Patient views on emergency department screening and interventions related to housing.

Objectives Emergency departments (EDs) serve as a health care "safety net" and may be uniquely suited to screening for and addressing patients' unmet social needs. We aimed to better understand patient perspectives on ED-based screening and interventions related to housing instability, as a step toward improving future efforts. Methods We present findings from a qualitative study using in-depth, one-on-one interviews with ED patients who had become homeless in the past 6 months. Qualitative interviewees were asked their thoughts on ED staff asking about and helping to address homelessness and housing issues. Interviews were professionally transcribed verbatim. Multiple coders identified interview text segments focused on ED-based housing screening and intervention, which were then independently analyzed thematically and discussed to reach consensus. Researchers also categorized each participant's overall opinion on ED housing screening and interventions as positive, neutral, or negative. Results Qualitative interviews were conducted with 31 patients. Four themes related to ED-based housing screening and interventions emerged: (1) patients generally welcome ED staff/providers asking about and assisting with their housing situation, with caveats around privacy and respect; (2) ED conversations about housing have potential benefits beyond addressing unmet housing needs; (3) patients may not consider the ED as a site to obtain help with housing; (4) patients' experiences navigating existing housing services can inform best approaches for the ED. Most participants expressed overall positive views of ED staff/providers asking patients about their housing situation. Conclusions Study participants generally felt positively about screening and interventions for housing in the ED. Insights from this study can inform future ED-based housing instability screening and interventions.

Social relationships, homelessness, and substance use among emergency department patients.

Background: Emergency department (ED) patients commonly experience both substance use and homelessness, and social relationships impact each in varied ways not fully captured by existing quantitative research. This qualitative study examines how social relationships can precipitate or ameliorate homelessness and the connection (if any) between substance use and social relationships among ED patients experiencing homelessness. Methods: As part of a broader study to develop ED-based homelessness prevention interventions, we conducted in-depth interviews with 25 ED patients who used alcohol or drugs and had recently become homeless. We asked patients about the relationship between their substance use and homelessness. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded line-by-line by investigators. Final codes formed the basis for thematic analysis through consensus discussions. Results: Social relationships emerged as focal points for understanding the four major themes related to the intersection of homelessness and substance use: (1) Substance use can create strain in relationships; (2) Help is there until it's not; (3) Social relationships can create challenges contributing to substance use; and (4) Reciprocal relationship of substance use and isolation. Sub-themes were also identified and described. Conclusions: The association between substance use and homelessness is multifaceted and social relationships are a complex factor linking the two. Social relationships are often critical for homelessness prevention, but they are impacted by and reciprocally affect substance use. ED-based substance use interventions should consider the high prevalence of homelessness and the impact of social relationships on the interaction between homelessness and substance use.

"It Wasn't Just One Thing": A Qualitative Study of Newly Homeless Emergency Department Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency departments (EDs) frequently care for patients who are homeless or unstably housed. One promising approach taken by the homeless services system is to provide interventions that attempt to prevent homelessness before it occurs. Experts have suggested that health care settings may be ideal locations to identify and intervene with patients at risk for homelessness, yet little is known even about the basic characteristics of patients who might benefit from such interventions. METHODS: We conducted in-depth, one-on-one qualitative interviews with ED patients who had become homeless within the past 6 months. Using a semistructured interview guide, we asked patients about their pathways into homelessness and what might have prevented them from becoming homeless. Interviews were digitally recorded and professionally transcribed. Transcripts were coded line by line by multiple investigators who then met as a group to discuss and refine codes in an iterative fashion. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 31 patients. Mean interview length was 42 minutes. Four main themes emerged: 1) unique stories yet common social and health contributors to homelessness, 2) personal agency versus larger structural forces, 3) limitations in help from family or friends, and 4) homelessness was not expected. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate gaps in current homeless prevention services and can help inform future interventions for unstably housed and homeless ED patients. More immediately, the findings provide rich, unique context to the lives of a vulnerable patient population commonly seen in EDs.