Integrating reproductive health care into substance use disorder services

Patient navigation for perinatal substance use disorder treatment: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Substance use during the perinatal period (i.e., pregnancy through the first year postpartum) can pose significant maternal and infant health risks. However, access to lifesaving medications and standard care remains low for perinatal persons who use substances. This lack of substance use disorder treatment access stems from fragmented services, stigma, and social determinants of health-related barriers that could be addressed using patient navigators. This systematic review describes patient navigation models of care for perinatal people who use substances and associated outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a structured search of peer-reviewed, US-focused, English- or Spanish-language articles from 2000 to 2023 focused on 1) patient navigation, 2) prenatal and postpartum care, and 3) substance use treatment programs using PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases.

RESULTS

After meeting eligibility criteria, 17 studies were included in this review. The majority (n=8) described outpatient patient navigation programs, with notable hospital (n=4) and residential (n=3) programs. Patient navigation was associated with reduced maternal substance use, increased receipt of services, and improved maternal and neonatal health. Findings were mixed for engagement in substance use disorder treatment and child custody outcomes. Programs that co-located care, engaged patients across the perinatal period, and worked to build trust and communication with family members and service providers were particularly successful.

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation may be a promising strategy for improving maternal and infant health outcomes among perinatal persons who use substances. More experimental research is needed to test the effect of patient navigation programs for perinatal persons who use substances compared to other models of care.

Narrative review: Revised Principles and Practice Recommendations for Adolescent Substance Use Treatment and Policy

OBJECTIVE

In 2014, the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse released the "Principles of Adolescent Substance Use Disorder Treatment," summarizing previously established evidence and outlining principles of effective assessment, treatment, and aftercare for substance use disorders (SUD). Winters et al. (2018) updated these principles to be developmentally appropriate for adolescents. This review builds on that formative work and recommends updated adolescent assessment, treatment, and aftercare principles and practices.

METHOD

The Cochrane, MEDLINE-PubMed, and PsychInfo databases were searched for relevant studies with new data about adolescent substance use services. This article updates the 13 original principles; condenses the 8 original modalities into 5 practices; and highlights implications for public policy approaches, future funding, and research.

RESULTS

Key recommendations from the principles include integrating care for co-occurring mental health disorders and SUDs, improving service accessibility including through the educational system, maintaining engagement, and addressing tension between agencies when collaborating with other youth service systems. Updates to the treatment practices include adoption of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), investment in social programs and family involvement in treatment, expanding access to behavioral therapies and medications, increasing funding to harm reduction services, supporting reimbursement for continuing care services, and increasing investment in research.

CONCLUSION

These revised principles of adolescent assessment, treatment, and aftercare approaches and practices aim to establish guidance and evidence-based practices for treatment providers, while encouraging necessary support from policymakers and funding agencies to improve the standard of care for adolescent SUD services.

"Meeting Patients Where They're at": Clinician Perspectives on Integration of Family Planning Services into Office-Based Addiction Treatment

OBJECTIVES

To study clinician perspectives on the feasibility of incorporating family planning services within office-based addiction treatment (OBAT) clinics. We sought to understand the unique facilitators of and barriers to the integration of contraceptive services within the OBAT model with a goal to support the design and implementation of a program tailored to meet the reproductive health needs of patients with substance use disorder.

METHODS

After obtaining institutional review board approval, we conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with OBAT clinicians (registered nurses, advanced practice registered nurses, and physicians) at a tertiary-care safety-net hospital. Interview transcripts were analyzed using deductive codes utilizing key components of the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services and Ottawa Decision Support Frameworks.

RESULTS

We analyzed 20 interviews. Our data noted 3 major themes: (1) evidence to support integration of family planning and OBAT, (2) inherent strengths and facilitative factors of the OBAT model, and (3) barriers and challenges of the OBAT model influencing successful integration. Strengths included the destigmatizing and trust-building OBAT approach to care, common use of patient-centered counseling, and providers' nuanced understanding of substance use disorder-specific impacts on reproductive health. Barriers included time constraints, balancing urgent patient recovery needs, the desire for additional contraception provision training, and concern for potential contraceptive coercion.

CONCLUSIONS

Office-based addiction treatment clinics have inherent strengths that may make it a beneficial location for integrated family planning services. Future research should elicit patient perspectives to ensure the implementation of a family planning program in OBAT that supports patients' reproductive goals while avoiding stigma or reproductive coercion.

How the war on drugs impacts social determinants of health beyond the criminal legal system

There is a growing recognition in the fields of public health and medicine that social determinants of health (SDOH) play a key role in driving health inequities and disparities among various groups, such that a focus upon individual-level medical interventions will have limited effects without the consideration of the macro-level factors that dictate how effectively individuals can manage their health. While the health impacts of mass incarceration have been explored, less attention has been paid to how the "war on drugs" in the United States exacerbates many of the factors that negatively impact health and wellbeing, disproportionately impacting low-income communities and people of colour who already experience structural challenges including discrimination, disinvestment, and racism. The U.S. war on drugs has subjected millions to criminalisation, incarceration, and lifelong criminal records, disrupting or altogether eliminating their access to adequate resources and supports to live healthy lives. This paper examines the ways that "drug war logic" has become embedded in key SDOH and systems, such as employment, education, housing, public benefits, family regulation (commonly referred to as the child welfare system), the drug treatment system, and the healthcare system. Rather than supporting the health and wellbeing of individuals, families, and communities, the U.S. drug war has exacerbated harm in these systems through practices such as drug testing, mandatory reporting, zero-tolerance policies, and coerced treatment. We argue that, because the drug war has become embedded in these systems, medical practitioners can play a significant role in promoting individual and community health by reducing the impact of criminalisation upon healthcare service provision and by becoming engaged in policy reform efforts. KEY MESSAGESA drug war logic that prioritises and justifies drug prohibition, criminalisation, and punishment has fuelled the expansion of drug surveillance and control mechanisms in numerous facets of everyday life in the United States negatively impacting key social determinants of health, including housing, education, income, and employment.The U.S. drug war's frontline enforcers are no longer police alone but now include physicians, nurses, teachers, neighbours, social workers, employers, landlords, and others.Physicians and healthcare providers can play a significant role in promoting individual and community health by reducing the impact of criminalisation upon healthcare service provision and engaging in policy reform.