Co-producing addiction aftercare

Abstract

2013),"Stigma and perceptions of recovery in Scotland: a qualitative study of injecting drug users attending methadone treatment", Drugs and Alcohol Today, Vol. 13 Iss 4 pp. 244-257 http://dx.Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:448207 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to describe the development and delivery of an aftercare programme called Learning To Live Again, which was co-produced between service users and clinic staff. Design/methodology/approach -In total, 37 semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 project stakeholders who were service users, mentors, university and clinical staff. The data were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Findings -Four overarching themes were identified in the analysis of interview data as characterising the process of co-producing an aftercare programme. These were: achieving common ground, roles and responsibilities, the activities programme and the road to recovery. Interdependence of service users and clinicians was given strong emphasis. Practical implications -A number of challenges arise in co-producing an aftercare programme which is largely service user led and adds to the local recovery capital. The benefits of co-producing aftercare outweigh the difficulties and the programme can be set up within existing resources. Given the study's focus on the process of setting up and maintaining an aftercare programme, no attempt was made to evaluate the improvement in outcomes or cost-effectiveness. Originality/value -Many peer-mentor-led aftercare programmes have been set up and this paper describes stakeholders' thoughts about the challenges and benefits of co-producing an aftercare programme.

Consumer participation in drug treatment: a systematic review

“…In five studies (Bryant et al , 2008b; Greer et al , 2016; Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Rutter, Albert and Crawford, 2009; Tober et al , 2013) service quality was enhanced when the views of service users were incorporated through consumer representation on decision-making committees, open councils or forums and service expansion projects. These improvements included: enhanced consumer-centred care (King, 2011), decreased waiting times and revised operating hours (Bryant et al , 2008b; Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Rutter, Albert and Crawford, 2009), increased consumer survey response rate about service reconfiguration (Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Rutter, Albert and Crawford, 2009) and better opportunities for social support, self-help and networking (Patterson et al , 2010).…”

“…Consumer input was found to expand the current range of available services such as the development of an aftercare service (Tober et al , 2013), an inpatient unit, a day programme, and mobile treatment service and the introduction of buprenorphine to increase treatment options (Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Rutter, Albert and Crawford, 2009). Consumer input also led to the development of improved harm reduction interventions, such as a take home naloxone programme and the provision of a wider range of safer inhalation supplies (Greer et al , 2016) and injecting equipment (Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Rutter, Albert and Crawford, 2009).…”

“…Involving consumers in CP activities was found to foster consumer empowerment as their participation altered the power dynamics of the consumer–provider relationship (King, 2011; Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Albert, Rhodes, Rutter and Crawford, 2009; Rance and Treloar, 2015) and reduced the stigmatisation of service users (Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Albert, Rhodes, Rutter and Crawford, 2009). CP decreased the interpersonal distance between consumers and providers (Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Albert, Rhodes, Rutter and Crawford, 2009), allowing them to see each other’s human qualities (Rance and Treloar, 2015) and find common ground (Tober et al , 2013). As a result, consumers were able to gain confidence and a sense of ownership over aspects of the service (Patterson et al , 2010; Tober et al , 2013).…”

“…CP decreased the interpersonal distance between consumers and providers (Patterson, Weaver, Agath, Albert, Rhodes, Rutter and Crawford, 2009), allowing them to see each other’s human qualities (Rance and Treloar, 2015) and find common ground (Tober et al , 2013). As a result, consumers were able to gain confidence and a sense of ownership over aspects of the service (Patterson et al , 2010; Tober et al , 2013).…”

Applying Behavior Change Theories and Qualitative Methods in Substance Misuse Implementation Research: Conceptualizing the Adoption of Breaking Free Online in Real-World Clinical Practice

“…Additional investigations into the role that was given to peer mentors in implementing BFO were subsequently conducted by Dugdale, Elison, Ward, et al (2016). Although many peer mentors at CGL were helping to deliver the program to service users, some evidence suggests that this role could lead to relapse for the peer mentors themselves, as they may be required to work with service users who are potentially still using substances (Colón, Deren, Guarino, Mino, & Kang, 2010; Tober et al, 2013). Therefore, it is important to understand this implementation approach and also the impact that this role has on peer mentors’ own recovery.…”