scholarly journals Patient-centred care for addiction treatment: a scoping review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e024588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Marchand ◽  
Scott Beaumont ◽  
Jordan Westfall ◽  
Scott MacDonald ◽  
Scott Harrison ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Substance Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Addiction Treatment ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Patient Centred Care ◽  
Healthcare Settings ◽  
Problematic Substance Use ◽  
Problematic Substance

IntroductionSubstance use disorders are chronic conditions that require a multidimensional treatment approach. Despite ongoing efforts to diversify such treatments, evidence continues to illuminate modest rates of treatment engagement and perceived barriers to treatment. Patient-centred care (PCC) is one approach that may strengthen the responsiveness of treatments for people with problematic substance use. The aim of this scoping review is to explore how the principles of PCC have been implemented and operationalised in healthcare settings for people with problematic substance use.Methods and analysisThis scoping review follows the iterative stages of the Arksey and O’Malley framework. Both empirical (from Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ISI Web of Science) and grey literature references will be considered if they focused on populations with problematic substance use and described or measured PCC or one of its principles in a health-oriented context. Two reviewers will independently screen references in two successive stages of title/abstract screening and then full-text screening for references meeting title/abstract criteria. A descriptive overview, tabular and/or graphical summaries, and a directed content analysis will be carried out on extracted data. This scoping review has been registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/5swvd/).Ethics and disseminationThis review will systematically examine the extent and nature of existing evidence of PCC in addiction research and clinical practice. Such evidence will contribute to the operationalisation of PCC for people with problematic substance use. A multidisciplinary team has been gathered to represent the needs of people with problematic substance use, healthcare providers and decision-makers. The team’s knowledge users will be engaged throughout this review and will participate in dissemination activities (eg, workshops, presentations, publications, reports).

scholarly journals Former inpatients’ narratives of substance use four years after substance use disorder treatment: A qualitative follow-up study

2021 ◽  
pp. 145507252110507
Author(s):  
Jacob Hystad ◽  
Turid Wangensteen
Keyword(s):  
Substance Use ◽  
Treatment Outcome ◽  
Substance Use Disorder ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Successful Treatment Outcome ◽  
Problematic Substance Use ◽  
Problematic Substance ◽  
Pre Treatment

Aim: The aim of this study was to explore the narratives of former substance use disorder (SUD) inpatients about substance use after their discharge from long-term SUD treatment in 2017. Method: We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with 11 former inpatients of SUD treatment. The data were analysed using a qualitative, thematic analysis model. Findings: During the analysis, two main themes emerged pertaining to participant reflections on substance use – their experience of non-problematic substance use (that is, substance use without declining into pre-treatment levels of misuse behaviours) and problematic substance use (that is, substance use associated with destructive patterns). All participants except one had engaged in substance use after their discharge three to four years ago. The commonly used substance was alcohol, which also appeared to be the most common substance for which there was consensus among the informants regarding non-problematic use. Conclusions: Most of the participants continued to use substances in some way, and some reported that such use did not affect them negatively. Healthcare providers and therapists in SUD treatment should avoid defining a relapse or failed treatment outcome in concrete terms. What is perceived as an actual relapse or a failed treatment outcome is highly subjective. Furthermore, complete sobriety might not necessarily be the best or the only way to measure the SUD treatment stay. An improvement in the quality of life and well-being, even when core symptoms are still present, may be considered a successful treatment outcome.

scholarly journals Mapping, assessing and promoting multiple psychological senses of community (MPSOC) through clinical pathways for treating substance use problems

2021 ◽  
pp. 145507252098597
Author(s):  
Nina Kavita Heggen Bahl ◽  
Anne Signe Landheim ◽  
Hilde Eileen Nafstad ◽  
Rolv Mikkel Blakar ◽  
Morten A. Brodahl
Keyword(s):  
Substance Use ◽  
Clinical Pathways ◽  
Collaborative Study ◽  
Social Situation ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Social Situations ◽  
Recovery Processes ◽  
Substance Use Problems ◽  
Problematic Substance Use ◽  
Problematic Substance

Aim: The recent nationally implemented clinical pathways for the treatment of substance use problems in Norway require mapping and assessing of patients’ needs, challenges, and resources. However, there is a lack of tools for systematically mapping and assessing patients’ social situations and social networks as part of the national guidelines. The aim of this article is to present a tool developed to map and assess the patient’s social situation, and to propose approaches for promoting multiple psychological senses of community (MPSOC) through clinical pathways for treating substance use problems. Methods: The proposed tool and approaches are developed based on findings in a previous in-depth collaborative study of MPSOC and recovery among people with substance use problems who received help and services from Norwegian municipalities. Findings: The findings suggest that multiple communities (geographical, relational and ideal) and senses of communities (within and outside treatment) simultaneously can influence individual recovery processes from problematic substance use in both positive as well as negative ways. As such, these community dimensions are of central importance to include in mapping and assessing of patients’ social situations, as well as in the promotion of MPSOC through clinical pathways. Conclusions: The suggested tool and approaches can increase the likelihood of achieving key aims of the national clinical pathways. Most important, mapping, assessing and promoting MPSOC through clinical pathways may promote long-term recovery processes and positive recovery capital for persons with substance use problems.

scholarly journals A scoping review of registry captured indicators for evaluating quality of critical care in ICU

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Issrah Jawad ◽  
Sumayyah Rashan ◽  
Chathurani Sigera ◽  
Jorge Salluh ◽  
Arjen M. Dondorp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background Excess morbidity and mortality following critical illness is increasingly attributed to potentially avoidable complications occurring as a result of complex ICU management (Berenholtz et al., J Crit Care 17:1-2, 2002; De Vos et al., J Crit Care 22:267-74, 2007; Zimmerman J Crit Care 1:12-5, 2002). Routine measurement of quality indicators (QIs) through an Electronic Health Record (EHR) or registries are increasingly used to benchmark care and evaluate improvement interventions. However, existing indicators of quality for intensive care are derived almost exclusively from relatively narrow subsets of ICU patients from high-income healthcare systems. The aim of this scoping review is to systematically review the literature on QIs for evaluating critical care, identify QIs, map their definitions, evidence base, and describe the variances in measurement, and both the reported advantages and challenges of implementation. Method We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane libraries from the earliest available date through to January 2019. To increase the sensitivity of the search, grey literature and reference lists were reviewed. Minimum inclusion criteria were a description of one or more QIs designed to evaluate care for patients in ICU captured through a registry platform or EHR adapted for quality of care surveillance. Results The search identified 4780 citations. Review of abstracts led to retrieval of 276 full-text articles, of which 123 articles were accepted. Fifty-one unique QIs in ICU were classified using the three components of health care quality proposed by the High Quality Health Systems (HQSS) framework. Adverse events including hospital acquired infections (13.7%), hospital processes (54.9%), and outcomes (31.4%) were the most common QIs identified. Patient reported outcome QIs accounted for less than 6%. Barriers to the implementation of QIs were described in 35.7% of articles and divided into operational barriers (51%) and acceptability barriers (49%). Conclusions Despite the complexity and risk associated with ICU care, there are only a small number of operational indicators used. Future selection of QIs would benefit from a stakeholder-driven approach, whereby the values of patients and communities and the priorities for actionable improvement as perceived by healthcare providers are prioritized and include greater focus on measuring discriminable processes of care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document