Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Successful implementation of peer recovery coach (PRC) programs may help improve linkage to services and clinical outcomes for emergency department (ED) patients with substance use disorder (SUD). However, literature on implementation outcomes and strategies of PRC programs is limited. We conducted a qualitative assessment of implementation outcomes and strategies for an ED-based PRC program in Atlanta, Georgia.</p> Methods <p>We conducted qualitative interviews with 27 program participants (ED patients with SUD served by PRC program) and 29 service providers and partners (peer recovery coaches, ED physicians and staff, SUD treatment and other service providers) in October 2023 – March 2025. We transcribed audio-recordings and analyzed data using rapid qualitative analysis approach mapping emerging themes to Proctor’s model of implementation outcomes and Leeman et al.’s implementation strategies framework.</p> Results <p>We identified two major themes related to implementation outcomes: (1) <i>PRC program acceptability</i> (patients’ positive interactions with PRCs) and (2) <i>appropriateness</i> (sub-themes include: successful linkage to community services; PRC program as an important resource for patients; added value of PRC team; no negative impact on ED workflow). Themes related to implementation strategies include (1) <i>streamlined communication between PRC and ED teams</i> (direct communication via electronic medical records system, single contact phone number, informing ED service providers of clinical and program outcomes), (2) <i>addressing barriers to community-based services</i> (preparing patient’s medical documentation, insurance, transportation to community services); (3) <i>supportive supervision of PRCs</i> (addressing daily and long-term issues through regular meetings; limiting caseload; and providing orientation, on-job training and mental health support) and (4) <i>addressing telehealth implementation challenges</i> (ensuring access to electronic medical records system).</p> Conclusion <p>This study outlines key implementation outcomes and strategies for PRC programs, offering practical guidance for successful ED-based PRC program implementation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Implementation outcomes and strategies of a peer recovery coach program: findings from a qualitative assessment in the U.S. South, 2024–2025

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月18日

查看全文
  • Umedjon Ibragimov,
  • Nicholas A. Giordano,
  • Sneha Amaresh,
  • Tatiana Getz,
  • Tatiana Matuszewski,
  • Alaina R. Steck,
  • Yan Li,
  • Eliot H. Blum,
  • Jessica Tuttle,
  • Hardik Pipalia,
  • Hannah L. F. Cooper,
  • Joseph E. Carpenter

摘要

Introduction

Successful implementation of peer recovery coach (PRC) programs may help improve linkage to services and clinical outcomes for emergency department (ED) patients with substance use disorder (SUD). However, literature on implementation outcomes and strategies of PRC programs is limited. We conducted a qualitative assessment of implementation outcomes and strategies for an ED-based PRC program in Atlanta, Georgia.

Methods

We conducted qualitative interviews with 27 program participants (ED patients with SUD served by PRC program) and 29 service providers and partners (peer recovery coaches, ED physicians and staff, SUD treatment and other service providers) in October 2023 – March 2025. We transcribed audio-recordings and analyzed data using rapid qualitative analysis approach mapping emerging themes to Proctor’s model of implementation outcomes and Leeman et al.’s implementation strategies framework.

Results

We identified two major themes related to implementation outcomes: (1) PRC program acceptability (patients’ positive interactions with PRCs) and (2) appropriateness (sub-themes include: successful linkage to community services; PRC program as an important resource for patients; added value of PRC team; no negative impact on ED workflow). Themes related to implementation strategies include (1) streamlined communication between PRC and ED teams (direct communication via electronic medical records system, single contact phone number, informing ED service providers of clinical and program outcomes), (2) addressing barriers to community-based services (preparing patient’s medical documentation, insurance, transportation to community services); (3) supportive supervision of PRCs (addressing daily and long-term issues through regular meetings; limiting caseload; and providing orientation, on-job training and mental health support) and (4) addressing telehealth implementation challenges (ensuring access to electronic medical records system).

Conclusion

This study outlines key implementation outcomes and strategies for PRC programs, offering practical guidance for successful ED-based PRC program implementation.