Transcript 2006 Annual report on the state of the drugs problem in Europe

Treatment Prevalence Project
Background information
Expert meeting
Implementation of the treatment strategy –
Module 1: TDI prevalence 24 June 2013
Aim of the project
• To have the total number of treatment clients in a country
• To collect data on the total number of drug addicts reached
by treatment
• To get the number of drug users in treatment for long period
or more than one year
• To have a picture of the profile of the treated population,
including its characteristics
History of the project (1)
• May 2005:
proposal of the Dutch SC member
• September 2005:
discussion during the TDI expert meeting, NL
presentation and setting up a working
group
• November 2005:
proposal for a pilot project presented to NFPs
• January 2006:
working group meeting 9 volunteer countries
and launch of pilot project
• Summer 2006:
1st pilot data collection
• Sep.-Nov. 2006
presentations first results during the TDI and
RTX meeting
History of the project (2)
• Summer 2007:
2nd pilot data collection
• Summer 2007:
feasibility assessment with NFPs
• Sep.-Nov.2007:
presentations results of 2nd pilot data collection
and of the feasibility assessment (TDI and
RTX meeting)
• 2008:
3rd pilot data collection
• 2008 until 2012:
TDI revision: TDI prevalence as separated
project
• 2013:
TDI prevalence included in the 2013 Work
programme
Results from feasibility assessment (2007)
28 countries replied: 25 MS + TK + HR + NO
2 countries not replying: RO, SI
TDI
TR. Prevalence
30
25
24
20
15
15
10
8
5
4
5
0
0
Already collectin
Planning to collect
Source: Results from a survey to the NFPs on feasibility assessment
Not planning to collect
Reasons for collecting prevalence data
(23 countries)
• More complete information on the whole drug problem
• Overview of drug treatment population: most part of treatment
clients is not included in the current TDI data collection
• More “realistic” picture on the number of drug clients
• Useful data for treatment planning: it gives information on
treatment capacities and treatment needs
• Increase research and analysis potentialities with TDI data
Reasons for not collecting prevalence data
(5 countries – DK, SP, GR, SW, NO)
•
Data collection: low feasibility (3 countries) or not feasible (2 countries)
•
Burden increase in the NFPs and treatment networks
•
Decrease in data quality
•
50% increase in financial (between 20.000 and 300.000 euros) and
human resources (between 3 and 5 staff members) in the
implementation phase
•
Less for maintaining the information system
•
Not much added value to the information currently collected
Resources to be invested
• No additional costs for 7 countries
• Differences in the remaining countries
• Human resources:
between 1 and 8 staff
• Financial resources:
between 20 000 and 100 000 Euros
(often including staff cost)
Additional feedback from NFPs and TDI experts
• Agreement on implementing data collection
on treatment prevalence
• Clear definition/methodology needed
• Only basic data should be collected