"The alternative is they're not getting care at all": a qualitative interview study of opioid use disorder treatment providers' perspectives on quality and appropriateness of telehealth for buprenorphine access.

IF 4.2 2区 社会学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Naomi Zucker, Emilio Flores, David Mandell, Justin Clapp, Shoshana V Aronowitz
{"title":"\"The alternative is they're not getting care at all\": a qualitative interview study of opioid use disorder treatment providers' perspectives on quality and appropriateness of telehealth for buprenorphine access.","authors":"Naomi Zucker, Emilio Flores, David Mandell, Justin Clapp, Shoshana V Aronowitz","doi":"10.1186/s12954-026-01474-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a major source of morbidity and mortality in the United States. While substantial evidence supports the effectiveness of medications for opioid disorder (MOUD), 80% of people with OUD receive no treatment, and of those who do, less than half receive MOUD. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been a substantial increase in the use of telehealth to deliver MOUD care. While telehealth has shown promise for increasing access and improving retention in treatment, its ongoing uptake and provision will depend on its acceptance and implementation by providers. This qualitative, interview-based study aims to explore how providers understand, experience, and assess telehealth for MOUD in the wake of its rapid expansion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted 25 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with MOUD providers in Southeastern Pennsylvania, including prescribing clinicians, clinic staff, mental health counselors, program administrators/leadership and pharmacists. We recruited from diverse substance use disorder treatment settings, using purposive and snowball sampling. Interviews were conducted over Zoom, transcribed, and coded and analyzed using iterative thematic coding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While most providers hold largely positive views of telehealth for MOUD due to its ability to improve access, they differed in their assessments of how such care compares to in-person MOUD treatment and for whom it is most appropriate and effective. Our findings show that debates over telehealth center on perceived quality of care and the \"stability\" of patients. Despite these disagreements, providers largely agree that telehealth is \"better than nothing.\"</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While most providers hold largely positive views of telehealth for MOUD, hesitation towards telehealth is linked to assumptions about the broader empirical state of in-person MOUD treatment and about patient needs, preferences, and capacities to engage in care. Understanding when and why providers may oppose the use of telehealth for MOUD is critical to improving care for patients and reducing barriers to a form of treatment that can increase access to much-needed care for the most vulnerable patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":12922,"journal":{"name":"Harm Reduction Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13563914/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harm Reduction Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-026-01474-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a major source of morbidity and mortality in the United States. While substantial evidence supports the effectiveness of medications for opioid disorder (MOUD), 80% of people with OUD receive no treatment, and of those who do, less than half receive MOUD. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been a substantial increase in the use of telehealth to deliver MOUD care. While telehealth has shown promise for increasing access and improving retention in treatment, its ongoing uptake and provision will depend on its acceptance and implementation by providers. This qualitative, interview-based study aims to explore how providers understand, experience, and assess telehealth for MOUD in the wake of its rapid expansion.

Methods: We conducted 25 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with MOUD providers in Southeastern Pennsylvania, including prescribing clinicians, clinic staff, mental health counselors, program administrators/leadership and pharmacists. We recruited from diverse substance use disorder treatment settings, using purposive and snowball sampling. Interviews were conducted over Zoom, transcribed, and coded and analyzed using iterative thematic coding.

Results: While most providers hold largely positive views of telehealth for MOUD due to its ability to improve access, they differed in their assessments of how such care compares to in-person MOUD treatment and for whom it is most appropriate and effective. Our findings show that debates over telehealth center on perceived quality of care and the "stability" of patients. Despite these disagreements, providers largely agree that telehealth is "better than nothing."

Conclusions: While most providers hold largely positive views of telehealth for MOUD, hesitation towards telehealth is linked to assumptions about the broader empirical state of in-person MOUD treatment and about patient needs, preferences, and capacities to engage in care. Understanding when and why providers may oppose the use of telehealth for MOUD is critical to improving care for patients and reducing barriers to a form of treatment that can increase access to much-needed care for the most vulnerable patients.

“另一种选择是他们根本没有得到照顾”:一项关于阿片类药物使用障碍治疗提供者对丁丙诺啡远程医疗质量和适当性的看法的定性访谈研究。
背景:阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)是美国发病率和死亡率的主要来源。虽然有大量证据支持阿片类药物治疗的有效性,但80%的阿片类药物患者没有接受治疗,而接受治疗的患者中,不到一半接受了阿片类药物治疗。自2019冠状病毒病大流行以来,利用远程医疗提供mod护理的情况大幅增加。虽然远程保健已显示出增加获得治疗和改善保留治疗的希望,但其持续吸收和提供将取决于提供者是否接受和实施。这个定性的,基于访谈的研究旨在探讨提供者如何理解,经验和评估远程医疗的mod在其快速扩张之后。方法:我们对宾夕法尼亚州东南部的mod提供者进行了25次深入的半结构化访谈,包括处方临床医生、诊所工作人员、心理健康咨询师、项目管理/领导和药剂师。我们从不同的物质使用障碍治疗设置中招募,使用目的和雪球抽样。访谈是通过Zoom进行的,使用迭代主题编码进行转录、编码和分析。结果:虽然大多数提供者对远程医疗的mod持积极态度,因为它能够改善获取,但他们在评估这种护理与面对面的mod治疗相比如何以及对谁最合适和有效方面存在差异。我们的研究结果表明,关于远程医疗中心对护理质量的感知和患者的“稳定性”的争论。尽管存在这些分歧,但提供者基本上同意远程医疗“聊胜于无”。结论:虽然大多数提供者对远程医疗对mod持积极态度,但对远程医疗的犹豫与对现场mod治疗的更广泛的经验状态以及对患者需要、偏好和参与护理能力的假设有关。了解提供者何时以及为何可能反对使用远程保健治疗mod,对于改善对患者的护理和减少这种治疗形式的障碍至关重要,这种治疗形式可以增加最弱势患者获得急需护理的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Harm Reduction Journal
Harm Reduction Journal Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
126
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: Harm Reduction Journal is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal whose focus is on the prevalent patterns of psychoactive drug use, the public policies meant to control them, and the search for effective methods of reducing the adverse medical, public health, and social consequences associated with both drugs and drug policies. We define "harm reduction" as "policies and programs which aim to reduce the health, social, and economic costs of legal and illegal psychoactive drug use without necessarily reducing drug consumption". We are especially interested in studies of the evolving patterns of drug use around the world, their implications for the spread of HIV/AIDS and other blood-borne pathogens.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书