"That original tension". Negotiating abstinence in clinicians' accounts of harm reduction in nonresidential treatment of heroin withdrawal

Facilitators of and barriers to healthcare providers' adoption of harm reduction in cannabis use: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

The high prevalence of cannabis use and the potential for negative effects indicate the need for effective prevention strategies and treatment of people who use cannabis. Studies show that harm reduction (HR) in cannabis use is effective in minimising the harmful consequences of the substance. However, health professionals often misunderstand it and resist its adoption due to various obstacles. To our knowledge, there has been no review of the scientific literature on the factors that facilitate or hinder practitioners' adoption of HR in cannabis use. To fill this gap, we aim to identify, through a scoping review, facilitators and barriers to healthcare providers' adoption of HR in cannabis use in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Our methodology will be guided by the six-step model initially proposed by Arksey and O'Malley (2005). The search strategy will be executed on different databases (Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, Sociological Abstracts, Érudit, BASE, Google Web and Google Scholar) and will cover articles published between 1990 and October 2022. Empirical studies published in French or English in an OECD country and identifying factors that facilitate or hinder healthcare providers' adoption of HR in cannabis use, will be included. Reference lists of the selected articles as well as relevant systematic reviews will be scanned to identify any missed publications by the electronic searches.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required. The results will be disseminated through various activities (eg, publication in peer-reviewed journals, conferences, webinars and knowledge translation activities). The results will also allow us to conduct a future study aiming to develop and implement a knowledge translation process among healthcare practitioners working with youth in Quebec in order to enhance their adoption of HR in cannabis use.

The old and familiar meets the new and unknown: patient and clinician perceptions on e-cigarettes for smoking reduction in UK general practice, a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Clinicians could promote e-cigarettes for harm reduction to people who smoke but cannot stop, but many clinicians feel uneasy doing so. In a randomized controlled trial (RCT), primary care clinicians offered free e-cigarettes and encouraged people with chronic diseases who were unwilling to stop smoking to switch to vaping. We interviewed clinicians and patients to understand how to adopt harm reduction in routine practice.

DESIGN

Qualitative analysis nested within an RCT, comprising thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with primary care clinicians who delivered the trial intervention, and patients who took part.

SETTING

Primary care clinics in England.

PARTICIPANTS/CASES

Twenty-one patients and 11 clinicians, purposively sampled from an RCT.

MEASUREMENTS

We qualitatively explored patients' and clinicians' experiences of: being offered/offering an e-cigarette, past and current perceptions about e-cigarettes and applying a harm reduction approach.

FINDINGS

Four themes captured clinicians' and patients' reported perspectives. These were: (1) concepts of safety/risk, with clinicians concerned about recommending a product with unknown long-term risks and patients preferring the known risks of cigarettes; (2) clinicians felt they were going out on a limb by offering these as though they were prescribing them, whereas patients did not share this view; (3) equating quitting with success, as both patients and clinicians conceptualized e-cigarettes as quitting aids; and (4) unchanged views, as clinicians reported that training did not change their existing views about e-cigarettes. These themes were united by the higher-order concept: 'The old and familiar meets the new and unknown', as a contradiction between this new approach and long-established methods underpinned these concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

A qualitative analysis found barriers obstructing clinicians and patients from easily accepting e-cigarettes for harm reduction, rather than as aids to support smoking cessation: clinicians had difficulty reconciling harm reduction with their existing ethical models of practice, even following targeted training, and patients saw e-cigarettes as quitting aids.

Harm Reduction – Ideals and Paradoxes

Aim

The aim of the article is to critically reflect on the harm reduction approach used in Danish substance abuse treatment.

Data

The article is based on qualitative interviews with staff at treatment institutions in Copenhagen.

Themes and Conclusions

Three themes are addressed. First, our data indicate that low-threshold methadone treatment is difficult to combine with a long-term goal of abstinence. In fact, many harm reduction proponents among staff are directly opposed to treatment models in which abstinence is a goal. Second, we illustrate how the development of harm reduction measures is embedded in a socio-political trend focusing on a combined “autonomization/responsibilization” of social clients. This focus on clients as autonomous and responsible subjects clashes with another central conception among staff: the idea that heroin addicts are slaves to their substance use and hence cannot be treated as fully rational human beings. Third, the article analyses the relationship between harm reduction and social integration. Although social integration of substance abusers is part of the rationale behind harm reduction measures, this goal is difficult to reach with a group of clients as marginalized as the ones in focus.

Provider views of harm reduction versus abstinence policies within homeless services for dually diagnosed adults

Harm reduction is considered by many to be a legitimate alternative to abstinence-based services for dually diagnosed individuals, yet there is limited understanding of how varying approaches affect front-line practice within services for homeless adults. This paper examines how front-line providers working with individuals who have experienced homelessness, serious mental illness, and addiction view policies of harm reduction versus abstinence within two different approaches to homeless services: the traditional or "treatment first" approach that requires abstinence, and the more recent housing first approach that incorporates harm reduction. As part of a federally funded qualitative study, 129 in-depth interviews conducted with 41 providers were thematically analyzed to understand how providers view harm reduction versus abstinence approaches. Themes included the following: (a) harm reduction as a welcomed alternative, (b) working with ambiguity, and (c) accommodating abstinence. Drawing on recovery principles, the authors consider the broader implications of the findings for behavioral health care with this population.

Harm reduction and 12 steps: complementary, oppositional, or something in-between?

BACKGROUND

Initially born of the desire to prevent the transmission of HIV among injection drug users, harm reduction presents a relatively new option for assisting individuals who struggle with drug and alcohol use. Twelve-step programs such as Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) are widely recognized as being a representative example of abstinence-based treatment and are often seen as oppositional to harm reduction.

METHODS

The purpose of this study is to examine the ways in which harm reduction workers interpret the relationship between harm reduction and 12-step approaches to treatment. The study draws upon qualitative interviews with 18 staff members from two harm reduction-based substance use treatment programs. (1)

RESULTS

Two central themes emerge from the qualitative data: (1) harm reduction and 12-step approaches can be complementary; and (2) 12-step approaches in high-threshold treatment settings may differ significantly from their original philosophy and intent. A third, much less prominent theme reflects some respondents' skepticism about the capacity of the two approaches to work together given the resistance to harm reduction by some in the 12-step community.

CONCLUSION

Complementary conceptualizations of harm reduction and 12-step approaches have the potential to broaden the range of options available to people experiencing substance use problems.

Approaches to methadone treatment: harm reduction in theory and practice

The paper analyses methadone treatment in Copenhagen -- as it is described by methadone users and staff at different outpatient centres. The starting point is a theoretical model distinguishing between two different approaches to methadone treatment: 'palliative' and 'curative'. Included in the model are three dimensions (1) treatment goals at the methadone centres (abstinence vs. stabilisation) (2) treatment focus (focus on addiction vs. focus on the consequences of addiction) and (3) conceptualisation of methadone (methadone as similar to or different from heroin). The paper shows that there is a discrepancy between the attitudes of the staff and those of the users. While the staff favour an almost clear-cut palliative approach to methadone treatment, defining curative goals as both unrealistic and as belonging to the past, the users prefer an approach that does not exclude the goal of abstinence and does not focus on the consequences of drug use alone but also on their problematic relationship to drugs (legal as well as illegal). Furthermore, the users' attitudes towards methadone are far more ambivalent than the staff's. For the users, methadone is not just medicine; it is also a dependence-producing and 'dangerous' drug.

Harm reduction – ideals and paradoxes

Aim

The aim of the article is to critically reflect on the harm reduction approach used in Danish substance abuse treatment.

Data

The article is based on qualitative interviews with staff at treatment institutions in Copenhagen.

Themes and Conclusions

Three themes are addressed. First, our data indicate that low-threshold methadone treatment is difficult to combine with a long-term goal of abstinence. In fact, many harm reduction proponents among staff are directly opposed to treatment models in which abstinence is a goal. Second, we illustrate how the development of harm reduction measures is embedded in a socio-political trend focusing on a combined “autonomization/responsibilization” of social clients. This focus on clients as autonomous and responsible subjects clashes with another central conception among staff: the idea that heroin addicts are slaves to their substance use and hence cannot be treated as fully rational human beings. Third, the article analyses the relationship between harm reduction and social integration. Although social integration of substance abusers is part of the rationale behind harm reduction measures, this goal is difficult to reach with a group of clients as marginalized as the ones in focus.