Canadian government discourses on the overdose death crisis: limitations of a bio-evidenced approach

IF 1.3 Q4 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Ana Ning, R. Csiernik
{"title":"Canadian government discourses on the overdose death crisis: limitations of a bio-evidenced approach","authors":"Ana Ning, R. Csiernik","doi":"10.1108/dhs-03-2022-0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nCritical analyses of health policies and practices may appear to lack practicality during unprecedented times that demand immediate solutions. This paper aims to use critical social science theories to help improve essential service delivery during a public health crisis.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study is based on qualitative content analysis of government and scholarly sources between 2008 and 2021 to identify strengths and gaps underlying the Canadian Federal Government’s evidence-based solutions to the opioid death crisis. Key questions examined are: What constitutes best-evidence practices underlying the Canadian Drugs and Substances Strategy?, Is biomedical evidence the only legitimate framework to substantiate feasible interventions? and Because the opioid death crisis affects disproportionately vulnerable populations, what is the potential merit of considering diverse knowledges and practices as valid forms of intervention despite lacking biomedical evidence bases?\n\n\nFindings\nWhile overdose reversing drugs, drug replacement approaches, biologically focused harm reduction options and pharmacological regulatory and surveillance initiatives help reduce premature opioid-related morbidity and mortality across provinces, this study’s findings demonstrate that these individualizing, biomedical magic bullets are temporary solutions, not comprehensive plans to solve a societal problem. This study’s theoretically informed analysis shows that the Canadian Federal Government responses detract attention from issues of social justice, social inequities and the biomedical dominance of health care as broader forces of the opioid death crisis. To address these analytical omissions, broader evidence-based solutions must build upon meaningful intraventions, the insiders’ perspectives or voices of the afflicted communities alongside meaningful interventions – going beyond distal, clinical-based and proximal, home-based interventions.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nBy highlighting the biomedical and social embeddings of the opioid death crisis, this study underscores structural conditions rather than individuals’ physical bodies as the catalysts for change. A deeper theoretical understanding of why certain issues exists, as they do and how they occur, can provide the basis for prediction of their (re)occurrence and for informing meaningful intervention efforts.\n","PeriodicalId":72849,"journal":{"name":"Drugs, habits and social policy","volume":"57 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs, habits and social policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/dhs-03-2022-0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose Critical analyses of health policies and practices may appear to lack practicality during unprecedented times that demand immediate solutions. This paper aims to use critical social science theories to help improve essential service delivery during a public health crisis. Design/methodology/approach This study is based on qualitative content analysis of government and scholarly sources between 2008 and 2021 to identify strengths and gaps underlying the Canadian Federal Government’s evidence-based solutions to the opioid death crisis. Key questions examined are: What constitutes best-evidence practices underlying the Canadian Drugs and Substances Strategy?, Is biomedical evidence the only legitimate framework to substantiate feasible interventions? and Because the opioid death crisis affects disproportionately vulnerable populations, what is the potential merit of considering diverse knowledges and practices as valid forms of intervention despite lacking biomedical evidence bases? Findings While overdose reversing drugs, drug replacement approaches, biologically focused harm reduction options and pharmacological regulatory and surveillance initiatives help reduce premature opioid-related morbidity and mortality across provinces, this study’s findings demonstrate that these individualizing, biomedical magic bullets are temporary solutions, not comprehensive plans to solve a societal problem. This study’s theoretically informed analysis shows that the Canadian Federal Government responses detract attention from issues of social justice, social inequities and the biomedical dominance of health care as broader forces of the opioid death crisis. To address these analytical omissions, broader evidence-based solutions must build upon meaningful intraventions, the insiders’ perspectives or voices of the afflicted communities alongside meaningful interventions – going beyond distal, clinical-based and proximal, home-based interventions. Originality/value By highlighting the biomedical and social embeddings of the opioid death crisis, this study underscores structural conditions rather than individuals’ physical bodies as the catalysts for change. A deeper theoretical understanding of why certain issues exists, as they do and how they occur, can provide the basis for prediction of their (re)occurrence and for informing meaningful intervention efforts.
加拿大政府关于过量死亡危机的话语:生物证据方法的局限性
目的在需要立即解决的空前时期,对卫生政策和做法的批判性分析似乎缺乏实用性。本文旨在利用关键的社会科学理论来帮助改善公共卫生危机期间的基本服务提供。设计/方法/方法本研究基于2008年至2021年期间政府和学术来源的定性内容分析,以确定加拿大联邦政府以证据为基础的阿片类药物死亡危机解决方案的优势和差距。审查的关键问题是:什么构成加拿大药物和物质战略的最佳证据做法?生物医学证据是证实可行干预措施的唯一合法框架吗?由于阿片类药物死亡危机对弱势群体的影响尤为严重,在缺乏生物医学证据基础的情况下,考虑将各种知识和做法作为有效干预形式的潜在优点是什么?虽然药物过量逆转药物、药物替代方法、以生物为重点的减少危害选择以及药理学监管和监测举措有助于减少各省与阿片类药物相关的过早发病率和死亡率,但本研究的结果表明,这些个性化的生物医学灵丹妙药只是暂时的解决方案,而不是解决社会问题的全面计划。这项研究的理论分析表明,加拿大联邦政府的反应分散了对社会正义、社会不平等和医疗保健的生物医学主导等问题的关注,这些问题是阿片类药物死亡危机的更广泛力量。为了解决这些分析上的遗漏,更广泛的循证解决方案必须以有意义的静脉干预、内部人士的观点或受影响社区的声音为基础,同时采取有意义的干预措施——超越以临床为基础的远端干预和以家庭为基础的近端干预。独创性/价值通过强调阿片类药物死亡危机的生物医学和社会嵌入,本研究强调了结构条件而不是个人的身体作为变革的催化剂。对某些问题存在的原因和发生方式的更深入的理论理解,可以为预测其(再次)发生提供基础,并为有意义的干预工作提供信息。
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
CiteScore
2.00
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