Injecting Drug Users (IDUs) are at a high risk of infection with blood-borne viruses including HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C, and they are increasingly being targeted by policies that aim at preventing the spread of HIV. Approximately 10% of HIV infections worldwide are transmitted via injecting drug use. Many countries in Asia, including Thailand, Myanmar, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Nepal and India, have reported serious HIV epidemics among IDUs. Injecting drug use is an efficient and prevalent mode of HIV transmission, and it is the principal mode of transmission in some parts of the world. In the United States, approximately 10,000 IDUs are believed to acquire HIV each year, and they account for 8% of new HIV infections and 16% of people currently living with HIV (CDC Report, 2012). Increasing the number of HIV-infected IDUs who undergo diagnosis, increasing their access to care and prevention services, and increasing their adherence to a therapeutic regimen are the current challenges in tackling the HIV epidemic in this population. To overcome these obstacles, clinicians must have both the technical knowledge and skill required for assisting patients. The timeliness of HIV diagnosis and the initiation of antiretroviral treatment are major determinants of survival for HIV-infected people. IDUs are less likely than non-users in other transmission categories to seek early HIV counselling, testing and treatment. To improve the survival of IDUs, HIV prevention efforts must ensure early access to HIV testing and care, as well as encourage adherence to antiretroviral treatment to slow disease progression. Wafa Fageeh, Prevalence and Awareness of Sexually Transmitted Infections among Inmates of a Drug Rehabilitation Center in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Review articles are the summary of current state of understanding on a particular research topic. They analyze or discuss research previously published by scientist and academicians rather than reporting novel research results.
Review article comes in the form of systematic reviews and literature reviews and are a form of secondary literature. Systematic reviews determine an objective list of criteria, and find all previously published original research papers that meet the criteria. They then compare the results presented in these papers. Literature reviews, by contrast, provide a summary of what the authors believe are the best and most relevant prior publications.
The concept of "review article" is separate from the concept of peer-reviewed literature. It is possible for a review to be peer-reviewed, and it is possible for a review to be non-peer-reviewed.
Last date updated on September, 2014