Abstract

Background

Prisons are complex environments where there is a high risk of transmission of blood borne viruses, including hepatitis C (HCV). Providing trustworthy information in such settings can be challenging. This article presents the findings from a qualitative study examining interpersonal trust between people in prison and other individuals from whom they access information regarding HCV (health professionals, custodial officers, and peers).

Methods

In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted across 12 prisons in New South Wales, Australia, with 30 participants that had a history of injecting drug use. Questions addressed topics including awareness of HCV and harm reduction information sources. Data analysis was guided by two frameworks examining the affective and cognitive determinants of trust and the domains of fidelity, competence, honesty, confidentiality, and global trust.

Results

In general, health professionals were seen as trustworthy, while custodial officers were seen as untrustworthy. In contrast, the trustworthiness of peers was dependent on the individuals and the context. Peers were trusted if they had previous experience with HCV or were considered an ‘elder’ of their group, whereas others were not trusted due to a perceived lack of competence or fidelity.

Conclusions

Information about HCV must come through trusted sources such as health professionals, selected peers, and, typically, not custodial officers. Affective and cognitive determinants of trust, as well as the domains of fidelity, competence, honesty, confidentiality, and global trust, are evident and should be leveraged to develop harm reduction interventions that will be trusted and adopted by people in prison.

中文翻译：

---

监狱中注射毒品的人：关于丙型肝炎的信息谁值得信赖？

摘要

背景

监狱是复杂的环境，极易传播包括丙型肝炎（HCV）在内的血液传播病毒。在这样的环境中提供可信赖的信息可能是具有挑战性的。本文介绍了一项定性研究的结果，该研究研究了监狱中的人与其他人之间的人际信任，他们从中获得了有关HCV的信息（卫生专业人员，保管人员和同伴）。

方法

在澳大利亚新南威尔士州的12所监狱中进行了深入的半结构化访谈，有30名参加过吸毒史的参与者。问题涉及主题，包括对HCV的了解和减少危害的信息来源。数据分析由两个框架指导，这些框架检查了信任的情感和认知决定因素以及忠诚，能力，诚实，机密性和全球信任的领域。

结果

通常，卫生专业人员被认为是值得信赖的，而监护人员则被认为是不值得信赖的。相反，同伴的信任度取决于个人和环境。如果同行以前具有HCV经验或被认为是其团队中的“长者”，则可以信任他们，而其他人则因为感觉不到能力或忠诚而不受信任。

结论

关于HCV的信息必须来自受信任的来源，例如卫生专业人员，选定的同行，通常不是监护人员。信任的情感和认知决定因素，以及忠诚，能力，诚实，保密和全球信任的领域很明显，应利用这些优势来制定减少伤害的干预措施，以使监狱中的人们能够信任和采用。