You are viewing archived content

Please note that this page is a static copy of a previously published web page and is no longer actively maintained.
Be aware that the information contained here may be out-of-date.
For the most recent information, we recommend visiting the main website of the EMCDDA.

Table TDI-17. Route of administration by primary drug of clients entering treatment, 2011 or most recent year available

Part (vii) New hypnotics and sedatives outpatient clients by country and usual route of administration (%)

Country		Inject	Smoke/inhale	Eat/drink	Sniff	Others	Route known (n)	Route unknown
Belgium		0.0	0.0	94.7	1.3	3.9	76	2
Bulgaria		:	:	:	:	:	:	:
Czech Republic		0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0	5	1
Denmark		0.0	5.0	95.0	0.0	0.0	20	3
Germany		2.1	2.2	92.2	1.8	1.8	1299	:
Estonia		:	:	:	:	:	:	:
Ireland	1	0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0	91	0
Greece		0.0	4.2	95.8	0.0	0.0	24	0
Spain	1	0.3	1.0	97.6	0.5	0.5	572	8
France		:	:	97.2	1.8	0.9	109	5
Italy	2	0.0	5.8	94.2	0.0	0.0	139	0
Cyprus		0.0	14.3	85.7	0.0	0.0	7	0
Latvia	3	0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0	23	0
Lithuania		10.0	:	90.0	:	:	10	1
Luxembourg		:	:	:	:	:	:	:
Hungary		0.0	3.8	88.5	7.7	0.0	26	0
Malta		:	:	:	:	:	:	:
Netherlands		0.4	0.4	98.8	0.4	0.0	256	136
Austria		0.0	0.0	91.3	8.7	0.0	23	2
Poland	4	:	:	42.9	:	57.1	7	:
Portugal	5	0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0	11	1
Romania		:	:	:	:	:	:	:
Slovenia		:	:	100.0	:	:	2	:
Slovakia		0.0	0.0	90.0	0.0	10.0	10	0
Finland		0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0	12	0
Sweden	1	1.2	0.0	98.8	0.0	0.0	82	0
United Kingdom	6	0.1	0.1	99.1	0.4	0.3	1508	28
Croatia		0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	:	20	0
Turkey		:	:	:	:	:	:	:
Norway		:	:	:	:	:	:	:
Total		0.8	1.1	96.3	0.9	0.9	4332	187

Notes:

: Indicates no data are available.

Percentages are of clients whose route of administration is known (n)

1 - Data are from 2010.

2 - In 2010 around 27% of all clients and 32% of new clients were registered as not known / missing for the primary drug category. Caution should be made when comparing data over time.

3 - In 2010 Latvia submitted a new dataset with a more precise TDI EMCDDA definition. Caution should be made when comparing data with previous years.

4 - Data are from 2010. Data presented in the table come from TDI pilot project. Caution should be made when interpreting the data.

5 - In 2010 came into implementation a new national information system implying methodological changes particularly in the registration criteria. Caution should be made when comparing 2010 data with previous years.

6 - Data are from 1st of April 2010 to 31st March 2011.

For more information relative to the treatment centre type, please see Table TDI-7.

See also 'General notes for interpreting data' on the Explanatory notes and help page.

Source:

Reitox national reports 2012 — TDI — outpatient treatment centres.

Download spreadsheet version (.xls)