A review of guidelines for collaboration in substance misuse management

Department of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Occupational Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.47). 07/2013; 63(6). DOI: 10.1093/occmed/kqt089
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Background
Substance misuse among the working population results in increasing economic costs. General practitioners (GPs) and occupational physicians (OPs) can play a central role in detecting and managing substance misuse in the working population. Their collaboration could be critical in coordinating care, in facilitating rehabilitation and in reducing sickness absence.AimsTo search guidelines for evidence on collaboration between GPs and OPs in substance misuse detection and management in the working population.Methods
International guidelines regarding collaborative care for alcohol, illicit drug, hypnotic and tranquillizer misuse were identified by a systematic search in the Guidelines International Network and US National Guidelines Clearinghouse databases.ResultsIn total, 20 guidelines were considered of sufficient methodological quality, based on the criteria of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Education II instrument. Only two guidelines reported on the OP's role in screening and intervention for alcohol misuse.Conclusions
There is a lack of guidance on the OP's role and on collaboration between GPs and OPs in this field. Further study is required on their respective roles in substance misuse management, the effectiveness of workplace interventions and the benefits of collaboration.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate cooperation between occupational physicians (OPs) and general practitioners (GPs). Literature review; structured interviews; questionnaires sent to randomised samples of OPs (n = 232) and GPs (n = 243). Actual cooperation is poor. However, more than 80% of both groups responded that they want to improve their cooperation, aiming at better quality of care. Obstacles identified by OPs include insufficient knowledge among GPs about occupational health services (OHSs) (57%) and their patients' working conditions (52%). OPs also consider that GPs suspect them of serving employers more than employees (44%) and of verifying reasons of absence, with information from GPs (34%). Responses from GPs confirm these two suspicions (48%, response 58%), adding obstacles like commercialisation of OHS, lack of financial incentives, etc. Both groups are unanimous about prerequisites for improvement, especially guaranteeing the professional autonomy of OPs (OPs 86%, GPs 76%). As a first step to overcome obstacles to cooperation, OPs must clarify their position to GP colleagues. Initiatives have been taken after presenting this study.
    Occupational and Environmental Medicine 11/1999; 56(10):709-13. DOI:10.1136/oem.56.10.709 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Occupational physicians are in a unique position to intervene early in substance abuse in the workplace. Despite the complexities of and the barriers to identifying and approaching the troubled worker, there are a number of effective methods available to enable a successful intervention and an appropriate referral to the substance abuse treatment system. Motivational interviewing is one effective way to increase motivation, in a short span of time, in a worker facing needed change. Drug testing in the workplace abounds with potential conflict. Guidelines set forth by the ADA and ACOEM can help the occupational physician balance the need to advocate and protect the rights and confidentiality of patients with the need to uphold the well being and safety of the workplace and of the general public.
    Occupational medicine (Philadelphia, Pa.) 01/2002; 17(1):1-12, iii.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anecdotally, communication between general practitioners (GPs) and occupational health professionals is poor and acts as a barrier to successful rehabilitation for work. It is not known how widely this view is held by the many stakeholders in rehabilitation for work, or how important the observation is in its effect. A Delphi study was conducted by initial semi-structured telephone interview, followed by a three-round collation and feedback of opinion by e-mail. The 25 participants were identified by suggestion within the study process for their position as key informants within a wide range of stakeholders. The process generated a consensus statement which identifies the extremely important nature of rehabilitation for work, the crucial role by GPs, the central role of occupational health professionals in case management and the barrier represented by the often very poor communication between them. The way forward is to improve communication by mutual education and understanding and a team approach to rehabilitation strategy. This may be facilitated by the GPs who work in occupational health and disability assessment and the involvement of other health professionals to great benefit for all stakeholders.
    Occupational Medicine 07/2003; 53(4):249-53. DOI:10.1093/occmed/kqg066 · 1.47 Impact Factor