Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Systematic Reviews
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Protocol

Impact of health system engagement on the health and well-being of people who use drugs: a realist review protocol

Authors: Ginetta Salvalaggio, Lawrence Ferguson, Hannah L. Brooks, Sandra Campbell, Vanessa Gladue, Elaine Hyshka, Linda Lam, Heather Morris, Lara Nixon, Jane Springett

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Although community-level benefits of health system engagement (i.e., health service planning, delivery, and quality improvement, engaged research and evaluation, and collaborative advocacy) are well established, individual-level impacts on the health and well-being of community members are less explored, in particular for people who use or have used illegal drugs (PWUD). Capacity building, personal growth, reduced/safer drug use, and other positive outcomes may or may not be experienced by PWUD involved in engagement activities. Indeed, PWUD may also encounter stigma and harm when interacting with healthcare and academic structures. Our objective is to uncover why, how, and under what circumstances positive and negative health outcomes occur during health system engagement by PWUD.

Methods

We propose a realist review approach due to its explanatory lens. Through preliminary exploration of literature, lived experience input, and consideration of formal theories, an explanatory model was drafted. The model describes contexts, mechanisms, and health outcomes (e.g., mental health, stable/safer drug use) involved in health system engagement. The explanatory model will be tested against the literature and iteratively refined against formal theories. A participatory lens will also be used, wherein PWUD with lived experience of health system engagement will contribute throughout all stages of the review.

Discussion

We believe this is the first realist review to explore the contextual factors and underlying mechanisms of health outcomes for PWUD who participate in health system engagement. A thorough understanding of the relevant literature and theoretical underpinnings of this process will offer insights and recommendations to improve the engagement processes of PWUD.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Haldane V, Chuah FLH, Srivastava A, Singh SR, Koh GCH, Seng CK, et al. Community participation in health services development, implementation, and evaluation: a systematic review of empowerment, health, community, and process outcomes. PLoS One. 2019;14(5):e0216112.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Brunton G, Thomas J, O’Mara-Eves A, Jamal F, Oliver S, Kavanagh J. Narratives of community engagement: a systematic review-derived conceptual framework for public health interventions. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):1–15.CrossRef
3.
Ti L, Tzemis D, Buxton JA. Engaging people who use drugs in policy and program development: a review of the literature. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2012;7(1):47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Jozaghi E. The role of drug users’ advocacy group in changing the dynamics of life in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, Canada. J Subst Use. 2014;19(1–2):213–8.CrossRef
5.
Jozaghi E, Greer AM, Lampkin H, Buxton JA. Activism and scientific research: 20 years of community action by the Vancouver area network of drug users. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2018;13(1):1–9.CrossRef
6.
Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, Macaulay AC, Greenhalgh T, Wong G, et al. A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):725.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
du Plessis C, Whitaker L, Hurley J. Peer support workers in substance abuse treatment services: a systematic review of the literature. J Subst Use. 2020;25(3):225–30.CrossRef
8.
Kennedy MC, Boyd J, Mayer S, Collins A, Kerr T, McNeil R. Peer worker involvement in low-threshold supervised consumption facilities in the context of an overdose epidemic in Vancouver, Canada. Soc Sci Med. 2019;225:60–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Marshall Z, Dechman MK, Minichiello A, Alcock L, Harris GE. Peering into the literature: a systematic review of the roles of people who inject drugs in harm reduction initiatives. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2015;151:1–14.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Sharma AE, Knox M, Mleczko VL, Olayiwola JN. The impact of patient advisors on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):693.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Jackson T, Pinnock H, Liew SM, Horne E, Ehrlich E, Fulton O, et al. Patient and public involvement in research: from tokenistic box ticking to valued team members. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):1–7.CrossRef
12.
Rhodes T. Risk environments and drug harms: a social science for harm reduction approach. Int J Drug Policy. 2009;20(3):193–201.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Bardwell G, Anderson S, Richardson L, Bird L, Lampkin H, Small W, et al. The perspectives of structurally vulnerable people who use drugs on volunteer stipends and work experiences provided through a drug user organization: opportunities and limitations. Int J Drug Policy. 2018;55:40–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Collins A, Strike C, Guta A, Turje R, McDougall P, Parashar S, et al. “We’re giving you something so we get something in return”: perspectives on research participation and compensation among people living with HIV who use drugs. Int J Drug Policy. 2017;39:92–8.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Damon W, Callon C, Wiebe L, Small W, Kerr T, McNeil R. Community-based participatory research in a heavily researched inner city neighbourhood: perspectives of people who use drugs on their experiences as peer researchers. Soc Sci Med. 2017;176:85–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Greer AM, Amlani A, Burmeister C, Scott A, Newman C, Lampkin H, et al. Peer engagement barriers and enablers: insights from people who use drugs in British Columbia, Canada. Can J Public Health. 2019;110(2):227–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S, Annandale E, Arthur A, Harvey J, et al. Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6(1):35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
McNeil R, Small W, Wood E, Kerr T. Hospitals as a ‘risk environment’: an ethno-epidemiological study of voluntary and involuntary discharge from hospital against medical advice among people who inject drugs. Soc Sci Med. 2014;105:59–66.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Souleymanov R, Kuzmanovic D, Marshall Z, Scheim A, Mikki M, Worthington C, et al. The ethics of community-based research with people who use drugs: results of a scoping review. BMC Med Ethics. 2016;17(1):25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Brown G, Crawford S, Perry G-E, Byrne J, Dunne J, Reeders D, et al. Achieving meaningful participation of people who use drugs and their peer organizations in a strategic research partnership. Harm Reduct J. 2019;16(1):37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Jürgens R. “Nothing about us without us” - greater, meaningful involvement of people who use illegal drugs: a public health, ethical, and human rights imperative. Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network; 2005.
22.
Greer AM, Amlani A, Pauly B, Burmeister C, Buxton JA. Participant, peer and PEEP: considerations and strategies for involving people who have used illicit substances as assistants and advisors in research. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):834.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(1_suppl):21–34.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Williams M. Making up mechanisms in realist research. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, Monaghan M, Dalkin S, editors. Doing realist research: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2019. p. 25–40.
25.
26.
Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11(1):1–4.CrossRef
27.
Marchal B, Kegels G, Van Belle S. Theory and realist methods. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, Monaghan M, Dalkin S, editors. Doing realist research: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2019. p. 79–90.
28.
Polk LV. Toward a middle-range theory of resilience. Adv Nurs Sci. 1997;19(3):1–13.CrossRef
29.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000;11:68–78.
30.
Hur MH. Empowerment in terms of theoretical perspectives: exploring a typology of the process and components across disciplines. J Community Psychol. 2006;34(5):523–40.CrossRef
31.
Hartman A. In search of subjugated knowledge. Fem Fam Ther. 2000;11(4):19–23.
32.
Benford RD, Snow DA. Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annu Rev Sociol. 2000;26(1):611–39.CrossRef
33.
Beder J. Loss of the assumptive world—how we deal with death and loss. Omega (Westport). 2005;50(4):255–65.CrossRef
34.
Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson AM, DeCorby K, Bucknall TK, Kent B, et al. Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;10:1–10.
35.
Booth A, Wright J, Briscoe S. Scoping and searching to support realist approaches. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, Monaghan M, Dalkin S, editors. Doing realist research: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2018. p. 147–66.CrossRef
36.
Belur J, Thompson L, Thornton A, Simon M. Interrater reliability in systematic review methodology: exploring variation in coder decision-making. Sociol Methods Res. 2018;50(2):837–865.
37.
Booth A, Harris J, Croot E, Springett J, Campbell F, Wilkins E. Towards a methodology for cluster searching to provide conceptual and contextual “richness” for systematic reviews of complex interventions: case study (CLUSTER). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):118.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
39.
Wong G. Data gathering in realist reviews: looking for needles in haystacks. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, Monaghan M, Dalkin S, editors. Doing realist research: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2019. p. 131–46.
40.
Morse JM. Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qual Health Res. 2015;25(9):1212–22.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Firestone M, Tyndall M, Fischer B. Substance use and related harms among Aboriginal People in Canada: a comprehensive review. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2015;26(4):1110–31.CrossRefPubMed
42.
43.
Fook J, Gardner F. Practising critical reflection. Berkshire: Open University Press - McGraw-Hill Education; 2007.
Metadata
Title
Impact of health system engagement on the health and well-being of people who use drugs: a realist review protocol
Authors
Ginetta Salvalaggio
Lawrence Ferguson
Hannah L. Brooks
Sandra Campbell
Vanessa Gladue
Elaine Hyshka
Linda Lam
Heather Morris
Lara Nixon
Jane Springett
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-01938-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Systematic Reviews 1/2022 Go to the issue

Research

PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature

Protocol

Exploring women’s experiences participating in yoga after a cancer diagnosis: a protocol for a meta-synthesis

Protocol

Exploring stigma associated with mental health conditions and alcohol and other drug use among people from migrant and ethnic minority backgrounds: a protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies

Protocol

Acceptability and feasibility of continuous glucose monitoring in people with diabetes: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence

Protocol

Heart failure in childhood cancer survivors—a systematic review protocol

Protocol

Genetic variants associated with the occurrence and progression of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review protocol