Rural social work practice

Rural social work is practiced in United States (U.S.) Census-defined rural areas and in small towns and frontier areas throughout the United States. Rural people tend to have many of the same diversities as urban populations but with the added diversity of being from a rural community, and social workers who work with them require deep knowledge of the communities in which they live. Poverty is an ongoing nuanced social problem in rural communities. Rural social work agencies often address needs for housing, food security, and mental health and addiction services as itinerant workers move to work in these industries. Practice in rural areas can be rewarding but also presents some professional challenges. Gaining cultural competence ultimately becomes an important issue if the worker did not grow up in the rural community. All social workers have a professional responsibility to advocate for social justice and equitable distribution of resources. For social work policy advocates, the time is ripe for advocacy for fair telehealth reimbursement because the coronavirus pandemic has placed a spotlight on even the urban area need for telehealth services and has accelerated research on the best practice standards of what can safely and effectively be provided via telehealth. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Demographic differences in services utilization across in-person (2019), telehealth (2020), and hybrid (2021) outpatient substance use services in New York.

OBJECTIVES: Many outpatient substance use programs have experienced in-person, remote/telehealth, and hybrid models of care since the 2020 Covid-19 Pandemic. Changes in treatment models naturally affect service utilization and may affect treatment trajectories. Currently, limited research examines the implications of different health care models on service utilization and patient outcomes in substance use treatment. Here, we reflect on the implications of each model from a patient-centered care approach and review the implications on service utilization and outcomes. METHODS: We employed a retrospective, observational, longitudinal, cohort design to explore differences in demographic characteristics and service utilization among patients receiving in-person, remote, or hybrid services across four substance use clinics in New York. We reviewed admission (N = 2238) and discharge (N = 2044) data from four outpatient SUD clinics within the same health care system across three cohorts (2019, in-person; 2020, remote; 2021, hybrid). RESULTS: Patients discharged in 2021 (hybrid) had significantly more median total treatment visits (M = 26, p ≤ 0.0005), a longer course of treatment (M = 154.5 days, p ≤ 0.0001), and more individual counseling sessions (M = 9, p ≤ 0.0001) compared to the other two cohorts. Demographic analyses indicate more ethnoracial diversity (p = 0.0006) among patients admitted in 2021, compared to the other two cohorts. Over time, the proportion of individuals being admitted with a co-existing psychiatric disorder (2019, 49 %; 2020; 55.4 %, 2021, 54.9 %) and no prior mental health treatment (2019, 49.4 %; 2020, 46.0 %; 2021, 69.3 %) increased (p = 0.0001). Admissions in 2021 were more likely to be self-referred (32.5 %, p < 0.0001), employed full-time (39.5 %, p = 0.01), and have higher educational attainment (p = 0.0008). CONCLUSION: During hybrid treatment in 2021, patients from a wider range of ethnoracial backgrounds were admitted and retained in care, patients with higher socioeconomic status (who were previously less likely to enter treatment) were admitted, and fewer individuals left against clinical advice (compared to the remote 2020 cohort). More patients successfully completed treatment in 2021. Service utilization, demographic, and outcome trends support a hybrid model of care.

Rapid adaptation during the COVID crisis: Challenges experienced in delivering service to those with Opioid Use Disorders.

Background: Adaptation is an accepted part of implementing evidence-based practices. COVID-19 presented a unique opportunity to examine adaptation in evolving contexts. Delivering service to people with opioid use disorder during the pandemic required significant adaptation due to revised regulations and limited service access. This report evaluated changes to addiction medication services caused by the pandemic, challenges encountered in rapidly adapting service delivery, and initial impressions of which changes might be sustainable over time. Methods: Qualitatively-evaluated structured interviews (N = 20) were conducted in late 2020 with key informants in Pinellas County (FL) to assess the pandemic's impact. Interviewees represented a cross-section of the professional groups including direct SUD/HIV service providers, and sheriff's office, Department of Health, and regional clinical program administrative staff. The interview questions examined significant changes necessitated by the pandemic, challenges encountered in adapting to this evolving context, and considerations for sustained change. Results: The most significant changes to service delivery identified were rapid adaptation to a telehealth format, and modifying service consistent with SAMHSA guidance, to allow for 'take-home' doses of methadone. Limitations imposed by access to technology, and the retraining of staff and patients to give and receive service differently were the most common themes identified as challenging adaptation efforts. Respondents saw shifts towards telehealth as most likely to being sustained. Conclusions: COVID-19 provided an unprecedented opportunity to examine adaptation in a fast-paced, dynamic, and evolving context. Adaptations identified will only be sustained through multisystem collaboration and validation. Results suggest that additional components could be added to implementation frameworks to assess rapid adaptation during unplanned events, such as access to additional resources or local decision-making that impacts service delivery. Findings will also be integrated with quantitative data to help inform local policy decisions. Plain Language Summary: Adaptation is an accepted part of implementing evidencebased practices. COVID-19 presented a unique opportunity to examine rapid adaptation necessitated within evolving contexts. Delivering services to people with opioid use disorder required significant adaptation due to changing regulations and limited access to lifesaving services. This study examined changes in service delivery due to the pandemic, challenges encountered in rapid adaptation, and initial impressions of which changes might be sustainable over time. Qualitatively-evaluated structured interviews were conducted with a cross-section of professional groups (direct substance use disorder (SUD) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) service providers, and sheriff's office, Department of Health, and clinical program administrative staff) in Pinellas County (FL). The most significant changes to service delivery were rapid adaptation to a telehealth format and increased allowance for 'takehome' doses of methadone medication. Limitations imposed by access to technology, as well as the education of and staff and patients were the most common themes identified as challenges. Respondents saw shifts towards telehealth as most likely to be sustained. COVID-19 provided an unprecedented opportunity to examine adaptation in a fast-paced, dynamic, and evolving context. Adaptations will only be sustained through multisystem collaboration and validation. Findings suggest that additional components could be added to implementation frameworks to assess rapid adaptation during unplanned events, such as access to additional resources or local decision-making that impacts service delivery.

Impact of changes to the delivery of opioid agonist treatment, introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, on treatment access and dropout in Ireland: An interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following the emergence of COVID-19, Ireland introduced national contingency guidelines to ensure rapid and uninterrupted access to opioid agonist treatment (OAT). This study aims to assess the impact of changes introduced to the delivery of OAT on the number of people accessing treatment and treatment dropout. METHODS: The study conducted interrupted time series analyses, with separate segmented regression models (March 2019-February 2020) vs (April 2020-March 2021), for (A) total number of people accessing OAT, (B) the number initiating treatment, and (C) the number dropping out of treatment, using data from the National OAT treatment register. The study examined immediate (change in level or intercept: ß2) and long-term impacts (change in slope; i.e., the difference between the slope before and after the intervention: ß3). We performed total and stratified analyses by gender, age group (<40/≥40 years), and OAT drug (methadone or buprenorphine). RESULTS: A total of 10,251 people accessed OAT in Ireland in March 2019 (2 % buprenorphine, n = 178), increasing to 11,441 (4 % buprenorphine, n = 471) in March 2021. The study observed an immediate (ß2 = 504.3, p < 0.001) and continued (ß3 = 31.9, p < 0.001) increase of people accessing treatment following the introduction of the OAT contingency guidelines. In contrast, observed changes in level and slope were not significant for treatment initiation or dropout. The study did find, however, a modest reduction in dropout among those receiving buprenorphine (ß3 = -0.6, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Changes introduced to the delivery of OAT, under the COVID-19 contingency guidelines, are associated with increased access to OAT in Ireland, with no evidence of increase in treatment dropout. Whether these effects will be maintained over time remains to be seen.

Are we starting to 'think family'? Evidence from a case file audit of parents and children supported by mental health, addictions and children's services

The Health and Social Care Board in Northern Ireland commissioned an audit of social work case files from across service teams to establish whether Think Family Northern Ireland (Think Family NI) and FFP have become embedded across three different services (Community Mental Health Teams (CMHTs), and addictions and children's services). The audit sought to: identify the extent to which these services co-worked to support families;highlight good practice;and identify areas for improvement. A random sample of files was selected from the three services in four of the five Health and Social Care Trusts, the main statutory provider of services in Northern Ireland. Data were collected from 108 case files. The COVID-19 lockdown ended fieldwork prematurely and electronic data from some files were unavailable (n = 12). Of the 103 families in the final sample, the mother was the primary focus in 85% of cases and, in total, parents had caring responsibilities for 258 children, the majority of whom were aged under 16 years. Joint planning was only evident in 18.5% of cases. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Consensus recommendations for opioid agonist treatment following the introduction of emergency clinical guidelines in Ireland during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency contingency guidelines for opioid agonist treatment (OAT) were introduced in Ireland in March 2020, to ensure rapid and uninterrupted access to treatment while mitigating COVID-19 risk. The contingency guidelines deviated, across multiple clinical domains, from pre-pandemic clinical guidelines published in 2016. The objectives of this study are to (1) identify changes introduced to OAT clinical guidelines in Ireland during the pandemic; and (2) develop consensus on whether the new recommendations should be retained beyond the pandemic, using a national Delphi consensus methodology. METHODS: Clinical guidance recommendations ('statements') were generated by comparing the newly established contingency guidelines with the national 2016 Clinical Guidelines for OAT. Over two rounds of on-line Delphi testing, a panel of experts (people currently accessing OAT, psychiatrists, general practitioners, community pharmacists, a nurse, a psychologist and support/key workers) independently rated their agreement with each statement and provided comments. Statements with a median score of 4 or 5 and a lower quartile of ≥4 were classified as having reached consensus. RESULTS: Forty-eight panel members were recruited, with a high participation level at Round 2 (90%, n=43). Consensus was achieved for 12 of the 19 statements at Round 1. The 7 remaining statements were revised, with 2 new statements, resulting in 9 statements at Round 2. Four statements reached consensus at Round 2. The final list includes 16 clinical guidance statements; 9 relating to assessment, 3 to OAT drug choice and dosing, 1 to take-away doses, 2 to overdose prevention and 1 to the continuation of e-prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of stakeholders involved in the delivery and receipt of OAT agreed on 16 clinical guidance statements for inclusion in OAT clinical guidelines as we move beyond the pandemic, rather than reverting to pre-pandemic guidelines. The agreed statements relate to facilitating safe access to OAT with minimal waiting time, supporting patient-centred care to promote health and well-being, and preventing drug overdose. Notably, consensus was not achieved for OAT drug dosage and frequency of urine testing during the stabilisation and maintenance phase of care.

Reorganization of Substance Use Treatment and Harm Reduction Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global Survey.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted people with substance use disorders (SUDs) worldwide, and healthcare systems have reorganized their services in response to the pandemic. Methods: One week after the announcement of the COVID-19 as a pandemic, in a global survey, 177 addiction medicine professionals described COVID-19-related health responses in their own 77 countries in terms of SUD treatment and harm reduction services. The health responses were categorized around (1) managerial measures and systems, (2) logistics, (3) service providers, and (4) vulnerable groups. Results: Respondents from over 88% of countries reported that core medical and psychiatric care for SUDs had continued; however, only 56% of countries reported having had any business continuity plan, and 37.5% of countries reported shortages of methadone or buprenorphine supplies. Participants of 41% of countries reported partial discontinuation of harm-reduction services such as needle and syringe programs and condom distribution. Fifty-seven percent of overdose prevention interventions and 81% of outreach services were also negatively impacted. Conclusions: Participants reported that SUD treatment and harm-reduction services had been significantly impacted globally early during the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on our findings, we highlight several issues and complications resulting from the pandemic concerning people with SUDs that should be tackled more efficiently during the future waves or similar pandemics. The issues and potential strategies comprise the following: (1) helping policymakers to generate business continuity plans, (2) maintaining the use of evidence-based interventions for people with SUDs, (3) being prepared for adequate medication supplies, (4) integrating harm reduction programs with other treatment modalities, and (5) having specific considerations for vulnerable groups such as immigrants and refugees.

The impact of COVID-19 on opioid treatment program (OTP) services: Where do we go from here?

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) services is key to addressing the opioid crisis and COVID-19 has significantly impacted MOUD delivery. The need for social distancing and self-quarantining requires individuals to maintain personal physical space and limits face-to-face interactions, which are required for methadone dispensing and other regulated treatment activities. Mount Sinai Beth Israel, which has one of the largest opioid treatment service (OTP) delivery systems within the United States and included 10 OTP methadone clinics that responded rapidly by implementing procedures to address the additional challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article discusses four key procedural areas: 1) verified identity in-person pick-up doses, 2) drug urine toxicology screens, 3) treatment interactions, and 4) discharges, which can inform future OTP operational procedures by encouraging out-of-the-box thinking in this new age.