Education for the mind and the heart? Changing residents' attitudes about addressing unhealthy alcohol use

The Status of SBIRT Training in Health Professions Education: A Cross-Discipline Review and Evaluation of SBIRT Curricula and Educational Research

PURPOSE

To assess the quality of curricular research on the Screening Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) approach and determine the presence of useful training modalities, particularly motivational interviewing (MI) training, across health care training curricula.

METHOD

The authors conducted a systematic review of published, peer-reviewed studies in PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL, Ovid HealthSTAR, and PsycINFO databases through March 2021 for English-language studies describing SBIRT, a curriculum for health care trainees, and curricular intervention outcomes. After the records were independently assessed, data were extracted and 20% of the studies were double-coded for interrater reliability.

RESULTS

Of 1,856 studies, 95 were included in the review; 22 had overlapping samples and were consolidated into 10 nested studies, leaving 83 total. Interrater reliability ranged from moderate (κ = .74, P < .001) to strong (κ = .91, P < .001) agreement. SBIRT training was delivered to trainees across many professions, including nursing (n = 34, 41%), medical residency (n = 28, 34%), and social work (n = 24, 29%). Nearly every study described SBIRT training methods (n = 80, 96%), and most reported training in MI (n = 54, 65%). On average, studies reported 4.06 (SD = 1.64) different SBIRT training methods and 3.31 (SD = 1.59) MI training methods. Their mean design score was 1.92 (SD = 0.84) and mean measurement score was 1.89 (SD = 1.05). A minority of studies measured SBIRT/MI skill (n = 23, 28%), and 4 studies (5%) set a priori benchmarks for their curricula.

CONCLUSIONS

SBIRT training has been delivered to a wide range of health care trainees and often includes MI. Rigor scores for the studies were generally low due to limited research designs and infrequent use of objective skill measurement. Future work should include predefined training benchmarks and validated skills measurement.

A systematic review of stigma interventions for providers who treat patients with substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

Stigma surrounding substance use disorders (SUDs) is a frequently cited barrier to treatment engagement. Research consistently demonstrates that healthcare professionals' attitudes towards patients with addiction problems are often negative and may adversely impact service delivery. The current study presents a systematic review of stigma interventions for providers who treat patients with SUDs, in order to evaluate the quality of existing studies and potential for implementation in clinical settings.

METHODS

This systematic literature review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases included PubMed, APA PsycInfo and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Of the 1462 records identified between 2011 and 2019, 15 studies were eligible for inclusion. A narrative synthesis of stigma interventions summarized the change in stigmatizing attitudes held by providers.

RESULTS

Studies included heterogeneous and culturally diverse samples of providers (N = 1324), who varied by age, location, discipline, and experience, with the exception of primarily female providers (75%). Results delineated six types of provider stigma interventions with components including online education, in-person education, in-person contact with consumers in recovery, or some combination of these elements. The highest quality studies incorporated motivational interviewing or communication training interventions, and many interventions combined either in-person mentorship or contact with individuals in recovery. Positive effects on provider attitudes occurred at several levels of educational and consumer contact interventions. Interventions with consumer contact demonstrated long-term maintenance of attitudinal shifts. Despite significant methodological limitations and low-quality assessment ratings, several studies utilized real-world providers and patients, as well as practical, innovative, brief, and potentially cost-effective interventions, particularly in locations with limited technological resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on provider stigma interventions increased in recent years, indicating greater worldwide attention to the negative impact of stigma. While educational interventions alone can be helpful in attitudinal change, contact with individuals in recovery from SUDs is a vital component of provider stigma interventions, particularly for lasting effects. This review highlights the importance of including implementation outcomes, such as sustainability and cost-effectiveness, in the study of stigma interventions for providers of addiction treatment.

A qualitative analysis of interprofessional students' perceptions toward patients with opioid use disorder after a patient panel experience

Background: Students from health professional schools participated in a half-day interprofessional education workshop centered on substance use disorder training. One component was a patient panel featuring individuals with a history of opioid use disorder who described the impact of addiction on their lives and their road to recovery using varied treatment options. We hypothesized that interacting with individuals with opioid use disorder early in training would elicit more humanistic perspectives and decrease bias and stigma in future health care professionals. Methods: After participating in the panel experience, health professional students (N = 580) from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, physical therapy, and social work were asked to complete short, 5-minute, rapid reflections. Prompts asked students whether the panel changed their perception of individuals with substance use disorder, to reflect on their attitudinal changes or lack thereof, and how working in interprofessional teams could impact the management and treatment of these patients. Conventional content analysis was performed. Results: Eighty-nine percent of students who attended the session completed the rapid reflections (n = 514). Overall, approximately 70% (n = 369) of students indicated that their perceptions of individuals with substance use disorder had changed as a result of the patient panel, with students from pharmacy more likely to indicate a change in attitudes. Themes across all professions included a change toward a more humanistic perspective, value of hearing real patient stories, and learning about treatment and recovery options. Student responses described how interprofessional health care teams can provide more holistic care with a broader range of therapeutic options that may improve long-term outcomes. Conclusions: A patient panel experience is influential on interprofessional students' attitudes toward patients who suffer from opioid use disorder. Students identified an interprofessional approach as being a valuable component of management and treatment of these patients.

Optimizing the delivery of interventions for harmful alcohol use in primary healthcare: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Alcohol is a leading risk factor for ill health and premature death. Regardless of poor levels of implementation achieved after more than 30 years of research and policy advice, alcohol screening and brief advice (SBA) remains one of the best policy options. This study updates the evidence by considering recent publications on SBA for heavy drinking and alcohol use disorder in primary healthcare at a timely moment, because researchers are, at present, debating future direction of research and policy in this field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Systematic literature search between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017 was conducted for new research on alcohol SBA in primary healthcare. In all, 63 articles were included.

SUMMARY

Primary healthcare-based SBA programmes are effective in reducing alcohol consumption among heavier drinkers. There is low implementation of these programmes in real practice. Academia is rethinking and debating future directions.

Physicians' experiences of SBIRT training and implementation for SUD management in primary care in the UAE: a qualitative study

AimThe objective of this paper is to present a qualitative study of introducing substance misuse screening using the Screening Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) model, in primary care in Abu Dhabi.

BACKGROUND

Substance misuse in the UAE is an increasing problem. However religious beliefs and fear of legal consequences have prevented this topic from being openly discussed, risk levels identified through screening and treatment options offered.

METHODS

A controlled trial was undertaken which included a qualitative process study which is reported here. Qualitative interviews with primary care physicians from two intervention clinics were undertaken to explore their views, experiences and attitudes towards substance misuse management in their clinic. Physicians were trained on SBIRT and on the research project process and documentation. At completion of the project, 10 months after the training, physicians (n=17) were invited to participate in an interview to explore their experiences of training and implementation of SBIRT. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Inductive thematic coding was applied.FindingsIn total, 11 physicians were interviewed and three main themes emerged: (1) The SBIRT screening project, (2) cultural issues and (3) patient follow-up. Findings revealed a general willingness toward the concept of screening and delivering brief interventions in primary care although increased workload and uncertainties about remuneration for the service may be a barrier to future implementation. There was a perceived problem of substance misuse that was not currently being met and a strong perception that patients were not willing to reveal substance use due cultural barriers and fear of police involvement. In conclusion this qualitative process evaluation provided essential insight into implementing SBIRT in the Middle East. In conclusion, despite physician willingness and a clinical need for a substance misuse care pathway, the reluctance among patients to admit to substance use in this culture needs to be addressed to enable successful implementation.