Background
The influence of societal inequities on health has long been established, but such content has been incorporated unevenly into medical education and clinical training. Structural ...competency calls for medical education to highlight the important influence of social, political, and economic factors on health outcomes.
Aim
This article describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of a structural competency training for medical residents.
Setting
A California family medicine residency program serving a patient population predominantly (88 %) with income below 200 % of the federal poverty level.
Participants
A cohort of 12 residents in the family residency program.
Program Description
The training was designed to help residents recognize and develop skills to respond to illness and health as the downstream effects of social, political, and economic structures.
Program Evaluation
The training was evaluated via qualitative analysis of surveys gathered immediately post-training (response rate 100 %) and a focus group 1 month post-training (attended by all residents not on service).
Discussion
Residents reported that the training had a positive impact on their clinical practice and relationships with patients. They also reported feeling overwhelmed by increased recognition of structural influences on patient health, and indicated a need for further training and support to address these influences.
Buprenorphine availability for the treatment of opioid use disorders (OUD) has expanded in the United States. Programs that previously offered only methadone treatment to patients with OUD now offer ...an equal choice between buprenorphine and methadone at the same location, yet little is known about patient preferences for buprenorphine over methadone in these settings. We sought to understand the decision-making factors and motivations underlying why patients opt for buprenorphine over methadone for the treatment of OUD when both are offered in a safety-net hospital-based opioid treatment program (OTP).
We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with patients receiving buprenorphine, in which we asked about substance use and treatment history, reasons for choosing buprenorphine, advantages, and disadvantages of choosing buprenorphine, and what they would like to change in their treatment experience.
Participants had varied exposure to buprenorphine prior to their current treatment, ranging from none to years of experience in multiple settings. Increased flexibility with take-home doses was a widespread motivation for choosing buprenorphine over methadone. Participants described decreased sedation and greater effectiveness in preventing opioid use compared to methadone as advantages during their treatment with buprenorphine. Difficulty with the transition to buprenorphine was a noteworthy challenge for many.
Overall, patients maintained on buprenorphine at an urban safety-net hospital OTP viewed their treatment favorably compared to methadone. Increased autonomy in light of federal regulation differences and an improved physical profile were significant decision-making factors, although the number of patients choosing buprenorphine at the OTP remained low. Targeted patient education about induction and focus on improving structural barriers such as dosing efficiency may enhance patient experiences.
People who use drugs (PWUD) commonly experience housing instability due to intersecting structural vulnerabilities (e.g., drug prohibition, discriminatory housing policies), and prejudicial or ...illegal evictions are common. In Vancouver, Canada, evictions have proliferated in the Downtown Eastside, a historically low-income neighbourhood with high rates of drug use and housing instability, resulting in many PWUD being evicted into homelessness. This study characterizes housing trajectories of recently-evicted PWUD through the lens of the institutional circuit of homelessness, and explores how wider contexts of structural vulnerability shape experiences within this. Qualitative interviews were conducted with PWUD recently evicted in the Downtown Eastside (<60 days). Peer research assistants recruited 58 PWUD through outreach activities. All PWUD participated in baseline interviews on the causes and contexts of evictions. Follow-up interviews were completed with 41 participants 3–6 months later, focusing on longer-term impacts of eviction, including housing trajectories. Most participants were evicted into homelessness, remaining so at follow-up. Participants described patterns of residential instability consisting of frequent cycling between shelters, streets, and kin-based networks. While participants normalized this cycling as characteristic of their marginalized social positions, narratives revealed how the demands of the institutional circuit deepened vulnerabilities and prolonged experiences of homelessness. Experiences were framed by participants' (in)ability to navigate survival needs (e.g., shelter, drug use), with tensions and trade-offs between needs increasing participants' and their peers' risks of harms. Constructions of agency further shaped experiences; accounts highlighted tensions between the control inherent to indoor spaces and participants’ need for autonomy. Findings demonstrate how the demands of the institutional circuit foregrounded structural vulnerabilities to perpetuate cycles of instability. Interventions that address survival needs and preserve agency will be necessary to mitigate risks within the institutional circuit, in tandem with upstream interventions that target housing vulnerability and broader social-structural conditions (e.g., poverty, affordability) that entrap recently-evicted PWUD in the institutional circuit.
•Eviction led to the institutional circuit of homelessness.•Institutional circuit - cycling between shelters, streets, and kin-based networks.•Experiences shaped by competing survival needs and constructions of agency.•Vulnerabilities reinforced institutional circuit to undermine housing security.
Loneliness is more common in older adults and those who face structural vulnerabilities, including homelessness. The homeless population is aging in the United States; now, 48% of single homeless ...adults are 50 and older. We know little about loneliness among older adults who have experienced homelessness. We aimed to describe the loneliness experience among homeless-experienced older adults with cognitive and functional impairments and the individual, social, and structural conditions that shaped these loneliness experiences.
We purposively sampled 22 older adults from the HOPE HOME study, a longitudinal cohort study among adults aged 50 years or older experiencing homelessness in Oakland, California. We conducted in-depth interviews about participants perceived social support and social isolation. We conducted qualitative content analysis.
Twenty participants discussed loneliness experience, who had a median age of 57 and were mostly Black (80%) and men (65%). We developed a typology of participants' loneliness experience and explored the individual, social, and structural conditions under which each loneliness experience occurred. We categorized the loneliness experience into four groups: (1) "lonely- distressed", characterized by physical impairment and severe isolation; (2) "lonely- rather be isolated", reflecting deliberate social isolation as a result of trauma, marginalization and aging-related resignation; (3) "lonely- transient", as a result of aging, acceptance and grieving; and (4) "not lonely"- characterized by stability and connection despite having experienced homelessness.
Loneliness is a complex and heterogenous social phenomenon, with homeless-experienced older adults with cognitive or functional impairments exhibiting diverse loneliness experiences based on their individual life circumstances and needs. While the most distressing loneliness experience occurred among those with physical impairment and mobility challenges, social and structural factors such as interpersonal and structural violence during homelessness shaped these experiences.
Against the backdrop of North America's overdose crisis, most overdose deaths are occurring in housing environments, largely due to individuals using drugs alone. Overdose deaths in cities remain ...concentrated in marginal housing environments (e.g., single-room occupancy housing, shelters), which are often the only forms of housing available to urban poor and drug-using communities. This commentary aims to highlight current housing-based overdose prevention interventions and to situate them within the broader environmental contexts of marginal housing. In doing so, we call attention to the need to better understand marginal housing as sites of overdose vulnerability and public health intervention to optimize responses to the overdose crisis.
In response to high overdose rates in marginal housing environments several interventions (e.g., housing-based supervised consumption rooms, peer-witnessed injection) have recently been implemented in select jurisdictions. However, even with the growing recognition of marginal housing as a key intervention site, housing-based interventions have yet to be scaled up in a meaningful way. Further, there have been persistent challenges to tailoring these approaches to address dynamics within housing environments. Thus, while it is critical to expand coverage of housing-based interventions across marginal housing environments, these interventions must also attend to the contextual drivers of risks in these settings to best foster enabling environments for harm reduction and maximize impacts.
Emerging housing-focused interventions are designed to address key drivers of overdose risk (e.g., using alone, toxic drug supply). Yet, broader contextual factors (e.g., drug criminalization, housing quality, gender) are equally critical factors that shape how structurally vulnerable people who use drugs navigate and engage with harm reduction interventions. A more comprehensive understanding of these contextual factors within housing environments is needed to inform policy and programmatic interventions that are responsive to the needs of people who use drugs in these settings.
Research on disparities in health and health care has demonstrated that social, economic, and political factors are key drivers of poor health outcomes. Yet the role of such structural forces on ...health and health care has been incorporated unevenly into medical training. The framework of structural competency offers a paradigm for training health professionals to recognize and respond to the impact of upstream, structural factors on patient health and health care.
We report on a brief, interprofessional structural competency curriculum implemented in 32 distinct instances between 2015 and 2017 throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. In consultation with medical and interprofessional education experts, we developed open-ended, written-response surveys to qualitatively evaluate this curriculum's impact on participants. Qualitative data from 15 iterations were analyzed via directed thematic analysis, coding language, and concepts to identify key themes.
Three core themes emerged from analysis of participants' comments. First, participants valued the curriculum's focus on the application of the structural competency framework in real-world clinical, community, and policy contexts. Second, participants with clinical experience (residents, fellows, and faculty) reported that the curriculum helped them reframe how they thought about patients. Third, participants reported feeling reconnected to their original motivations for entering the health professions.
This structural competency curriculum fills a gap in health professional education by equipping learners to understand and respond to the role that social, economic, and political structural factors play in patient and community health.
•Patients discussed cannabis use - withand in place of opioids - for pain management.•Clinicians in our study did not routinely discuss cannabis with patients.•Patients noted concerns about cannabis ...use, and concerns regarding their own substance use histories.•As legalization expands, cannabis may become more widely available and used more frequently.•Lack of communication may inadvertently place the burden of negotiating issues of dosing and medication management on patients.
The prevalence of opioid-associated morbidity and mortality underscores the need for research on non-opioid treatments for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Pain is the most common medical condition for which patients request medical cannabis. Limited research indicates that patients are interested in cannabis as a potential addition to or replacement for opioid medication. This analysis reports on CNCP patient and clinician perceptions about the co-use of cannabis and opioids for CNCP management.
We interviewed 23 clinicians and 46 CNCP patients, using semi-structured interview guides, from six safety-net clinics across the San Francisco Bay Area, and 5 key stakeholders involved in CNCP management. We used a modified grounded theory approach to code and analyze transcripts.
CNCP patients described potential benefits of co-use of cannabis and opioids for pain management and concerns about dosing and addictive potential. Patients reported seeking cannabis when unable to obtain prescription opioids. Clinicians stated that their patients reported cannabis being helpful in managing pain symptoms. Clinicians expressed concerns about the potential exacerbation of mental health issues resulting from cannabis use.
Clinicians are hampered by a lack of clinically relevant information about cannabis use, efficacy and side-effects. Currently no guidelines exist for clinicians to address opioid and cannabis co-use, or to discuss the risk and benefits of cannabis for CNCP management, including side effects. Cannabis and opioid co-use was commonly reported by patients in our sample, yet rarely addressed during clinical CNCP care. Further research is needed on the risks and benefits of cannabis and opioid co-use.
There is growing concern among US-based clinicians, patients, policy makers, and in the media about the personal and community health risks associated with opioids. Perceptions about the efficacy and ...appropriateness of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) have dramatically transformed in recent decades. Yet, there is very little social scientific research identifying the factors that have informed this transformation from the perspectives of prescribing clinicians. As part of an on-going ethnographic study of CNCP management among clinicians and their patients with co-occurring substance use, we interviewed 23 primary care clinicians who practice in safety-net clinical settings. In this paper, we describe the clinical and social influences informing three historic periods: (1) the escalation of opioid prescriptions for CNCP; (2) an interim period in which the efficacy of and risks associated with opioids were re-assessed; and (3) the current period of “opioid pharmacovigilance,” characterized by the increased surveillance of opioid prescriptions. Clinicians reported that interpretations of the evidence-base in favor of and opposing opioid prescribing for CNCP evolved within a larger clinical-social context. Historically, pharmaceutical marketing efforts and clinicians' concerns about racialized healthcare disparities in pain treatment influenced opioid prescription decision-making. Clinicians emphasized how patients' medical complexity (e.g. multiple chronic health conditions) and structural vulnerability (e.g. poverty, community violence) impacted access to opioids within resource-limited healthcare settings. This clinical-social history of opioid prescribing practices helps to elucidate the ongoing challenges of CNCP treatment in the US healthcare safety net and lends needed specificity to the broader, nationwide conversation about opioids.
•Opioid prescribing practices of US primary care clinicians are under-researched.•Safety net healthcare settings serve the majority of patients receiving opioids.•The evidence-base in favor of and opposing opioid prescribing has evolved.•Poverty, race, and limited healthcare resources influence opioid prescribing.•This analysis elucidates current consequences of opioid pharmacovigilance.
PDF
