The aims of this review were to assess smoking prevalence among drug abuse treatment staff and summarize the range of barriers to provision of nicotine dependence intervention to clients receiving addictions treatment. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify publications reporting on workforce smoking prevalence, attitudes toward smoking, and perceived barriers to providing smoking cessation treatment in drug abuse treatment settings. Twenty papers met study inclusion criteria. Staff smoking prevalence estimates in the literature ranged from 14% to 40%. The most frequently reported barriers to providing nicotine dependence intervention in addiction treatment settings were lack of staff knowledge or training in this area, that smoking cessation concurrent with other drug or alcohol treatment may create a risk to sobriety, and staff are themselves smokers. Staff smoking is not uniformly elevated in the drug abuse treatment workforce. Smoking prevalence may be lower where staff are more educated or professionally trained, and may be higher in community-based drug treatment programs. Barriers to treating nicotine dependence may be addressed through staff training, policy development, and by supporting staff to quit smoking. State departments of alcohol and drug programs, and national and professional organizations, can also support treatment of nicotine dependence in drug abuse treatment settings.

PURPOSE Though evidence supports the value of community health workers (CHWs) in chronic disease self-management support, and authorities have called for expanding their roles within patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs), few PCMHs in Minnesota have incorporated these health workers into their care teams. We undertook a qualitative study to (1) identify facilitators and barriers to utilizing a CHW model among PCMHs in Minnesota, and (2) define roles played by this workforce within the PCMH team. METHODSWe conducted 51 semistructured, key-informant interviews of clinic leaders, clinicians, care coordinators, CHWs, and staff from 9 clinics (5 with community health workers, 4 without). Qualitative analysis consisted of thematic coding aligned with interview topics.RESULTS Four key conceptual themes emerged as facilitators and barriers to utilizing a CHW model: the presence of leaders with knowledge of CHWs who championed the model, a clinic culture that favored piloting innovation vs maintaining established care models, clinic prioritization of patients' nonmedical needs, and leadership perceptions of sustainability. These health care workers performed common and clinic-specific roles that included outreach, health education and coaching, community resource linkage, system navigation, and facilitating communication between clinician and patient.CONCLUSIONS We identified facilitators and barriers to adopting CHW roles as part of PCMH care teams in Minnesota and documented their roles being played in these settings. Our findings can be used when considering strategies to enhance utilization and integration of this emerging workforce. 2018;16:14-20. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2171. Ann Fam Med INTRODUCTIONC ommunity health workers (CHWs), trusted frontline health workers who have a close understanding of the community served, 1 can be valuable contributors to the team-based and patient-centered care promoted through the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model. 2 CHWs complement roles played by traditional health professionals through culturally sensitive outreach, patient education, resource identification, case management, care coordination, and patient support. [3][4][5][6] Interventions by CHWs supporting chronic disease self-management and preventive services show improved health care utilization, knowledge, self-care, adherence, health outcomes, and quality of life, particularly when these workers are integrated into primary care teams. 4,[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] Their interventions are most often directed to and studied in underserved communities (racial and ethnic minority and low-income populations, federally qualified health care [FQHC] settings), where the integration of these workers show benefit. 3,4,12,[21][22][23] Health authorities have called for expanding interventions by CHWs among clinics serving these populations, and recent policies create a platform for greater community health worker integration. [24][25][26] Researchers have explored the experience of ...

Twelve Step Facilitation (TSF) is an emerging, empirically supported treatment, the study of which will be strengthened by rigorous fidelity assessment. This report describes the development, reliability and concurrent validity of the Twelve Step Facilitation Adherence Competence Empathy Scale (TSF ACES), a comprehensive fidelity rating scale for group and individual TSF treatment developed for the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study, Stimulant Abuser Groups to Engage in 12-Step. Independent raters used TSF ACES to rate treatment delivery fidelity of 966 (97% of total) TSF group and individual sessions. TSF ACES summary measures assessed therapist treatment adherence, competence, proscribed behaviors, empathy and overall session performance. TSF ACES showed fair to good overall reliability; weighted kappa coefficients for 59 co-rated sessions ranged from .31–1.00, with a mean of .69. Reliability ratings for session summary measures were good to excellent (.69–.91). Internal consistency for the instrument was variable (.47–.71). Relationships of the TSF ACES summary measures with each other, as well as relationships of the summary measures with a measure of therapeutic alliance provided support for concurrent and convergent validity. Implications and future directions for use of TSF ACES in clinical trials and community treatment implementation are discussed.

The goals of the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) are to test promising drug abuse treatment models in multisite clinical trials and to support the adoption of new interventions into clinical practice. Using qualitative research methods, we studied adoption in the context of two multisite trials, one outside the CTN and another within the CTN. Seventy-one participants representing eight organizational roles ranging from clinic staff to clinical trial leaders were interviewed about their role in the clinical trial, the trial's interactions with clinics, and intervention adoption. Drawing on the conceptual themes identified in these interviews, we report on strategies that could be applied in the planning, development, and implementation of multisite studies to better support the adoption of tested interventions in study clinics after trials had ended. Planning for adoption in the early stages of protocol development will enhance the integration of new interventions into practice.

No abstract