RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Structural aspects of community-engaged research are not well measured yet have critical implications for community research empowerment. This is particularly so with people who use drugs. We introduce the Structural Indicators of Community-Based Participatory Action Research (SI-CBPAR) to measure structural indicators of community-research entity relationships. METHODS: A three-phased process of iterative development, feasibility and applicability assessment was used to examine the instrument with community-engaged studies as a first stage of instrument development. The development team included people with university, non-government organisation and lived/ing drug use experience. Four studies on the health of people who use drugs were reviewed for indicator evidence followed by iterative discussion about construct and item discrepancies. Indicators were measured for the degree to which they were observed using a three-point scale. RESULTS: All but two constructs were confirmed for meaning. Constructs of 'community' and 'coalition' required revision and explanation. The need for further exploration of power differentials between community and community-based organisations was identified. Indicator evidence was found for all six categories across studies. The instrument was deemed applicable and easy to use. It was observed that categories could apply to studies with various degrees of community engagement and to other research focal areas. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: SI-CBPAR applicability testing and initial category confirmation indicate its potential utility for community research collaboratives. The next phase of development involves cognitive interviewing with researchers from across community engaged research orientations, and with communities engaged in research beyond drug user health.
RESUMO
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to characterize hepatitis C virus screening and treatment access experiences among people in treatment for opioid use disorder in Arizona during COVID-19. Methods: Arizonans receiving treatment for opioid use disorder from methadone clinics and buprenorphine providers during COVID-19 were interviewed about hepatitis C virus testing, curative treatment, and knowledge about screening recommendations. Interviews were conducted with 121 people from August 4, 2021 to October 10, 2021. Qualitative data were coded using the categories of hepatitis C virus testing, knowledge of screening recommendations, diagnosis, and experiences seeking curative treatment. Data were also quantitated for bivariate testing with outcome variables of last hepatitis C virus test, diagnosis, and curative treatment process. Findings were arrayed along an adapted hepatitis C virus cascade framework to inform program and policy improvements. Results: Just over half of the sample reported ever having tested for hepatitis C virus (51.2%, n=62) and of this group, 58.1% were tested in the past 12 months. Among those who were ever tested, 54.8% reported a hepatitis C virus diagnosis and 16.1% reported either being in treatment or having been declared cured of the hepatitis C virus. Among those who were diagnosed with hepatitis C, 14.7% indicated that they unsuccessfully tried to access curative treatment and would not attempt to again. Reasons cited for not accessing or receiving curative treatment included beliefs about treatment safety, barriers created by access requirements, natural resolution of the infection, and issues with healthcare coverage and authorization. Conclusions: Structural barriers continue to prevent curative hepatitis C virus treatment access. Given that methadone and buprenorphine treatment providers serve patients who are largely undiagnosed or treated for hepatitis C virus, opportunities exist for them to screen their patients regularly and provide support for and/or navigation to hepatitis C virus curative treatment.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To understand patient experience of federal regulatory changes governing methadone and buprenorphine (MOUD) access in Arizona during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This community-based participatory and action research study involved one-hour, audio-recorded field interviews conducted with 131 people who used methadone and/or buprenorphine to address opioid use disorder at some point during COVID (January 1, 2020- March 31, 2021) in Arizona. Transcribed data were analyzed using a priori codes focused on federally recommended flexibilities governing MOUD access. Data were quantitated to investigate associations with COVID risk and services access. RESULTS: Telehealth was reported by 71.0% of participants, but the majority were required to come to the clinic to attend video appointments with an offsite provider. Risk for severe COVID outcomes was reported by 40.5% of the sample. Thirty-eight percent of the sample and 39.7% of methadone patients were required to be at the clinic daily to get medication and 47.6% were at high risk for COVID severe outcomes. About half (54.2%) of methadone patients indicated that some form of multi-day take home dosing was offered at their clinic, and 45.8% were offered an extra day or two of multi-day doses; but no participants received the federally allowed 14- or 28-day methadone take-home doses for unstable and stable patients respectively. All participants expressed that daily clinic visits interrupted their work and home lives and desired more take-home dosing and home delivery options. CONCLUSIONS: MOUD patients in Arizona were not offered many of the federally allowed flexibilities for access that were designed to reduce their need to be at the clinic. To understand the impact of these recommended treatment changes in Arizona, and other states where they were not well implemented, federal and state regulators must mandate these changes and support MOUD providers to implement them.
