Mapping the peer-reviewed literature on accommodating nurses' return to work after leaves of absence for mental health issues: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The complexity of nursing practice increases the risk of nurses suffering from mental health issues, such as substance use disorders, anxiety, burnout, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). These mental health issues can potentially lead to nurses taking leaves of absence and may require accommodations for their return to work. The purpose of this review was to map key themes in the peer-reviewed literature about accommodations for nurses' return to work following leaves of absence for mental health issues. METHODS: A six-step methodological framework for scoping reviews was used to summarize the amount, types, sources, and distribution of the literature. The academic literature was searched through nine electronic databases. Electronic charts were used to extract code and collate the data. Findings were derived inductively and summarized thematically and numerically. RESULTS: Academic literature is scarce regarding interventions for nurses' return to work following leaves of absence for mental health issues, and most focused on substance use concerns. Search of the peer-reviewed literature yielded only six records. The records were primarily quantitative studies (n = 4, 68%), published between 1997 and 2018, and originated in the United States (n = 6, 100%). The qualitative thematic findings addressed three major themes: alternative to discipline programs (ADPs), peer support, and return to work policies, procedures, and practices. CONCLUSIONS: While the literature supports alternative to discipline programs as a primary accommodation supporting return to work of nurses, more on the effectiveness of such programs is required. Empirical evidence is necessary to develop, maintain, and refine much needed return to work accommodations for nurses after leaves of absence for mental health issues.

Preparing Physicians to Treat Addiction: Inclusion of Dedicated Addiction Training During Internal Medicine Residency.

BACKGROUND: Physicians in internal medicine lack comfort and skills required to diagnose and treat substance use disorder (SUD). Formal training in substance use treatment within primary care training has traditionally been inconsistent and sparse. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of a longitudinal experiential addiction curriculum on the attitudes and experiences of graduates from a primary care/internal medicine residency program that included formal addiction didactics, rotations in an outpatient addiction clinic embedded within the resident primary care clinic, and exposure to addiction medicine faculty across treatment settings. METHODS: A survey was emailed to all graduates from a single academic primary care residency program who graduated between 2016 and 2018 (n = 53). The survey assessed pharmacotherapy for SUD prescribing patterns, comfort with SUD pharmacotherapy, overall comfort treating SUD, experience correcting stigmatizing language, and providing guidance to colleagues on the care of patients with SUD. A subset of respondents (n = 14) were interviewed regarding their experience with the residency program's addiction medicine curriculum and its impact on their current clinical practice. RESULTS: Sixty percent (n = 28) of graduates responded to the survey. All respondents felt comfortable using medications to treat SUD. Eighty-four percent perceived themselves as more comfortable using pharmacotherapy to treat SUD than their colleagues. Qualitative interviews revealed that this addiction medicine training shaped participants' attitudes toward patients with SUD and imparted them with the skills to address stigmatizing language. Participants described how they have become ambassadors of addiction medicine in their workplace and a resource to colleagues with less comfort in the management of SUD. CONCLUSION: Graduates of a primary care/internal medicine residency with a dedicated addiction medicine curriculum are comfortable prescribing pharmacotherapy for SUD, taking an active role in reducing SUD-related stigma, and serving as a resource for colleagues.

Drug-related physician continuing medical education requirements, 2010-2020.

INTRODUCTION: The crisis of drug-related harm in the United States continues to worsen. While prescription-related overdoses have fallen dramatically, they are still far above pre-2010 levels. Physicians can reduce the risk of overdose and other drug-related harms by improving opioid prescribing practices and ensuring that patients are able to easily access medications for substance use disorder treatment. Most physicians received little or no training in those subjects in medical school. It is possible that continuing medical education can improve physician knowledge of appropriate prescribing and substance use disorder treatment and patient outcomes. METHODS: Descriptive legal review. Laws in all 50 states and the District of Columbia were searched for provisions that require all or most physicians to receive either one-time or continuing medical education regarding controlled substance prescribing, pain management, or substance use disorder treatment. RESULTS: There has been a rapid increase in the number of states with relevant requirements, from three states at the end of 2010 to 42 at the end of 2020. The frequency and duration of required education varied substantially across states. In all states, the number of hours required in relevant topics is a small fraction of overall required continuing education, an average of 1 h per year. Despite recent shifts in the substances driving overdose, most requirements remain focused on opioids. CONCLUSION: While most states have now adopted continuing education requirements regarding controlled substance prescribing, pain management, or substance use disorder treatment, these requirements comprise a small component of the required post-training education requirements. Research is needed to determine whether this training translates into reductions in drug-related harm.