A systematic review exploring healthcare professionals' perceptions of take‐home naloxone dispensing in acute care areas
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AIMS: To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions and experiences of take-home naloxone initiatives in acute care settings to gain an understanding of issues facilitating or impeding dispensing. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane, MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched from 15/03/2021 to 18/03/2021, with a follow-up search performed via PubMed on 22/03/2021. The years 2011 to 2021 were included in the search. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic literature review focused on qualitative studies and quantitative survey designs. Synthesis without meta-analysis was undertaken using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Seven articles from the United States of America (5), Australia (1) and Canada (1) with 750 participants were included in the review. Results indicate ongoing stigma towards people who use drugs with preconceived moral concerns regarding take-home naloxone. There was confusion regarding roles and responsibilities in take-home naloxone dispensing and patient education. Similarly, there was a lack of clarity over logistical and financial issues. CONCLUSION: Take-home naloxone is a vital harm reduction initiative. However, barriers exist that prevent the optimum implementation of these initiatives. IMPACT: What is already known: Deaths due to opioid overdose are a global health concern, with take-home naloxone emerging as a key harm reduction scheme. Globally, less than 10% of people who use drugs have access to treatment initiatives, including take-home naloxone. An optimum point of distribution of take-home naloxone is post-acute hospital care. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: There is role confusion regarding responsibility for the provision of take-home naloxone and patient education. This is exacerbated by inconsistent provision of training and education for healthcare professionals. Logistical or financial concerns are common and moral issues are prevalent with some healthcare professionals questioning the ethics of providing take-home naloxone. Stigma towards people who use drugs remains evident in some acute care areas which may impact the use of this intervention. Implications for practice/policy: Further primary research should examine what training and education methods are effective in improving the distribution of take-home naloxone in acute care. Education should focus on reduction of stigma towards people who use drugs to improve the distribution of take-home naloxone. Standardized care guidelines may ensure interventions are offered equally and take-home naloxone 'champions' could drive initiatives forward, with support from harm reduction specialists. REPORTING METHOD: This has adhered to the PRISMA reporting guidelines for systematic reviews. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,071 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,013 | 0,013 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».