Literature Collection

OBJECTIVES: Primary care behavioral health (PCBH) is a patient care model in which a behavioral health consultant (BHC) works alongside the primary care provider to address behavioral components of health conditions. PCBH is well received in the primary care setting; however, little is known about acceptability of the service among prenatal patients. The study was designed to explore the acceptability of PCBH among pregnant patients in a resident obstetrics and gynecology clinic. METHODS: A survey designed to assess different components of acceptability was administered to eligible pregnant patients who received prenatal care at the resident obstetrics and gynecology clinic. RESULTS: The majority of patients wanted to receive education on pregnancy-relevant topics from the BHC: healthy weight gain (68.4%), healthy eating (70.4%), healthy exercise (73.5%), and mood disorders (63.3%). The majority of participants wanted help from the BHC in managing coexisting conditions affecting pregnancy: stress (63.3%), depression (75.5%), or anxiety (73%). The majority of patients (55.6%) preferred to work with a BHC for mental health concerns rather than an outside psychiatrist or counselor. PCBH service was perceived to be easy to understand (78%). Barriers to engaging in the PCBH service included time (41.4%), lack of perceived need (13.8%), unavailability (6.9%), and others (13.8%). Despite the perceived benefit, there was an implication of stigma among prenatal patients seeking PCBH or mental health care. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the PCBH model had high acceptability among a prenatal care population in a resident obstetrics and gynecology clinic and offers potential to improve prenatal outcomes.

IMPORTANCE: Harm reduction is associated with improved health outcomes among people who use substances. As overdose deaths persist, hospitals are recognizing the need for harm reduction services; however, little is known about the outcomes of hospital-based harm reduction for patients and staff. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient and staff perspectives on the impact and challenges of a hospital-based harm reduction program offering safer use education and supplies at discharge. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This qualitative study consisted of 40-minute semistructured interviews with hospitalized patients receiving harm reduction services and hospital staff at an urban, safety-net hospital in California from October 2022 to March 2023. Purposive sampling allowed inclusion of diverse patient racial and ethnic identities, substance use disorders (SUDs), and staff roles. EXPOSURE: Receipt of harm reduction education and/or supplies (eg, syringes, pipes, naloxone, and test strips) from an addiction consult team, or providing care for patients receiving these services. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes. RESULTS: A total of 40 participants completed interviews, including 20 patients (mean [SD] age, 43 [13] years; 1 American Indian or Alaska Native [5%], 1 Asian and Pacific Islander [5%], 6 Black [30%]; 6 Latine [30%]; and 6 White [30%]) and 20 staff (mean [SD] age 37 [8] years). Patients were diagnosed with a variety of SUDs (7 patients with opioid and stimulant use disorder [35%]; 7 patients with stimulant use disorder [35%]; 3 patients with opioid use disorder [15%]; and 3 patients with alcohol use disorder [15%]). A total of 3 themes were identified; respondents reported that harm reduction programs (1) expanded access to harm reduction education and supplies, particularly for ethnically and racially minoritized populations; (2) built trust by improving the patient care experience and increasing engagement; and (3) catalyzed culture change by helping destigmatize care for individuals who planned to continue using substances and increasing staff fulfillment. Black and Latine patients, those who primarily used stimulants, and those with limited English proficiency (LEP) reported learning new harm reduction strategies. Program challenges included hesitancy regarding regulations, limited SUD education among staff, remaining stigma, and the need for careful assessment of patient goals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this qualitative study, patients and staff believed that integrating harm reduction services into hospital care increased access for populations unfamiliar with harm reduction, improved trust, and reduced stigma. These findings suggest that efforts to increase access to harm reduction services for Black, Latine, and LEP populations, including those who use stimulants, are especially needed.