Ethical Dilemmas Facing Substance Use Counselors During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment settings experienced several abrupt changes, including decreased admissions, reduction in services, and modified requirements for medication for substance use disorder. While these changes were implemented to facilitate the maintenance of important treatment options, the ethical consequences of such changes remained unknown. The current study aimed to explore ethical issues related to COVID-19-related changes reported by counselors in SUD treatment facilities. Method: From May to August 2020, we conducted 60 to 90 minutes in-depth interviews with 18 front-line staff in 1 residential and 1 outpatient treatment program, exploring issues drawn from the ethical principles of the national organization representing SUD counselors. Counselors volunteered to participate via phone or email, and participation was confidential. Interviews were conducted via videoconferencing. Topics included day-to-day experiences of ethical dilemmas in the workplace, particularly during the COVID-19 era. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and checked for accuracy and a trained team of analysts then coded transcripts using thematic analysis. Results: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, SUD treatment programs quickly modified procedures to adhere to public health mandates while also continuing to offer care to clients. SUD counselors reported several ways their programs adapted new and creative procedures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. SUD counselors also identified several novel ethical dilemmas that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, often resulting from the counselor balancing the needs for responding to public health mandates with providing services to clients. There were several ways that COVID-19 related changes resulted in therapeutic challenges for some clients, and the SUD counselors highlighted ways that changes resulted in more flexible services for other clients. Conclusions: This study highlights the quick response to COVID-19 that occurred within SUD treatment. While these changes resulted in novel ethical dilemmas, they also offered more flexible and client-centered approaches to treatment.

Consideration of racism experiences in the implementation of trauma-focused therapy in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To understand providers' perceptions of how a patient's experience of racism may impact the successful implementation of a brief posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment in the safety net integrated primary care setting. To conduct a developmental formative evaluation prior to a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: From October 2020 to January 2021, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with integrated primary care stakeholders (N = 27) at the largest safety net hospital in New England, where 82% of patients identify as racial or ethnic minorities. STUDY DESIGN: Interviews with clinical stakeholders were used to (a) contextualize current patient and provider experiences and responses to racism, (b) consider how racism may impact PTSD treatment implementation, (c) gather recommendations for potential augmentation to the proposed PTSD treatment (e.g., culturally responsive delivery, cultural adaptation), and (d) gather recommendations for how to shift the integrated primary care practice to an antiracist framework. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Interview data were gathered using remote data collection methods (video conferencing). Participants were hospital employees, including psychologists, social workers, primary care physicians, community health workers, administrators, and operations managers. We used conventional content analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Clinical stakeholders acknowledged the impact of racism, including racial stress and trauma, on patient engagement and noted the potential need to adapt PTSD treatments to enhance engagement. Clinical stakeholders also characterized the harms of racism on patients and providers and provided recommendations such as changes to staff training and hiring practices, examination of racist policies, and increases in support for providers of color. CONCLUSIONS: This study contextualizes providers' perceptions of racism in the integrated primary care practice and provides some suggestions for shifting to an antiracist framework. Our findings also highlight how racism in health care may be a PTSD treatment implementation barrier.

Reducing tobacco use in substance use treatment: An intervention to promote tobacco-free grounds.

BACKGROUND: People in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment experience disproportionate rates of tobacco use. California has prioritized smoking cessation among these individuals through the Tobacco-Free for Recovery Initiative, which includes an intervention aimed at supporting programs in implementing tobacco-free grounds. The current study examined changes in client smoking prevalence, tobacco use behaviors, and receipt of cessation services among the first seven programs participating in the initiative. METHODS: Residential treatment program clients completed cross-sectional surveys at the start of the intervention (baseline: n = 249), at an interim timepoint post-baseline (interim: n = 275), and at the end of the intervention 15 months later (post-intervention: n = 219). All participants reported smoking status. Current smokers reported tobacco use behaviors, and both current smokers and those who quit in treatment reported receipt of cessation services. Univariate analyses explored differences across the three timepoints and multivariate logistic regression assessed change from baseline to interim and baseline to post-intervention. RESULTS: Client smoking prevalence decreased from 54.2% at pre- to 26.6% at post-intervention (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.45). Current smokers and those who quit while in treatment reported an increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy (11.9% vs. 25.2%; AOR = 3.02, CI = 1.24, 7.35). When comparing baseline to the interim timepoint (a timepoint before the COVID-19 pandemic), data analyses also demonstrated a significant decrease in smoking prevalence (54.2% vs. 41.8%; AOR = 0.62, CI = 0.42, 0.92) and increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy (11.9% vs. 24.5%; AOR = 3.68, CI = 1.11, 12.19). CONCLUSION: An intervention to promote tobacco-free grounds implemented in residential SUD treatment programs was associated with a significant reduction in client smoking and an increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy. These associations were observed both before the COVID-19 pandemic and in the early stages of the pandemic, suggesting that they may be due to the intervention rather than to the pandemic.

COVID-19 vaccine trust among clients in a sample of California residential substance use treatment programs.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with a substance use disorder (SUD) are at a significantly higher risk for coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) and have higher rates of COVID-19 related hospitalization and death than those without SUD. This study assessed COVID-19 vaccine trust, transmission awareness, risk and protective behaviors, and effects of COVID-19 on mental health and smoking among a sample of clients in California residential SUD treatment programs and identified factors associated with vaccine trust. METHODS: A multi-site sample of SUD treatment clients (n = 265) completed a cross-sectional survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine trust. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly male (82.3 %) and racially/ethnically diverse (33.3 % Non-Hispanic White). Most participants were aware of COVID-19 modes of transmission, however, only 39.5 % trusted a COVID-19 vaccine would be safe and effective. Factors independently associated with trust in a COVID-19 vaccine included age (AOR = 1.03, 95 % CI = 1.02, 1.05, p = 0.0001) and wearing a mask all the time (AOR = 2.48, 95 % CI = 1.86, 3.31, p = 0.0001). African Americans were less likely than White participants to trust that a COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective (AOR = 0.41, 95 % CI = 0.23, 0.70, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: SUD treatment clients were aware of COVID-19 modes of transmission; however, fewer than half trusted that a COVID-19 vaccine would be safe and effective. Health communication about COVID-19 for people with SUD should use a multipronged approach to address COVID-19 vaccine mistrust and transmission risk behaviors.