1SOURCE EXTRACT — arxiv-2609.27732v12Title: Do Drug Consumption Rooms Reduce Drug-Related Hospitalizations? Evidence from Switzerland3Authors: Ana Armendariz (University of St. Gallen)4Bibliographic record: arXiv:2609.27732v1 [econ.GN], submitted 23 Sep 2026 (version 1, the only version at retrieval). Abstract page: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.27732v15Retrieved: https://arxiv.org/html/2609.27732v1 on 2026-10-30T03:23:18Z (SHA-256 of the retrieved HTML: 22b06050f4ff6e665aedd80561fa4031b1717867ecfeca71d1d2902ee1b09f52)6License: CC BY 4.0 (license shown on the arXiv abstract page; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Reproduced in part with attribution.7Extract contents: title, author, date and abstract; Section 6 'Results' in full (Figure notes, Table 6, Table 7, Section 6.1 'Mechanisms'); Appendix Table A19 with its note and the paragraph that discusses it.8Omitted: Sections 1-5 and 7, the other appendix tables and figures, the references.9Rendering note: converted from the HTML rendering to plain text. Tables are rendered one row per line with " | " separating cells; in regression tables the line following a coefficient row holds the standard errors in parentheses, exactly as printed. Mathematical expressions appear as LaTeX source; non-breaking spaces were replaced by ordinary spaces. No numbers were altered.10================================================================1112# Do Drug Consumption Rooms Reduce Drug-Related Hospitalizations? Evidence from Switzerland1314Ana Armendariz*1516September 23, 20261718This paper estimates the causal effect of drug consumption room (DCR) openings on drug-related hospitalizations in Switzerland. I exploit the staggered introduction of DCRs across Swiss cities between 1998 and 2022, using individual-level hospital records and a difference-in-differences estimator. DCR openings reduce drug-related hospitalization rates by roughly 35% within 5 km of a facility. The reduction is most pronounced for fatal outcomes, which fall by 35% while narcotics poisoning hospitalizations rise by a comparable amount, consistent with DCRs converting potentially fatal overdoses into non-fatal hospitalizations. Mental and behavioral disorder hospitalizations decline by 32% while estimates for Hepatitis and HIV are imprecise. The findings support the role of DCRs as an effective harm reduction strategy.1920Keywords: Drug Consumption Rooms, Harm Reduction, Hospitalizations, Drugs, Public Health, Causal Inference2122## 6 Results2324This section reports the effect of DCR openings on the rate of drug-related hospitalizations per 100,000 inhabitants. I begin with the event-study estimates and then present the overall pooled ATT. I then disaggregate the overall outcome into its sub-outcome categories and report the same estimates for each.2526Figure 6: Event study estimates by buffer zone, \pm 5-year window2728Note: The figure plots event-study coefficients from the doubly robust estimator of Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021) for regions within 5 km of a DCR opening. The comparison group consists of never-treated regions (608 control regions). The outcome is the log drug-related hospitalization rate per 100,000 inhabitants. The sample includes all staggered-treated MedStat regions within 5 km of a DCR that opened between 1998 and 2022 and all never-treated regions. The estimation uses a \pm 5-year window relative to DCR opening, with t=-5 and t=+5 representing pooled endpoint bins that absorb all periods beyond the window. The reference period is a universal base period. Regions near DCRs that opened before 1998 (always-treated) are excluded through out. 95% confidence intervals are based on standard errors clustered at the MedStat region level. Results for the 1 km and 3 km buffer specifications are reported in Appendix Figure A17.2930Figure 6 presents the event study estimates for the 5 km buffer specifications. I focus on the 5 km buffer specification, as it includes the largest number of treated regions and yields the most precise estimates. I summarize dynamic effects over a symmetric five year window around DCR openings. This window avoids relying on distant leads and lags that are informed by only a small subset of adopters. Pre-treatment coefficients are small and statistically insignificant, supporting the parallel trends assumption. The post-treatment coefficients are consistently negative, indicating a reduction in drug-related hospitalizations following DCR openings. The estimates of the overall summary of ATTs based on calendar time aggregation of Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021) is around -35% reduction in hospitalizations due to drugs.3132Table 6: Overall Average Treatment Effect on the Treated (ATT)3334| 1 km | 3 km | 5 km3536ATT | -0.399 | -0.283 | -0.431**3738| (0.412) | (0.279) | (0.210)3940% change | -32.9% | -24.7% | -35.0%4142Treated regions | 7 | 35 | 504344Control regions | 608 | 608 | 6084546Observations | 16,175 | 16,875 | 17,2504748Note: The table reports the overall ATT estimated using the doubly robust Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021) estimator with never-treated controls and a universal base period. The outcome is the log drug-related hospitalization rate per 100,000 inhabitants. Columns differ in the geographic buffer used to define treated Medstat regions. The control group consists of 608 never-treated Medstat regions49throughout. Regions near DCRs that opened before 199850(always-treated) are excluded. Standard errors clustered at the Medstat region level in51parentheses. Significance: {}^{***}p<0.01 , {}^{**}p<0.05 ,52{}^{*}p<0.10 .5354Table 6 reports the pooled ATT for the 1 km, 3 km and 5 km buffer specification, aggregating the dynamic treatment effects into a single estimate averaged across all post-treatment periods and cohorts. The 5 km specification, yields an ATT of -0.43155corresponding to a 35% reduction in the drug-related hospitalization rate. This estimate is statistically significant at the 5% level. The 3 km and 1 km estimates point in the same direction but are less precise, due to the smaller number of treated regions.5657To further explore the mechanisms through which DCR openings affect drug-related hospitalizations, I disaggregate the main outcome into five diagnostic58sub-categories: (i) mental and behavioral disorders due to psychoactive substance use, (ii) viral hepatitis, (iii) HIV, (iv) poisoning by narcotics and psychodysleptics, and (v) fatal drug-related hospitalizations. Accidental poisoning is excluded due to the very small number of cases.5960Figure 7: Event study: Sub-outcome estimates,61within 5 km, \pm 5-year window6263Note: The figure plots event-study coefficients from the doubly robust Callaway & Sant’Anna (2021) estimator for four diagnostic sub-categories of drug-related hospitalizations. Each panel uses a separate y -axis to accommodate differences in scale across outcomes. The sample includes all staggered-treated MedStat regions within 5 km of a64DCR that opened between 1998 and 2022. The reference period is a universal base period. Regions near DCRs that opened before 1998 (always-treated) are excluded. 95% confidence intervals are based on standard errors clustered at the MedStat region level.6566Table 7: Overall ATT by Outcome Category and Buffer Zone6768Outcome | 1 km | 3 km | 5 km6970Mental/Behavioral | -0.354 | -0.202 | -0.381*7172| (0.382) | (0.244) | (0.220)7374Hepatitis | -0.270 | -0.413 | -0.4067576| (0.486) | (0.270) | (0.250)7778HIV | 0.063 | -0.239 | -0.3407980| (0.801) | (0.337) | (0.294)8182Narcotics | 1.186*** | 0.549*** | 0.390**8384| (0.288) | (0.187) | (0.165)8586Drug-related (fatal) | -1.207*** | -0.290 | -0.354**8788| (0.137) | (0.215) | (0.178)8990Treated regions | 7 | 35 | 509192Control regions | 608 (never-treated) | |9394Note: Each cell reports the overall ATT from95the doubly robust Callaway & Sant’Anna (2021) estimator with96never-treated controls and a universal base period. Outcomes are97log hospitalization rates per 100,000 inhabitants. Sub-outcomes:98mental and behavioral disorders (F11–F19), viral hepatitis (B15–B19),99HIV disease (B20–B24), narcotics/psychodysleptics (T40). The 1 km100estimates are identified from a single treated region per cohort and101should be interpreted with caution. Regions near DCRs opened before1021998 excluded. Standard errors clustered at the Medstat region level.103Significance: {}^{***}p<0.01 , {}^{**}p<0.05 , {}^{*}p<0.10 .104105Figure 7 and Table 7 repeat the estimation for the five diagnostic categories. From Table 7, the ATT estimates for hospitalizations due to mental and behavioral disorders are consistently negative and marginally significant at the 5 km buffer specification. Moreover, the estimates of hepatitis are also negative and of comparable magnitude but insignificant. However, the event-study path in Figure 7 shows a gradual decline that builds from year 3 onward, consistent with a slow-acting reduction in needle sharing. HIV estimates are insignificant and close to zero. Narcotics poisoning hospitalizations rise after DCR opening and remain positive across all buffers. Lastly, fatal drug-related hospitalizations move in the opposite direction, falling after opening the DCR. The opposing patterns in narcotics and fatal hospitalizations suggest that DCRs convert events that would otherwise be fatal into survivable hospital contacts.106107### 6.1 Mechanisms108109The sub-outcome results point to two channels through which DCRs reduce drug-related hospitalizations. The first is overdose supervision. DCRs provide a medically supervised environment where staff can control the dose consumed, perform resuscitation, and call emergency services when an overdose occurs. When supervision prevents a death that would otherwise happen outside a hospital, the consequence is a simultaneous decline in fatal drug-related hospitalizations and a rise in non-fatal poisoning contacts, as events that would have ended in death instead end in a hospital visit. The results are consistent with this prediction. Drug-related fatal hospitalizations fall near DCRs, by approximately 30% at 5 km, while narcotics and psychodysleptics hospitalizations rise by 47% at 5 km. The opposing signs and spatial concentration of these two effects are consistent with a110substitution from out-of-hospital mortality to in-hospital survival. Since I cannot observe overdose events that do not result in a hospital contact, this interpretation is suggestive rather than identified, but it is consistent with the clinical evidence on DCR-based overdose reversals111(Kerr et al., 2017; Hedrich, 2004).112113The second channel is harm reduction for blood-borne diseases. DCRs distribute sterile injection equipment, which reduces needle sharing and the transmission of viral hepatitis and HIV. Unlike overdose prevention, these effects are expected to emerge slowly, since disease progression and hospitalization take years to follow from initial infection. The event-study path for hepatitis is consistent with this lag. The estimates are close to zero in the first two post-treatment years and become progressively more negative from year 3 onward, reaching approximately 40% below baseline by year 5. HIV estimates are near zero through out the analysis, with wide confidence intervals. A longer panel and additional out-patient data would be needed to determine whether these trends continue and to get more precise estimates.114115A third potential channel is referral to treatment and social services. DCRs routinely connect users to addiction treatment, primary care, and housing support, and a sustained reduction in hospitalizations could partly reflect better long-term management of drug dependence. The regional hospitalization panel used in this paper does not contain information on treatment entry or service use, so I cannot separate this channel from the two described above. It remains a plausible additional mechanism that future work with information on treatment take up data could examine.116117Table A19: Robustness: Overall ATT Across Estimators — 5 km buffer, \pm 5-year window118119| CS-DR | Sun & Abraham | Synthetic DiD | Stacked DiD120121ATT | -0.431** | -0.438** | -0.362* | -0.149***122123| (0.218) | (0.208) | (0.205) | (0.038)124125% change | -35.0% | -35.5% | -30.3% | -13.9%126127Treated regions | 50 | | |128129Control regions | 608 | | |130131Observations | 17,250 | | |132133Note: All specifications use the 5 km buffer,134never-treated comparison regions (640 regions), and a \pm 5-year window135