The shifting roles of medical stakeholders in opioid substitution treatment: a comparison between Denmark and the UK

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the shifting roles of medical professionals as stakeholders in opioid substitution treatment (OST) policies and practices in Denmark and the UK within the past 15 years. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on literature reviews, documentary analyses and key informant interviews with a range of stakeholders involved in OST and policy in Denmark and UK. The study is part of the EU-funded project: Addictions and Lifestyles in Contemporary Europe: Reframing Addictions Project. Findings – Denmark and the UK are amongst those few European countries that have long traditions and elaborate systems for providing OST to heroin users. The UK has a history of dominance of medical professionals in drugs treatment, although this has been recently challenged by the recovery movement. In Denmark, a social problem approach has historically dominated the field, but a recent trend towards medicalisation can be traced. As in all kinds of policy changes, multiple factors are at play when shifts occur. We examine how both countries’ developments around drugs treatment policy and practice relate to broader societal, economic and political changes, how such divergent developments emerge and how medical professionals as stakeholders enhanced their roles as experts in the field through a variety of tactics, including the production and use of “evidence”, which became a key tool to promote specific stakeholder’s perspectives in these processes. Originality/value – The paper contributes to current policy and practice debates by providing comparative analyses of drug policies and examination of stakeholder influences on policy processes

Stakeholder ownership: a theoretical framework for cross national understanding and analyses of stakeholder involvement in issues of substance use, problem use and addiction

This project contributes to understanding of the role of different stakeholder groups in the formulation and implementation of policy in the addictions field in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Poland and the UK. It comprises a number of case studies which draw on a range of theoretical frameworks to examine stakeholder dynamics at international, national and local levels. Mainly qualitative methods were used: interviews, policy and documentation analyses, webcrawler network analysis, and simple surveys; one case study was based on a survey only. The case studies fall into four main categories: three focus on controversial issues in drug treatment policy and practice – opioid substitution treatment, drug consumption rooms, and heroin assisted treatment; three look at stakeholder activity in alcohol control and public health; one pilot case study considers the potential role of researchers in the development of a scientific network around gambling; and one looks at the role of nurses in implementing brief interventions. In addition, themes explored across case studies included the role of evidence and stakeholder activity, drug users as stakeholders, and the role of external stakeholders on national policy. Professional stakeholders at implementation level and families and drug users as stakeholders are also considered. The case studies revealed that, in many instances, the addictions field is characterised by tensions between groups, by entrenched relationships between some addiction-specific stakeholder groups and powerful political stakeholders, and by the dominance of some forms of evidence over other forms of knowledge. Science and scientists are only influential in policy terms if their scientific findings ‘fit’ with the wider political context. Nevertheless, at least within the European context, there are opportunities for new stakeholder groups to emerge and gain policy salience and there are opportunities for stakeholders to challenge prevailing frames of understanding the addictions and prevailing modes of responding to problems of substance misuse and addiction

Effects of Anacetrapib in Patients with Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease

BACKGROUND: Patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease remain at high risk for cardiovascular events despite effective statin-based treatment of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels. The inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) by anacetrapib reduces LDL cholesterol levels and increases high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels. However, trials of other CETP inhibitors have shown neutral or adverse effects on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 30,449 adults with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive atorvastatin therapy and who had a mean LDL cholesterol level of 61 mg per deciliter (1.58 mmol per liter), a mean non-HDL cholesterol level of 92 mg per deciliter (2.38 mmol per liter), and a mean HDL cholesterol level of 40 mg per deciliter (1.03 mmol per liter). The patients were assigned to receive either 100 mg of anacetrapib once daily (15,225 patients) or matching placebo (15,224 patients). The primary outcome was the first major coronary event, a composite of coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: During the median follow-up period of 4.1 years, the primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (1640 of 15,225 patients [10.8%] vs. 1803 of 15,224 patients [11.8%]; rate ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 0.97; P=0.004). The relative difference in risk was similar across multiple prespecified subgroups. At the trial midpoint, the mean level of HDL cholesterol was higher by 43 mg per deciliter (1.12 mmol per liter) in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (a relative difference of 104%), and the mean level of non-HDL cholesterol was lower by 17 mg per deciliter (0.44 mmol per liter), a relative difference of -18%. There were no significant between-group differences in the risk of death, cancer, or other serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive statin therapy, the use of anacetrapib resulted in a lower incidence of major coronary events than the use of placebo. (Funded by Merck and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN48678192 ; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01252953 ; and EudraCT number, 2010-023467-18 .)

The twilight zone: paradoxes of practicing reform

Purpose In many public sector reform processes, employees’ roles as professional experts are shifting toward more entrepreneurial and market-oriented roles, a change that entails a shift in the demands made of these employees. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the reflections, considerations, and experiences of such employees regarding the spaces of possibility open to them in which to act in accordance with this new role. Design/methodology/approach Two ethnographic studies were carried out in drug and alcohol treatment services and in city and business development in the Danish welfare system. Findings Although the areas of investigation are not related in their daily practices, the authors trace similar responses to the demands made of their respective employees as their role shifts from that of professional experts to include more entrepreneurial aspects. The authors observe that employees are often eager to align new demands and practices, and the authors identify various challenges in respect of the structural public set-up of these services, which often leaves the employees to operate in what could be described as a “twilight zone” between the public and the private. Originality/value While scholars often have accounted for situations where such pluralistic roles create conflict, the authors also answer calls to capture moments of synergy where tensions of role paradox are constructively exploited. In this process of ongoing production, images of hierarchy and bureaucracy, rather than merely casting shadows over more bottom-up process of entrepreneurship, are actively used, alongside images of entrepreneurship, in the mutual construction of different roles and the constantly shifting relationality between them, conflicting or synergetic. The definitions and interpretations of the role of the public sector employee are not entirely fixed, but rather subject to ongoing (re)construction in the daily workings of public organizations. </jats:sec

Stakeholders in opioid substitution treatment policy: similarities and differences in six European countries

Based on the research papers within this special issue, this overview discusses similarities and differences in stakeholding in drug user opioid substitution treatment policy in Britain, Denmark, Italy, Austria, Poland, and Finland. It explores factors that have influenced stakeholder activity, including the importance of crisis, the impact of evidence, the availability of resources, the wider political context, the influence of moral frameworks and ideologies, and the pressure of external influences. The paper highlights the important differences in the emergence and evolution of stakeholder groups and in the political, cultural, and economic circumstances, which both constrain and enable their activities

Stakeholder influences on drug and alcohol policy processes

Guest editoria