Drug Helplines,

Online Health & NPS

Tom Evenepoel

WHAT DO WE DO?ALCOHOL - ILLEGAL DRUGS

PRESCRIPTION DRUGS,

GAMBLING, GAMING, …

INFORMATION - ADVICE

HELP - REFERRAL

MONITORING

WHO DOES IT?

• Paid staff1 fulltime co-ordinator

4 halftime ‘operators’

• VolunteersBasic training (30 hours)

Practice training (30 hours),

Individual monitoring,

Intervision & training (1 per month)

A multi-channel approach

WWW.DRUGLIJN.BE• Drugs ABC• Advice for target groups, incl. early

warnings

• Interactive tools: 6 knowledge tests

12 self assessment tests

2 online selfhelp programs

facebook.com/druglijn

� �

Users 43% 30% 31%

Parents 7% 12% 29%

Partners 10% 10% 10%

Friends 6% 5% 5%

Young males/users are better reached online

Cannabis 38%

Alcohol 28%

Cocaine 16%

Prescribed drugs 10%

Amphetamines 7%

Ecstasy 5%

Heroin 3%

…

NPS only 2%

However: web pages on NPS: + 67%Facebook-posts on NPS do well

WHAT QUESTIONS REGARDING

NPS?

? Legal status

? ‘Complications’ post NPS-use

? Effects of specific NPS

? Long term risks

? Detection in blood/urine

Monitoring: De Druglijn gathers + spreads

relevant Early Warning information, both via

website/social media as ‘assimilated’ into

one-on-one contacts

OTHER

EUROPEAN

HELPLINES?

Survey amongst 11 helplines

involved in FESAT (European

Foundation f Drug Helplines)

Austria

Belgium (x2)

Bulgaria

Cyprus (x2)

Finland (x2)

Ireland

Portugal

The Netherlands

Services provided:

Telephone Service 11 91.7%

Telephone Service 11 100%

Chat Service 5 45%

Email Service 9 82%

SMS or Text Service 0 0%

Online Forum 2 18%

Other (Social Media,

inhouse counseling)

2 18%

% of inquiries on NPS:

Up till 5% 5

6 – 10 % 1

11 – 15 % 1

16 - 20 % 2

Over 20% 1

Unknown/Unclear 1

How did inquiries on NPS evolve?

How will inquiries on NPS evolve?

Most frequently asked

# 1 #2 #3 Tot

Legal status of specific NPS 2 2 2 6

Effects of specific NPS 7 1 2 10

Short term risks of specific NPS 1 7 2 10

Long term risks of specific NPS 1 0 1 2

Injecting use of specific NPS 0 1 2 3

Detection in urine/blood/ saliva 0 0 2 2

Reported needs of

helplines in dealing

with NPS# 1 #2 #3 Tot

Up-to-date information 7 1 1 9

Guidelines or helpline protocols 1 2 0 3

Helpline staff training on NPS 0 1 3 4

Monitoring of helpline questions 0 2 1 3

Accessible information or databases 2 1 3 6

Exchange with other helplines on NPS 1 3 1 5

Harm reduction advice on NPS 0 1 1 2

Stronger know-how on legal status 0 0 1 1

CONCLUSIONS

�NPS is a reality but prevalence seems

to differ a lot across Europe

�Online information and e-help has

potential (‘no strings attached’), but

more personal contact like telephone

calls remain important

�Helplines have clear common needs:

tailored information, databases,

exchange, training & capacity building

Challenges? Selective vs. indicated prevention + harm

reduction advice: how to target & reach the

right audience online

? What potential has reaching out online (eg.

involvement in user fora) got

? Which opportunities are there for better

helpline monitoring

? How can helplines better connect with available

resources and translate them into their work