Suchergebnisse

Introduction: The positive impact of substance use treatment is well‐evidenced but there has been substantial disinvestment from publicly funded treatment services in England since 2013/2014. This paper examines whether this disinvestment from adult alcohol and drug treatment provision was associated with changes in treatment and health outcomes, including: treatment access, successful completions from treatment, alcohol‐specific hospital admissions, alcohol‐specific mortality and drug‐related deaths. Methods: Annual administrative data from 2013/2014 to 2018/2019 was matched at local government level and multi‐level time series analysis using linear mixed‐effect modelling conducted for 151 upper‐tier local authorities in England. Results: Between 2013/2014 and 2018/2019, £212.2 million was disinvested from alcohol and drug treatment services, representing a 27% decrease. Concurrently, 11% fewer people accessed, and 21% fewer successfully completed, treatment. On average, controlling for other potential explanatory factors, a £10 000 disinvestment from alcohol and drug treatment services was associated with reductions in all treatment outcomes, including 0.3 fewer adults in treatment (95% confidence interval 0.16–0.45) and 0.21 fewer adults successfully completing treatment (95% % confidence interval 0.12–0.29). A £10 000 disinvestment from alcohol treatment was not significantly associated with changes in alcohol‐specific hospital admissions or mortality, nor was disinvestment from drug treatment associated with the rate of drug‐related deaths. Discussion and Conclusions: Local authority spending cuts to alcohol and drug treatment services in England were associated with fewer people accessing and successfully completing alcohol and drug treatment but were not associated with changes in related hospital admissions and deaths.

BACKGROUND: In the context of substantial financial disinvestment from alcohol and drug treatment services in England, our aim was to review the existing evidence of how such disinvestments have impacted service delivery, uptake, outcomes and broader health and social implications. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence (PROSPERO CRD42020187295), searching bibliographic databases and grey literature. Given that an initial scoping search highlighted a scarcity of evidence specific to substance use treatment, evidence of disinvestment from publicly funded sexual health and smoking cessation services was also included. Data on disinvestment, political contexts and impacts were extracted, analysed, and synthesized thematically. RESULTS: We found 20 eligible papers varying in design and quality including 10 related to alcohol and drugs services, and 10 to broader public health services. The literature provides evidence of sustained disinvestment from alcohol and drug treatment in several countries and a concurrent decline in the quantity and quality of treatment provision, but there was a lack of methodologically rigorous studies investigating the impact of disinvestment. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a paucity of scientific evidence quantifying the impacts of disinvestment on alcohol and drug treatment service delivery and outcomes. As the global economy faces new challenges, a stronger evidence base would enable informed policy decisions that consider the likely public health impacts of continued disinvestment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-12219-0.

Background: In the context of substantial financial disinvestment from alcohol and drug treatment services in England, our aim was to review the existing evidence of how such disinvestments have impacted service delivery, uptake, outcomes and broader health and social implications. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence (PROSPERO CRD42020187295), searching bibliographic databases and grey literature. Given that an initial scoping search highlighted a scarcity of evidence specific to substance use treatment, evidence of disinvestment from publicly funded sexual health and smoking cessation services was also included. Data on disinvestment, political contexts and impacts were extracted, analysed, and synthesized thematically. Results: We found 20 eligible papers varying in design and quality including 10 related to alcohol and drugs services, and 10 to broader public health services. The literature provides evidence of sustained disinvestment from alcohol and drug treatment in several countries and a concurrent decline in the quantity and quality of treatment provision, but there was a lack of methodologically rigorous studies investigating the impact of disinvestment. Conclusions: This review identified a paucity of scientific evidence quantifying the impacts of disinvestment on alcohol and drug treatment service delivery and outcomes. As the global economy faces new challenges, a stronger evidence base would enable informed policy decisions that consider the likely public health impacts of continued disinvestment.

BACKGROUND: The considerable challenges associated with implementing national level alcohol policies have encouraged a renewed focus on the prospects for local-level policies in the UK and elsewhere. We adopted a case study approach to identify the major characteristics and drivers of differences in the patterns of local alcohol policies and services in two contrasting local authority (LA) areas in England. METHODS: Data were collected via thirteen semi-structured interviews with key informants (including public health, licensing and trading standards) and documentary analysis, including harm reduction strategies and statements of licensing policy. A two-stage thematic analysis was used to categorize all relevant statements into seven over-arching themes, by which document sources were then also analysed. RESULTS: Three of the seven over-arching themes (drink environment, treatment services and barriers and facilitators), provided for the most explanatory detail informing the contrasting policy responses of the two LAs: LA1 pursued a risk-informed strategy via a specialist police team working proactively with problem premises and screening systematically to identify riskier drinking. LA2 adopted a more upstream regulatory approach around restrictions on availability with less emphasis on co-ordinated screening and treatment measures. CONCLUSION: New powers over alcohol policy for LAs in England can produce markedly different policies for reducing alcohol-related harm. These difference are rooted in economic, opportunistic, organisational and personnel factors particular to the LAs themselves and may lead to closely tailored solutions in some policy areas and poorer co-ordination and attention in others.

Background and aims: Recent years have seen a rise in new and innovative policies to reduce alcohol consumption and related harm in England, which can be implemented by local, as opposed to national, policy-makers. The aim of this paper is to explore the processes that underpin the adoption of these alcohol policies within local authorities. In particular, it aims to assess whether the concept of policy transfer (i.e. a process through which knowledge about policies in one place is used in the development of policies in another time or place) provides a useful model for understanding local alcohol policy-making. Methods: Qualitative data generated through in-depth interviews and focus groups from five case study sites across England were used to explore stakeholder experiences of alcohol policy transfer between local authorities. The purposive sample of policy actors included representatives from the police, trading standards, public health, licensing, and commissioning. Thematic analysis was used inductively to identify key features in the data. Results: Themes from the policy transfer literature identified in the data were: policy copying, emulating, hybridization, and inspiration. Participants described a multitude of ways in which learning was shared between places, ranging from formal academic evaluation to opportunistic conversations in informal settings. Participants also described facilitators and constraints to policy transfer, such as the historical policy context and the local cultural, economic, and bureaucratic context, which influenced whether or not a policy that was perceived to work in one place might be transferred successfully to another context. Conclusions: Theories of policy transfer provide a promising framework for characterising processes of local alcohol policy-making in England, extending beyond debates regarding evidence-informed policy to account for a much wider range of considerations. Applying a policy transfer lens enables us to move beyond simple (but still important) questions ...

Cumulative impact policies (CIPs) are widely used in UK local government to help regulate alcohol markets in localities characterised by high density of outlets and high rates of alcohol related harms. CIPs have been advocated as a means of protecting health by controlling or limiting alcohol availability. We use a comparative qualitative case study approach (n=5 English local government authorities, 48 participants) to assess how CIPs vary across different localities, what they are intended to achieve, and the implications for local-level alcohol availability. We found that the case study CIPs varied greatly in terms of aims, health focus and scale of implementation. However, they shared some common functions around influencing the types and managerial practices of alcohol outlets in specific neighbourhoods without reducing outlet density. The assumption that this will lead to alcohol harm-reduction needs to be quantitatively tested.

Cumulative impact policies (CIPs) are widely used in UK local government to help regulate alcohol markets in localities characterised by high density of outlets and high rates of alcohol related harms. CIPs have been advocated as a means of protecting health by controlling or limiting alcohol availability. We use a comparative qualitative case study approach (n=5 English local government authorities, 48 participants) to assess how CIPs vary across different localities, what they are intended to achieve, and the implications for local-level alcohol availability. We found that the case study CIPs varied greatly in terms of aims, health focus and scale of implementation. However, they shared some common functions around influencing the types and managerial practices of alcohol outlets in specific neighbourhoods without reducing outlet density. The assumption that this will lead to alcohol harm-reduction needs to be quantitatively tested.

Cumulative impact policies (CIPs) are widely used in UK local government to help regulate alcohol markets in localities characterised by high density of outlets and high rates of alcohol related harms. CIPs have been advocated as a means of protecting health by controlling or limiting alcohol availability. We use a comparative qualitative case study approach (n=5 English local government authorities, 48 participants) to assess how CIPs vary across different localities, what they are intended to achieve, and the implications for local-level alcohol availability. We found that the case study CIPs varied greatly in terms of aims, health focus and scale of implementation. However, they shared some common functions around influencing the types and managerial practices of alcohol outlets in specific neighbourhoods without reducing outlet density. The assumption that this will lead to alcohol harm-reduction needs to be quantitatively tested.