"Wanna cry this out real quick?": an examination of secondary traumatic stress risk and resilience among post-overdose outreach staff in Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: Post-overdose outreach programs engage overdose survivors and their families soon after an overdose event. Staff implementing these programs are routinely exposed to others' trauma, which makes them vulnerable to secondary traumatic stress (STS) and compassion fatigue. The purpose of this study was to explore experiences of STS and associated upstream and downstream risk and protective factors among program staff. METHODS: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of semi-structured interviews with post-overdose outreach program staff in Massachusetts. Transcripts were analyzed using a multi-step hybrid inductive-deductive approach to explore approaches and responses to outreach work, factors that might give rise to STS, and compassion fatigue resilience. Findings were organized according to the three main constructs within Ludick and Figley's compassion fatigue resilience model (empathy, secondary traumatic stress, and compassion fatigue resilience). RESULTS: Thirty-eight interviews were conducted with staff from 11 post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts. Within the empathy construct, concern for others' well-being emerged as a motivator to engage in post-overdose outreach work - with staff trying to understand others' perspectives and using this connection to deliver respectful and compassionate services. Within the secondary traumatic stress construct, interviewees described regular and repeated exposure to others' trauma - made more difficult when exposures overlapped with staff members' personal social spheres. Within the compassion fatigue resilience construct, interviewees described the presence and absence of self-care practices and routines, social supports, and workplace supports. Job satisfaction and emotional detachment from work experiences also arose as potential protective factors. Interviewees reported inconsistent presence and utilization of formal support for STS and compassion fatigue within their post-overdose outreach teams. CONCLUSION: Post-overdose outreach program staff may experience secondary traumatic stress and may develop compassion fatigue, particularly in the absence of resilience and coping strategies and support. Compassion fatigue resilience approaches for post-overdose outreach staff warrant further development and study.

Privacy and confidentiality in Massachusetts' post-overdose outreach programs: Mixed methods analysis of outreach staff surveys and interviews.

BACKGROUND: Public health-public safety partnerships for post-overdose outreach have emerged in many communities to prevent future overdose events. These efforts often identify overdose survivors through emergency call data and seek to link them with relevant services. The aim of this study was to describe how post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts manage the confidentiality of identifiable information and privacy of survivors. METHODS: In 2019, 138 Massachusetts programs completed surveys eliciting responses to questions about program operations. Descriptive statistics were calculated from the closed-ended survey responses. Thirty-eight interviews were conducted among outreach staff members during 2019-2020. Interview transcripts and open-ended survey responses were thematically analyzed using deductive and inductive approaches. RESULTS: Of programs that completed the survey, 90 % (n = 124/138) reported acting to protect the privacy of survivors following overdose events, and 84 % (n = 114/135) reported implementing a protocol to maintain the confidentiality of personal information. Interviews with outreach team members indicated substantial variation in practice. Outreach programs regularly employed discretion in determining actions in the field, sometimes undermining survivor privacy and confidentiality (e.g., by disclosing the overdose event to family members). Programs aiming to prioritize privacy and confidentiality attempted to make initial contact with survivors by phone, limited or concealed materials left behind when no one was home, and/or limited the number of contact attempts. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the establishment of privacy and confidentiality protocols within most post-overdose outreach programs, application of these procedures was varied, discretionary, and at times viewed by staff as competing with engagement efforts. Individual outreach overdose teams should prioritize privacy and confidentiality during outreach to protect overdose survivors from undesired exposure. In addition to individual program changes, access to overdose survivor information could be changed across all programs to bolster privacy and confidentiality protocols. For example, transitioning the management of overdose-related information to non-law enforcement agencies would limit officers' ability to disseminate such information at their discretion.

Perspectives on Perioperative Team-Based Morbidity and Mortality Conferences: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality conferences (MMCs) are quality improvement mechanisms during which adverse events are reviewed, often by physicians within a single discipline. There is a growing desire to include nonphysicians and physicians from other disciplines in team-based morbidity and mortality conferences (TBMMs). This mixed methods study investigates perioperative perspectives on MMCs generally and TBMMs specifically. METHODS: A national survey of perioperative health care professionals, including surgeons, anesthesiologists, and nurses, was used to explore opinions about MMCs and TBMMs. Semistructured qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted with health care professionals and leaders at a single study site. Quantitative data were compared using a Kruskal-Wallis test. Interview transcripts were inductively analyzed. Data were analyzed using a concurrent mixed methods approach, triangulating both sources of data. RESULTS: Survey respondents (N = 1,466) were generally positive about both MMCs and TBMMs, agreeing that conferences were respectful, affected practice, and were educational. Nurses, compared to surgeons and anesthesiologists, were more likely to find conferences educational (p = 0.004) and were less comfortable speaking up in conferences (p < 0.001). Attendees who had more experience with TBMMs rated conferences as having significantly higher utility in achieving educational and safety goals. Qualitative data from 14 participants identified barriers and facilitators at the micro, meso, and macro level. Barriers include negative personal interactions, unsupportive leadership, and legal and regulatory issues. Facilitators include interpersonal relationships between professionals, buy-in from leadership, and external motivators. CONCLUSION: Perceptions of TBMMs were overall positive, but significant barriers to implementation remain. Team members may be invited to the table, but more effort is needed to make the entire team feel included in the discussion and optimize the value of these conferences. Strategies for overcoming identified barriers remains an open area of research.

The police paradox: A qualitative study of post-overdose outreach program implementation through public health-public safety partnerships in Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: Post-overdose outreach has emerged in the United States as an increasingly common response to non-fatal overdose. This qualitative study investigates the implementation of such programs through public health-public safety partnerships in Massachusetts. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with post-overdose outreach team members, overdose survivors, and family members who received outreach. Interview transcripts were inductively analyzed to identify emergent themes and subsequently organized within the framework of Ecological Systems Theory. RESULTS: Forty-nine interviews were conducted, including 15 police officers (80% male, 100% non-Hispanic White); 23 public health partners (48% male, 87% non-Hispanic White); 8 overdose survivors who received outreach services and 3 parents of survivors who received services (collectively 27% male, 64% non-Hispanic White). Implementation factors identified across all levels (macrosystem, exosystem, mesosystem, and microsystem) of Ecological Systems Theory included key program facilitators, such as access to police data and funding (macro), interagency collaboration (exo), shared recognition of community needs (exo), supportive relationships among team members (meso), and program champions (micro). Common barriers included inherent contradictions between policing and public health mandates (macro), poor local treatment and service capacity (exo), divergent staff views of program goals (exo), overdose survivors' prior negative experiences with law enforcement (meso), difficulty locating overdose survivors (meso), and police officers' lack of qualifications or training in providing psycho-social services (micro). CONCLUSIONS: Most post-overdose outreach programs in this study were dependent on funding and data-sharing partnerships, which police agencies largely controlled. Yet, police participation, especially during outreach visits presented numerous challenges for engaging overdose survivors and establishing non-coercive linkages with evidence-based services, which may undermine the public health goals of these programs. These findings should inform state and federal efforts to expand the role of law enforcement in behavioral health initiatives.

Warrant checking practices by post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Post-overdose outreach programs engage survivors in harm reduction and treatment to prevent future overdoses. In Massachusetts, these emerging programs commonly deploy teams comprised of police and public health professionals based on 911 call information. Some teams use name/address data to conduct arrest warrant checks prior to outreach visits. We used mixed methods to understand approaches to outreach related to warrant checking, from the perspectives of police and public health outreach agencies and staff. METHODS: We analyzed a 2019 statewide survey of post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts to classify approaches to warrant checking and identify program and community factors associated with particular approaches. Ethnographic analysis of qualitative interviews conducted with outreach staff helped further contextualize outreach program practices related to warrants. RESULTS: A majority (57% - 79/138) of post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts conducted warrant checks prior to outreach. Among programs that checked warrants, we formulated a taxonomy of approaches to handling warrants: 1) performing outreach without addressing warrants (19.6% - 27/138), 2) delaying outreach until warrants are cleared (15.9% - 22/138), 3) arresting the survivor (11/138 - 8.0%), 4) taking a situational approach (10/138 - 7.2%), 5) not performing outreach (9/138 - 6.5%). Program characteristics and staff training did not vary across approaches. From police and public health outreach staff interviews (n = 38), we elicited four major themes: a) diverse motivations precede warrant checking, b) police officers feel tension between dual roles, c) warrants alter approaches to outreach, and d) teams leverage warrants in relationships. Findings from both analyses converged to demonstrate unintended consequences of warrant checking. CONCLUSION: Checking warrants prior to post-overdose outreach visits can result in arrest, delayed outreach, and barriers to obtaining services for overdose survivors, which can undermine the goal of these programs to engage overdose survivors. With the public health imperative of engaging overdose survivors, programs should consider limiting warrant checking and police participation in field activities.

Loss of Trust in the Neighborhood: The Experience of Older African Americans in Detroit.

Objective: Although evidence suggests that neighborhood conditions are related to stress and health, the processes connecting neighborhood conditions and stress for older minorities is little explored. The purpose of this analysis is to contribute new insights into this issue. Method: We conducted a qualitative analysis as part of a larger mixed methods study of 100 African Americans aged 55 years and older living in neighborhoods of varying quality in Detroit, Michigan. A subsample of (n = 20) older adults took photographs of bothersome aspects of their neighborhoods and participated in in-depth photo-elicitation interviews. Data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Results: "Loss of trust in the neighborhood" emerged as the core category to explain how older African Americans in our sample experienced neighborhood stressors in their daily lives. Loss of trust in physical, social, and institutional dimensions of the neighborhood contributed to the core category. Discussion: The life course of neighborhoods and the trust placed in them appears to be intimately connected to the well-being of older African Americans. We therefore hypothesize that a fundamental pathway through which neighborhood stressors are experienced for older African Americans in United States "Rust Belt" cities is the multifaceted loss of trust in the neighborhood.