Stigmatizing Clients with Mental Health Conditions: An Assessment of Social Work Student Attitudes

Stigma Against Patients With Substance Use Disorders Among Health Care Professionals and Trainees and Stigma-Reducing Interventions: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

In this systematic review, the authors examine the prevalence and extent of stigmatizing attitudes among health care professionals (HCPs) and trainees against patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), including research on interventions to reduce stigma.

METHOD

The authors searched 7 databases for articles published from January 1, 2011, through February 15, 2023, that quantified SUD stigma among HCPs or trainees. Inclusion criteria allowed both observational and intervention studies from the United States or Canada to be included in this review. Quality assessment was applied to all included studies; studies were not excluded based on quality.

RESULTS

A total of 1,992 unique articles were identified of which 32 articles (17 observational studies and 15 intervention studies), all conducted in the United States, met the inclusion criteria. Half of the included studies (16 of 32) were published in 2020 or later. Most of the intervention studies (13 of 15) used a single-group pre-post design; interventions involved didactics and/or interactions with persons with SUDs. The 32 included studies used a total of 19 different measures of stigma. All 17 observational studies showed some degree of HCP or trainee stigma against patients with SUDs. Most intervention studies (12 of 15) found small but statistically significant reductions in stigma after intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

SUD stigma exists among HCPs and trainees. Some interventions to reduce this stigma had positive impacts, but future studies with larger, diverse participants and comparison groups are needed. Heterogeneity among studies and stigma measures limits the ability to interpret results across studies. Future rigorous research is needed to determine validated, consensus measures of SUD stigma among HCPs and trainees, identify stigma scores that are associated with clinical outcomes, and develop effective antistigma interventions for HCPs and trainees.

Health Care Provider Stigma Toward Patients With Substance Use Disorders: Protocol for a Nationally Representative Survey

BACKGROUND

The US overdose epidemic is an escalating public health emergency, accounting for over 100,000 deaths annually. Despite the availability of medications for opioid use disorders, provider-level barriers, such as negative attitudes, exacerbate the treatment gap in clinical care settings. Assessing the prevalence and intensity of provider stigma, defined as the negative perceptions and behaviors that providers embody and enact toward patients with substance use disorders, across providers with different specialties, is critical to expanding the delivery of substance use treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To thoroughly understand provider stigma toward patients with substance use disorders, we conducted a nationwide survey of emergency medicine and primary care physicians and dentists using a questionnaire designed to reveal how widely and intensely provider attitudes and stigma can impact these providers' clinical practices in caring for their patients. The survey also queried providers' stigma and clinical practices toward other chronic conditions, which can then be compared with their stigma and practices related to substance use disorders.

METHODS

Our cross-sectional survey was mailed to a nationally representative sample of primary care physicians, emergency medicine physicians, and dentists (N=3011), obtained by American Medical Association and American Dental Association licensees based on specified selection criteria. We oversampled nonmetropolitan practice areas, given the potential differences in provider stigma and available resources in these regions compared with metropolitan areas. Data collection followed a recommended series of contacts with participants per the Dillman Total Design Method, with mixed-modality options offered (email, mail, fax, and phone). A gradually increasing compensation scale (maximum US$250) was implemented to recruit chronic nonresponders and assess the association between requiring higher incentives to participate and providers stigma. The primary outcome, provider stigma, was measured using the Medical Condition Regard Scale, which inquired about participants' views on substance use and other chronic conditions. Additional survey measures included familiarity and social engagement with people with substance use disorders; clinical practices (screening, treating, and referring for a range of chronic conditions); subjective norms and social desirability; knowledge and prior education; and descriptions of their patient populations.

RESULTS

Data collection was facilitated through collaboration with the National Opinion Research Center between October 2020 and October 2022. The overall Council of American Survey Research Organizations completion rate was 53.62% (1240/2312.7; physicians overall: 855/1681.9, 50.83% [primary care physicians: 506/1081.3, 46.79%; emergency medicine physicians: 349/599.8, 58.2%]; dentists: 385/627.1, 61.4%). The ineligibility rate among those screened is applied to those not screened, causing denominators to include fractional numbers.

CONCLUSIONS

Using systematically quantified data on the prevalence and intensity of provider stigma toward substance use disorders in health care, we can provide evidence-based improvement strategies and policies to inform the development and implementation of stigma-reduction interventions for providers to address their perceptions and treatment of substance use.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/47548.

Advances in Alzheimer's imaging are changing the experience of Alzheimer's disease

Neuroimaging is advancing a new definition of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Using imaging biomarkers, clinicians may begin to diagnose the disease by identifying pathology and neurodegeneration in either cognitively impaired or unimpaired adults. This "biomarker-based" diagnosis may allow clinicians novel opportunities to use interventions that either delay the onset or slow the progression of cognitive decline, but it will also bring novel challenges. How will changing the definition of AD from a clinical to a biomarker construct change the experience of living with the disease? Knowledge of AD biomarker status can affect how individuals feel about themselves (internalized stigma) and how others judge them (public stigma). Following a review of AD stigma, we appraise how advances in diagnosis may enable or interrupt its transfer from clinical to preclinical stages and then explore conceptual and pragmatic challenges to addressing stigma in routine care.

Health student regard for substance-using patients as measured by the Medical Condition Regard Scale: a systematic review

Objectives

As clinical impartiality is an accepted basic principle of ethical practice, any proactive exercises that may inform selection, training, clinical placements, and other interventions, which promote future positive and equitable professional conduct, thus guarding against future discriminatory attitudes are germane. Within this context, the purpose of this review was to identify trends and patterns in health student, namely future practitioners’, regard for substance-using patients using the Medical Condition Regard Scale.

Methods

Six electronic databases were systematically searched for studies that used the Medical Condition Regard Scale as an outcome measure in assessing health student regard for drug-using patients. Academics who had published in this area were also consulted to recommend texts that would complement the above citation sourcing process. Following an elimination of duplicates, the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as conducting citation searches, 16 studies were incorporated in the final review. Although the quality of all included studies was satisfactory, no study was free from a potential source of bias.

Results

This review found that patients with drug-use problems were consistently held in the lowest echelons of regard by trainee health practitioners. The impact of sex, age, year of course, and personal exposure to mental health difficulties in predicting negative regard was unclear.

Conclusions

Unless addressed, patients with drug problems may have a high potential for future treatment marginalisation by tomorrow’s health professionals. This scenario needs to be proactively managed by all stakeholders through a greater investment in educational and clinical training placement opportunities.

Health student regard for substance-using patients as measured by the Medical Condition Regard Scale: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

As clinical impartiality is an accepted basic principle of ethical practice, any proactive exercises that may inform selection, training, clinical placements, and other interventions, which promote future positive and equitable professional conduct, thus guarding against future discriminatory attitudes are germane. Within this context, the purpose of this review was to identify trends and patterns in health student, namely future practitioners', regard for substance-using patients using the Medical Condition Regard Scale.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were systematically searched for studies that used the Medical Condition Regard Scale as an outcome measure in assessing health student regard for drug-using patients. Academics who had published in this area were also consulted to recommend texts that would complement the above citation sourcing process. Following an elimination of duplicates, the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as conducting citation searches, 16 studies were incorporated in the final review. Although the quality of all included studies was satisfactory, no study was free from a potential source of bias.

RESULTS

This review found that patients with drug-use problems were consistently held in the lowest echelons of regard by trainee health practitioners. The impact of sex, age, year of course, and personal exposure to mental health difficulties in predicting negative regard was unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

Unless addressed, patients with drug problems may have a high potential for future treatment marginalisation by tomorrow's health professionals. This scenario needs to be proactively managed by all stakeholders through a greater investment in educational and clinical training placement opportunities.