Medication for Opioid Use Disorders (MOUD) Providers' Experiences with Recovery Courts: Qualitative Study of Individual and Systemic Factors Impacting Interagency Collaboration.

Ekaterina Pivovarova, Faye S Taxman, Alexandra K Boland, Barbara Andraka-Christou, Barbara A De La Cruz, David Smelson, Stephenie C Lemon, Peter D Friedmann
{"title":"Medication for Opioid Use Disorders (MOUD) Providers' Experiences with Recovery Courts: Qualitative Study of Individual and Systemic Factors Impacting Interagency Collaboration.","authors":"Ekaterina Pivovarova, Faye S Taxman, Alexandra K Boland, Barbara Andraka-Christou, Barbara A De La Cruz, David Smelson, Stephenie C Lemon, Peter D Friedmann","doi":"10.1177/29767342241297745","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recovery courts mandate substance use disorder treatment as an alternative to prosecution or incarceration but lack internal resources to offer treatment. Hence, recovery courts must rely on community-based providers to ensure access to care. Interagency collaborations between recovery courts and providers of medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD) are often challenging. This qualitative study aimed to understand community-based MOUD providers' perspectives on collaboration with recovery courts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured, hourlong interviews were conducted with 24 providers from 11 community agencies about their experiences and perceptions of working with recovery courts. Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research informed study design, coding, and analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the individual-level domain, lack of knowledge about recovery courts and overall negative impressions of the criminal legal system were impediments to collaboration. Inner setting factors such as staffing shortages and provider roles in establishing therapeutic relationships limited active engagement in interagency collaboration. Outer setting domains such as communication barriers (eg, requirement of multiple release forms, lack of knowledge about who needed what information and when) and nonresponse from the courts were frequently referenced. Providers, however, also noted that direct experience with recovery court staff, especially in person, and recognition of mutual agency goals to ensure individuals receive proper care and remain in the community served as facilitators.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>While interagency collaboration is essential to ensuring that individuals in recovery courts can access MOUD, providers identify individual- and system-level barriers that impact collaboration with recovery courts. Results from providers mirror findings from recovery court staff that note communication barriers, distrust toward external agencies, and limited resources for active collaboration. Findings highlight areas where implementation strategies to improve collaboration can be targeted to ensure that individuals in recovery courts can access and remain in MOUD treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":516535,"journal":{"name":"Substance use & addiction journal","volume":" ","pages":"29767342241297745"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance use & addiction journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/29767342241297745","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Recovery courts mandate substance use disorder treatment as an alternative to prosecution or incarceration but lack internal resources to offer treatment. Hence, recovery courts must rely on community-based providers to ensure access to care. Interagency collaborations between recovery courts and providers of medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD) are often challenging. This qualitative study aimed to understand community-based MOUD providers' perspectives on collaboration with recovery courts.

Methods: Semi-structured, hourlong interviews were conducted with 24 providers from 11 community agencies about their experiences and perceptions of working with recovery courts. Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research informed study design, coding, and analysis.

Results: At the individual-level domain, lack of knowledge about recovery courts and overall negative impressions of the criminal legal system were impediments to collaboration. Inner setting factors such as staffing shortages and provider roles in establishing therapeutic relationships limited active engagement in interagency collaboration. Outer setting domains such as communication barriers (eg, requirement of multiple release forms, lack of knowledge about who needed what information and when) and nonresponse from the courts were frequently referenced. Providers, however, also noted that direct experience with recovery court staff, especially in person, and recognition of mutual agency goals to ensure individuals receive proper care and remain in the community served as facilitators.

Discussion: While interagency collaboration is essential to ensuring that individuals in recovery courts can access MOUD, providers identify individual- and system-level barriers that impact collaboration with recovery courts. Results from providers mirror findings from recovery court staff that note communication barriers, distrust toward external agencies, and limited resources for active collaboration. Findings highlight areas where implementation strategies to improve collaboration can be targeted to ensure that individuals in recovery courts can access and remain in MOUD treatment.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信