-associated risk behaviour in IDU populations in urban and semi-urban centres across Canada would provide critical information for those involved in planning and evaluating the response to HIV/HCV among IDU. Through such a system, national and, to a certain extent, provincial and local trends in injecting and sexual risk behaviours could be assessed. Data on behavioural trends would also enhance existing national HIV/AIDS surveillance data and national incidence and prevalence estimates in monitoring the course of the HIV (and HCV) epidemic among IDU.

The development of a system for enhanced surveillance of risk behaviours among IDU in Canada (I-Track) that would contribute to achieving the above-mentioned benefits was proposed and developed by CIDPC. Partnerships were formed between PHAC, researchers, provincial/ local health authorities, and community-based organizations in Victoria, Edmonton, Regina, Winnipeg, Sudbury, and Toronto. In addition, linkages were developed with the ongoing SurvUDI study to implement the studies in Quebec and Ottawa. The selection of the sites to be included in the survey was a result of discussions among all stakeholders, including provincial and local governments, and was guided by HIV prevalence and incidence in different cities and the need to study the populations of IDU. The initial questionnaire was modified after a pilot phase and in consultation with the partners.

Objectives of surveillance of risk behaviours among IDU populations across Canada

The objectives of national surveillance of HIV/HCV-associated risk behaviours among IDU are as follows:

  • To describe the changing patterns in drug injecting practices among IDU at the national and regional level
  • To describe the changing patterns in HIV-and HCV-testing behaviour among IDU at the national and regional level
  • To describe changing patterns in sexual risk behaviours among IDU at the national and regional level
  • To describe changing patterns in the prevalence of HIV infections among IDU at the national and regional level
  • To describe changing patterns in the prevalence of hepatitis C (HCV) infections among IDU at the national and regional level

Depending on the availability of valid tests, such as the detuned assay, additional objectives may include assessment of the incidence of HIV at the national and regional level. The specimens collected under I-Track would also help in the study of HCV genotypes circulating in Canada.

This report presents the findings of the surveys undertaken between 2003 and 2005 at selected sites.


Acknowledgements

The I-Track: Enhanced Surveillance of Risk Behaviours among People who Inject Drugs in Canada Phase I Survey was a result of collaboration between Public Health Agency of Canada and researchers, provincial and local health authorities and community-based organizations from participating sites across Canada. The organizations and people who were associated with Phase I include:

EXPERT ADVISORY GROUP
Dr. Michel Alary (SurvUDI Research Group, Quebec), Dr. Lawrence Elliot (University of Manitoba), Dr. Peggy Millson (University of Toronto), Dr. Mark Tyndall (University of British Columbia, and BC, Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS), Dr. Chris Archibald (CIDPC, PHAC), Jennifer Siushansian (formerly of CIDPC, PHAC).

EDMONTON
Alberta Health and Wellness, Dr. Ameeta Singh, Vicki Pilling, Bev Lucki, Sharyn Hewitt, Patsy Conroy, Tracy Parnell.

REGINA
Regina Qu'Appelle Health Region, Regina Needle Exchange Programs, Dr. Maurice Hennink, Kathy Lloyd, Charlotte Miller, Michelle Bilan, Carleen Rozon.

SUDBURY
Sudbury and District Health Unit, The Point Needle Exchange Program, Dr. Sarah Strasser, Dr. Susan Snelling, Dr. Peggy Millson, Doris Schwar, Marlene Gorman, Julie Gorman, Lisa Mills.

SurvUDI RESEARCH GROUP
Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec, Direction de la santé publique de Montréal, SurvUDI Working Group, Carole Morissette, Michel Alary, élise Roy, Raymond Parent, Caty Blanchette, Christiane Classsens, Pauline Clermont, Andrée Côté, Jocelyne Daigneault, Jacques Dumont, Marcel Gauthier, Lynne Leonard, Pascale Morin, Lina Noël, Andrée Perreault, Louiselle Rioux Département de médecine sociale et préventive, Université de Montréal, Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québec, Unité de recherche en santé des populations, Université Laval, Université de Sherbrooke, Programme de toxicomanie, secteur recherche Faculté de médecine et des sciences de la santé, Campus de Longueuil, Unité de recherche en santé des populations, Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québec, Québec, Direction de la santé publique de l'Abitibi/Témiscamingue, Rouyn-Noranda, Direction de la santé publique de la Mauricie/Centre du Québec, Trois-Rivières, Direction de la santé publique du Saguenay/Lac St-Jean, Chicoutimi, Département de désintoxication de l'hôpital Saint-François d'Assises, Québec, Département d'épidémiologie et de santé communautaire, Université d'Ottawa, Ottawa, Centre d'expertise en santé de Sherbrooke, Direction de la santé publique de Québec, Québec, CLSC de Sherbrooke, Direction de la santé publique de la Montérégie, Longueuil, Direction de la santé publique de l'Outaouais, Hull.

TORONTO
University of Toronto, Dr. Peggy Millson, Shaun Hopkins, Laurel Challacombe, Robert Bright, WORKS, StreetHealth, COUNTERfit (South Riverdale Community Health Centre), Queen West Community Health Centre, and Parkdale Community Health Centre.

VICTORIA
Vancouver Island Health Authority, AIDS Vancouver Island, Nurses of the Street Outreach Program of Vancouver Island, Streetlink Emergency Shelter, Victoria Cool Aid Society, Dr. Murray W. Fyfe, Audrey Shaw, Dana Carr, Charlene Heilman, Josephine MacIntosh, Murray
Anderson, Andrea Turner.

WINNEPEG
Manitoba Health, Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, Mount Carmel Clinic, Sunshine House, Nine Circles Community Health Centre., CARI Clinic, Sage House, RAY/Powerhouse, Dr. John Wylie, Debbie Nowicki, Margaret Ormond.

CENTRE FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASE PREVENTION AND CONTROL, PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA

Surveillance and Risk Assessment Division
Dr. Chris Archibald, Dr. Yogesh Choudhri, Stephen Cule, Dana Paquette, Farrah Ali, Mark Vanderkloot, Dr. Martina Polakova.

National HIV and Retrovirology Laboratories
Dr. Paul Sandstrom, Dr. John Kim, Laurie Malloch, Yawa Adonsou-Hoyi.

Community Acquired Infections Division
Dr. Tom Wong, Tracey Donaldson, Katherine Dinner.

HIV/AIDS Policy, Coordination and Programs Division
Neil Burke, Michael R. Smith.

SPECIAL THANKS TO:
The I-Track participants in all participating centres.


This document is available:

By mail

Surveillance and Risk Assessment Division
Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control
Public Health Agency of Canada
Tunney's Pasture
Postal Locator 0602B
Ottawa, ON K1A 0K9

Or from

Canadian HIV/AIDS Information Centre
Canadian Public Health Association
1565 Carling Avenue, Suite 400
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Z 8R1
Tel.: (613) 725-3434
Fax: (613) 725-1205
Toll Free: 1-877-999-7740
E-mail: aidssida@cpha.ca

By Internet

This report can be assessed electronically via the Internet at <http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/i-track/sr-re-1/index-eng.php>.

Suggested Citation:
Public Health Agency of Canada. I-Track: Enhanced Surveillance of Risk Behaviours among People who
Inject Drugs. Phase I Report, August 2006
. Surveillance and Risk Assessment Division, Centre for
Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Public Health Agency of Canada, 2006.

Surveillance and Risk Assessment Division
Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control