Search

Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment settings experienced several abrupt changes, including decreased admissions, reduction in services, and modified requirements for medication for substance use disorder. While these changes were implemented to facilitate the maintenance of important treatment options, the ethical consequences of such changes remained unknown. The current study aimed to explore ethical issues related to COVID-19-related changes reported by counselors in SUD treatment facilities. Method: From May to August 2020, we conducted 60 to 90 minutes in-depth interviews with 18 front-line staff in 1 residential and 1 outpatient treatment program, exploring issues drawn from the ethical principles of the national organization representing SUD counselors. Counselors volunteered to participate via phone or email, and participation was confidential. Interviews were conducted via videoconferencing. Topics included day-to-day experiences of ethical dilemmas in the workplace, particularly during the COVID-19 era. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and checked for accuracy and a trained team of analysts then coded transcripts using thematic analysis. Results: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, SUD treatment programs quickly modified procedures to adhere to public health mandates while also continuing to offer care to clients. SUD counselors reported several ways their programs adapted new and creative procedures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. SUD counselors also identified several novel ethical dilemmas that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, often resulting from the counselor balancing the needs for responding to public health mandates with providing services to clients. There were several ways that COVID-19 related changes resulted in therapeutic challenges for some clients, and the SUD counselors highlighted ways that changes resulted in more flexible services for other clients. Conclusions: This study highlights the quick response to COVID-19 that occurred within SUD treatment. While these changes resulted in novel ethical dilemmas, they also offered more flexible and client-centered approaches to treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Public health detailing is an intervention in which a public health professional visits health care providers to educate them about evidence-based approaches to improve health. The San Francisco Department of Public Health conducted a public health detailing program from 2016 to 2018 to improve sexual health care and preexposure prophylaxis services in the city. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study to understand the implementation of detailing and explore examples of changes to clinicians' clinical behaviors. We surveyed 203 clinicians, conducted 60-minute qualitative interviews with 7 clinicians and 4 detailers, and analyzed tracking forms. We used descriptive statistics to assess associations in the surveys. We used qualitative thematic analysis to understand facilitators and barriers to detailing and identify ways to improve the process and identify its potential benefits. Results: In interviews, both clinicians and detailers had a favorable view of detailing as a tool to connect health department expertise to clinicians. Detailers cited challenges such as limited clinic time, provider turnover, and policies that limit their access to clinicians. These challenges may attenuate the real-world benefits of detailing. Clinicians offered examples of how detailing altered their behaviors, such as taking sexual health histories, building knowledge and confidence about sexual health, and using health department services. Matched surveys (n = 21) showed preliminary changes to prescribing preexposure prophylaxis. Conclusions: Public health detailing is a promising approach to increase clinicians' knowledge and confidence to offer sexual health care services, build buy-in, and support connection to health departments. Detailing programs require sufficient investment and staff support to build lasting and collaborative relationships between clinicians and public health departments and to assess the impact of the intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aims to compare primary care providers and medical assistants in degrees of comfort, confidence, and consistency when addressing behavioral health concerns with patients before and after the implementation of a model of integrated behavioral health in primary care (IBHPC), and evaluate whether these perceptions differ based on increased access to behavioral health clinicians. Methods: This longitudinal study was conducted at 2 primary care clinics in Northern California while implementing an IBHPC model. The Integrated Behavioral Health Staff Perceptions Survey was administered to assess the comfort, confidence, and consistency of behavioral health practices. Confidential online surveys were distributed to primary care faculty and staff members before and post-implementation. Responses from providers and medical assistants were compared between pre- and post-implementation with linear regression analyses. The relationships between accessibility to behavioral health clinicians and a change in comfort, confidence, and consistency of behavioral health practices were explored using a linear mixed-effects model. Results: A total of 35 providers and medical assistants completed the survey both before and post-implementation of IBHPC. Over time, there were increasingly positive perceptions about the consistency of behavioral health screening (P =.03) and overall confidence in addressing behavioral health concerns (P =.005). Comfort in addressing behavioral health concerns did not significantly change for either providers or staff over time. Medical assistants were initially more confident and comfortable addressing behavioral health concerns than providers, but providers' attitudes increased post-IBHPC implementation. Improved access to behavioral health clinicians was associated with greater consistency of screening and referral to specialty mental health care (P <.001). Conclusion: The present study is the first to explore differences in provider and medical assistant perceptions during the course of an IBHPC implementation. Findings underscore the importance of integrating medical assistants, along with providers, into all phases of the implementation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment settings experienced several abrupt changes, including decreased admissions, reduction in services, and modified requirements for medication for substance use disorder. While these changes were implemented to facilitate the maintenance of important treatment options, the ethical consequences of such changes remained unknown. The current study aimed to explore ethical issues related to COVID-19-related changes reported by counselors in SUD treatment facilities. METHOD: From May to August 2020, we conducted 60 to 90 minutes in-depth interviews with 18 front-line staff in 1 residential and 1 outpatient treatment program, exploring issues drawn from the ethical principles of the national organization representing SUD counselors. Counselors volunteered to participate via phone or email, and participation was confidential. Interviews were conducted via videoconferencing. Topics included day-to-day experiences of ethical dilemmas in the workplace, particularly during the COVID-19 era. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and checked for accuracy and a trained team of analysts then coded transcripts using thematic analysis. RESULTS: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, SUD treatment programs quickly modified procedures to adhere to public health mandates while also continuing to offer care to clients. SUD counselors reported several ways their programs adapted new and creative procedures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. SUD counselors also identified several novel ethical dilemmas that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, often resulting from the counselor balancing the needs for responding to public health mandates with providing services to clients. There were several ways that COVID-19 related changes resulted in therapeutic challenges for some clients, and the SUD counselors highlighted ways that changes resulted in more flexible services for other clients. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the quick response to COVID-19 that occurred within SUD treatment. While these changes resulted in novel ethical dilemmas, they also offered more flexible and client-centered approaches to treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adults experiencing homelessness experience a disproportionate burden of health disparities which has further exacerbated mental health, substance use, and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic. As limited data is available to understand the experience of adults experiencing homelessness and their health during this time, the purpose of this study was to explore how COVID-19 may have impacted their mental health, substance use, and ways of coping in this population. Using community-based participatory research, a community advisory board was established and remote individual interviews with 21 adults experiencing homelessness and 10 providers were conducted in Skid Row, Los Angeles. Using a qualitative, data analytic approach, the following major themes emerged: (1) Negative Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health; (2) Negative Impact of COVID-19 on Limitation of Harm Reduction Services; and (3) Coping Strategies Utilized During the COVID-19 Pandemic. More research is needed to understand the impact of this pandemic on underserved communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adults experiencing homelessness experience a disproportionate burden of health disparities which has further exacerbated mental health, substance use, and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic. As limited data is available to understand the experience of adults experiencing homelessness and their health during this time, the purpose of this study was to explore how COVID-19 may have impacted their mental health, substance use, and ways of coping in this population. Using community-based participatory research, a community advisory board was established and remote individual interviews with 21 adults experiencing homelessness and 10 providers were conducted in Skid Row, Los Angeles. Using a qualitative, data analytic approach, the following major themes emerged: (1) Negative Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health; (2) Negative Impact of COVID-19 on Limitation of Harm Reduction Services; and (3) Coping Strategies Utilized During the COVID-19 Pandemic. More research is needed to understand the impact of this pandemic on underserved communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]