A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient Program
The present study represents a two-phase process evaluation of the implementation of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) on an adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit. The first phase analyzed uptake efforts using chart review data, which revealed that 158 (16.8%) of 942 h...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2020-06-01
|
| Series: | Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1177/1178221820936666 |
| _version_ | 1819176482531966976 |
|---|---|
| author | Sarah E Johnson Andrea Lapomardo Heather M Thibeau Melanie Altemus Jeffrey I Hunt Jennifer C Wolff |
| author_facet | Sarah E Johnson Andrea Lapomardo Heather M Thibeau Melanie Altemus Jeffrey I Hunt Jennifer C Wolff |
| author_sort | Sarah E Johnson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The present study represents a two-phase process evaluation of the implementation of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) on an adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit. The first phase analyzed uptake efforts using chart review data, which revealed that 158 (16.8%) of 942 hospitalized patients ( Mean age = 15.81, SD = 1.24) were eligible to receive the brief intervention; however, only 30 (19%) adolescents received the intervention, 15 (9.5%) declined treatment, and 113 (71.5%) were never offered. The second phase involved directed content analyses of clinical staff and providers’ perceived facilitators and barriers to the implementation. Qualitative findings revealed that providers and staff accepted and agreed with the use of the brief substance use intervention, though perceived time constraints, competing demands, and insufficient staffing interfered with implementation across disciplines. Barriers included patients’ length of stay and competing treatment priorities. Several recommendations emerged including, utilization of non-clinical staff, a clear administration protocol, and the use of computer-based interventions. Findings from the present study shed light on the need to consider alternate or more streamlined substance use treatments such as computerized approaches and focus on ways in which protocol can be modified to fit the needs within an acute, short-term setting. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-22T21:11:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7668582c7c294a6bb5bd17093333128e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1178-2218 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-22T21:11:28Z |
| publishDate | 2020-06-01 |
| publisher | SAGE Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment |
| spelling | doaj.art-7668582c7c294a6bb5bd17093333128e2022-12-21T18:12:31ZengSAGE PublishingSubstance Abuse: Research and Treatment1178-22182020-06-011410.1177/1178221820936666A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient ProgramSarah E Johnson0Andrea LapomardoHeather M Thibeau1Melanie Altemus2Jeffrey I Hunt3Jennifer C Wolff4Bradley/Hasboro Research Center, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USABradley/Hasboro Research Center, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USABradley/Hasboro Research Center, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USABradley/Hasboro Research Center, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USABradley/Hasboro Research Center, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USAThe present study represents a two-phase process evaluation of the implementation of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) on an adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit. The first phase analyzed uptake efforts using chart review data, which revealed that 158 (16.8%) of 942 hospitalized patients ( Mean age = 15.81, SD = 1.24) were eligible to receive the brief intervention; however, only 30 (19%) adolescents received the intervention, 15 (9.5%) declined treatment, and 113 (71.5%) were never offered. The second phase involved directed content analyses of clinical staff and providers’ perceived facilitators and barriers to the implementation. Qualitative findings revealed that providers and staff accepted and agreed with the use of the brief substance use intervention, though perceived time constraints, competing demands, and insufficient staffing interfered with implementation across disciplines. Barriers included patients’ length of stay and competing treatment priorities. Several recommendations emerged including, utilization of non-clinical staff, a clear administration protocol, and the use of computer-based interventions. Findings from the present study shed light on the need to consider alternate or more streamlined substance use treatments such as computerized approaches and focus on ways in which protocol can be modified to fit the needs within an acute, short-term setting.https://doi.org/10.1177/1178221820936666 |
| spellingShingle | Sarah E Johnson Andrea Lapomardo Heather M Thibeau Melanie Altemus Jeffrey I Hunt Jennifer C Wolff A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient Program Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment |
| title | A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient Program |
| title_full | A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient Program |
| title_fullStr | A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient Program |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient Program |
| title_short | A Process Evaluation of a Substance Use Brief Intervention for Adolescents in a Psychiatric Inpatient Program |
| title_sort | process evaluation of a substance use brief intervention for adolescents in a psychiatric inpatient program |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1177/1178221820936666 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sarahejohnson aprocessevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT andrealapomardo aprocessevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT heathermthibeau aprocessevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT melaniealtemus aprocessevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT jeffreyihunt aprocessevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT jennifercwolff aprocessevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT sarahejohnson processevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT andrealapomardo processevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT heathermthibeau processevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT melaniealtemus processevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT jeffreyihunt processevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram AT jennifercwolff processevaluationofasubstanceusebriefinterventionforadolescentsinapsychiatricinpatientprogram |