A Nationwide Survey Study of Recovery Community Centers Supporting People in Recovery From Substance Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The medical community has become aware of its role in contributing to the opioid epidemic and must be part of its resolution. Recovery community centers (RCCs) represent a new underused component of recovery support. METHODS: This study performed an online national survey of all RCCs identified in the United States, and used US Census ZIP code tabulation area data to describe the communities they serve. RESULTS: Residents of areas with RCCs were more likely to be Black (16.5% vs 12.6% nationally, P = 0.005) and less likely to be Asian (4.7% vs 5.7%, P = 0.005), American Indian, or Alaskan Native (0.6% vs 0.8%, P = 0.03), or live rurally (8.5% vs 14.0%, P < 0.0001). More than half of RCCs began operations within the past 5 years. Recovery community centers were operated, on average, by 8.8 paid and 10.2 volunteer staff; each RCC served a median of 125 individuals per month (4-1,500). Recovery community centers successfully engaged racial/ethnic minority groups (20.8% Hispanic, 22.5% Black) and young adults (23.5% younger than 25 years). Recovery community centers provide addiction-specific support (eg, mutual help, recovery coaching) and assistance with basic needs, social services, technology access, and health behaviors. Regarding medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs), RCC staff engaged members in conversations about MOUDs (85.2%) and provided direct support for taking MOUD (77.0%). One third (36.1%) of RCCs reported seeking closer collaboration with prescribers. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery community centers are welcoming environments for people who take MOUDs. Closer collaboration between the medical community and community-based peer-led RCCs may lead to significantly improved reach of efforts to end the opioid epidemic.

Language Matters: It Is Time We Change How We Talk About Addiction and its Treatment.

The way we communicate about addiction, its treatment, and treatment outcomes matters to individuals affected by addiction, their families, and communities. Stigmatizing language can worsen addiction-related stigma and outcomes. Although non-professional terminology may be used by individuals with addiction, the role of clinicians, educators, researchers, policymakers, and community and cultural leaders is to actively work toward destigmatization of addiction and its treatment, in part through the use of non-stigmatizing language. Role-modeling better approaches can help us move away from the inaccurate, outdated view of addiction as a character flaw or moral failing deserving of punishment, and toward that of a chronic disease requiring long-term treatment. Non-stigmatizing, non-judgmental, medically-based terminology and the adoption of person-first language can facilitate improved communication as well as patient access to and engagement with addiction care. Person-first language, which shifts away from defining a person through the lens of disease (eg, the term "a person with addiction" is recommended over the terms "addict" or "addicted patient"), implicitly acknowledges that a patient's life extends beyond a given disease. While such linguistic changes may seem subtle, they communicate that addiction, chronic pain and other diseases are only one aspect of a person's health and quality of life, and can promote therapeutic relationships, reduce stigma and health and disparities in addiction care. This article provides examples of stigmatizing terms to be avoided and recommended replacements to facilitate the dialogue about addiction in a more intentional, therapeutic manner.