Reframing conceptualizations of opioid use disorder treatment in primary care
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<h3>CONTEXT:</h3> Opioid use disorder (OUD) and drug-related harms are health priorities requiring urgent policy responses. In countries like Canada and Australia, which have been experiencing high rates of opioid-related harms, there have been many calls to increase involvement of and improve OUD care in primary care. <h3>OBJECTIVE:</h3> To understand the factors that influence how OUD treatment is delivered through primary care in Canada and Australia and to identify current barriers and opportunities to improve OUD care in primary care. <h3>STUDY DESIGN & ANALYSIS:</h3> In our qualitative policy analysis, we used Starfield’s 4Cs conceptualization of primary care functions (first contact, comprehensiveness, continuity, coordination) to examine how and why current primary care systems may be suited towards, or pose challenges to providing OUD care, and to identify health system opportunities to address these challenges. <h3>SETTING/DATASET:</h3> We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews with 16 key informants with insights into opioid use policy in Canada and Australia. These included people with lived/living experience of drug use, clinicians, researchers, government health department staff, and individuals from non-government organizations focusing on drug use. <h3>RESULTS:</h3> Primary care was identified to be an ideal setting for OUD care due to its potential as the first point of contact in the health system; the opportunity to offer other health and social services to people with OUD; and the ability to coordinate with other care providers (e.g. specialists, social workers), thus providing care continuity. However, challenges include the prevailing model of OUD treatment, where addictions care is not viewed as part of comprehensive primary care, and the lack of resources and support for broader chronic disease management in primary care. Additionally, the highly regulated OUD policy landscape has manifested as a ‘regulatory cascade’ in which restrictive oversight of OUD treatment passes from regulators to health providers to people receiving treatment, normalizing the overly restrictive nature and inaccessibility of OUD care. <h3>CONCLUSIONS:</h3> The regulatory and sociocultural context of opioid use has led to treatment models involving primary care with priorities that conflict with the priorities and wellbeing of many people with OUD. This work presents an opportunity to re-think primary care delivery (including and beyond OUD care) from the perspective of people living at the margins.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».