Browsing by Subject "Medication for opioid use disorder"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Barriers impacting the POINT pragmatic trial: the unavoidable overlap between research and intervention procedures in “real-world” research
    (BMC, 2021-02-04) Dir, Allyson L.; Watson, Dennis P.; Zhiss, Matthew; Taylor, Lisa; Bray, Bethany C.; McGuire, Alan; Psychiatry, School of Medicine
    Background: This manuscript provides a research update to the ongoing pragmatic trial of Project POINT (Planned Outreach, Intervention, Naloxone, and Treatment), an emergency department-based peer recovery coaching intervention for linking patients with opioid use disorder to evidence-based treatment. The research team has encountered a number of challenges related to the "real-world" study setting since the trial began. Using an implementation science lens, we sought to identify and describe barriers impacting both the intervention and research protocols of the POINT study, which are often intertwined in pragmatic trials due to the focus on external validity. Method: Qualitative data were collected from 3 peer recovery coaches, 2 peer recovery coach supervisors, and 3 members of the research team. Questions and deductive qualitative analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: Nine unique barriers were noted, with 5 of these barriers impacting intervention and research protocol implementation simultaneously. These simultaneous barriers were timing of intervention delivery, ineffective communication with emergency department staff, lack of privacy in the emergency department, the fast-paced emergency department setting, and patient's limited resources. Together, these barriers represent the intervention characteristics, inner setting, and outer setting domains of the CFIR. Conclusion: Results highlight the utility of employing an implementation science framework to assess implementation issues in pragmatic trials and how this approach might be used as a quality assurance mechanism given the considerable overlap that exists between research and intervention protocols in real-world trial settings. Previously undocumented changes to the trial design that have been made as a result of the identified barriers are discussed.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Health care workers' perspectives on care for patients with injection drug use associated infective endocarditis (IDU-IE)
    (BMC, 2022-05-31) Butt, Saira; McClean, Mitchell; Turner, Jane; Roth, Sarah; Rollins, Angela L.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Despite high morbidity and mortality, patients with injection drug use associated infective endocarditis (IDU-IE) lack standardized care, and experience prolonged hospitalization and variable substance use disorder (SUD) management. Our study's objective was to elicit perspectives of health care workers (HCWs) who deliver care to this population by understanding their perceived patient, provider, and system-level resources and barriers. Methods: This qualitative study included interviews of HCWs providing care to patients with IDU-IE from January 2017 to December 2019 at a single Midwest academic center. Based on electronic medical record queries to determine high and low rates of referral to SUD treatment, HCWs were selected using stratified random sampling followed by convenience sampling of non-physician HCWs and a patient. Study participants were recruited via email and verbal consent was obtained. The final sample included 11 hospitalists, 3 specialists (including 2 cardiovascular surgery providers), 3 case managers, 2 social workers, 1 nurse, and 1 patient. Qualitative semi-structured interviews explored challenges and resources related to caring for this population. Qualitative Data Analysis (QDA) Minor Lite was used for thematic data using an inductive approach. Results: Three major thematic categories emerged relative to patient-level barriers (e.g., pain control, difficult patient interactions, social determinants of health), provider-level barriers (e.g., inequity, expectations for recovery, varying levels of hope, communication style, prescribing medication for SUD), and system-level barriers (e.g., repeat surgery, placement, resources for SUD and mental health). The need to address underlying SUD was a prominent theme. Conclusion: Practical steps we can take to improve treatment for this population include training and coaching HCWs on a more person-centered approach to communication and transparent decision-making around pain management, surgery decisions, and expectations for SUD treatment.