How clinicians manage access to opioid replacement therapy

In Australia, people wait to access opioid replacement therapy (ORT). The aim of this study was to examine how clinicians (n = 35) prioritize consumers for opioid replacement therapy (ORT). The study used a methodology informed by a constructivist approach to grounded theory. Based on a scenario related to two consumers seeking admission to opioid replacement therapy (ORT), participants were asked to prioritize one for preferential admission and questioned about their decision-making. Clinicians were neither confident nor unanimous in their decision-making. Team involvement and work experience influenced their judgment. Differences between clinicians in regard to understanding risks and protective factors were identified. To support uniformity in managing treatment requests, clearer policy direction to gui clinician practice, and further exploration of how models of care and team involvement influence consumer outcomes, are recommended

Triage in opioid replacement therapy: what\u27s the wait?

In Australia, a wait for Opioid Replacement Therapy (ORT) has been reported although the magnitude is unknown. This study examined data recorded by one urban publicly funded ORT clinic (from 2009 to 2011) to identify if people (n = 803) were waiting for ORT assessment appointments and to explore how triage influences access to ORT. Data analysis incorporated descriptive methods and the use of Kaplan-Meier estimator of the cumulative incidence function. The implications and limitations of this study are included with further research suggestions

Opioid replacement therapy : a wait unmanaged

There has been a rapid increase in members of the Australian population using opioids in recent years. The flow-on effect has been an increase in demand for treatments, particularly opioid replacement therapy (ORT), but the availability of treatments has not increased. This has frequently resulted in delays before treatment can be commenced. Outcomes could improve if health-care professionals had clearer guidelines on how to prioritize access to ORT. This review investigates the triage of consumers in ORT within Australia. Information on triage in ORT was not available, and an understanding of how consumer needs are managed when they present for ORT triage was not identified. In the absence of research to guide this practice, the body of evidence regarding ORT treatment access is weighted on government policies. Triage, as applied in general health and mental health-care service delivery, was reviewed to consider the components of triage and how these might pertain to triage in ORT. Failure to facilitate the needs of consumers accessing ORT can result in further harm to consumers and increased social and financial costs for society. Research is required to investigate how this issue is currently being managed and to lead the way for needed improvements in service delivery