Rural service coordination programming for women using substances and their families
Lesley Cottrell,Charlotte Workman,Melina Danko,Ellis Walker,Anthony Dmytrijuk,Susan Harrison,Mikisha Lee,Ashleigh McKinsey,Mark C Smith
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17455057241278858
Abstract:Background: Women experiencing substance use during their pregnancies or after the birth of a child report being fearful of losing their children based on care, stigmatized when seeking assistance, and barriers to care such as having to provide the same information to different providers, and having to repeat their lived experiences with substance use in detail. Particularly these service barriers can be confusing, complicated, and difficult to follow, which could lead to non-compliance or not seeking services. Objectives: We evaluated components of a service coordination program for women experiencing substance use, their children, and larger families who help with caregiving. We examined stakeholder interest in the program, feasibility providing services over time, and initial program effectiveness. Design: Participant enrollment and outcomes as well as service coordination activities provided over a 4-year period was gathered across three demonstration site locations (a birthing hospital, reunification program, and home visiting program). Methods: Program information was gathered from needs assessment data, health survey data from enrolled caregivers and infants, training evaluations, and budget recordings of direct aid. In this mixed method design, we examined potential differences between baseline and the last assessment for women and children enrolled in the program. We also utilized univariate analyses of variance to examine the main effects of maternal and infant characteristics on final maternal and infant outcomes. Results: Three sites enrolled 182 women and families for program services. Patient navigators provided direct aid, training, goal setting, and service coordination and planning. Families remained in the program, on average, 655 days and were satisfied with the services received. Respondents thought the program elements were easy to implement within the rural setting. The program effectively addressed basic needs, violence (p < 0.001; η2 = 0.34 (0.05-0.53)), infant development (p < 0.02; η2 = 0.51 (0.13-0.61)), and maternal depression (p < 0.05; η2 = 0.9 (0.00-0.22)). Select outcomes did differ by site. Conclusion: A service coordination model utilizing a patient navigator role to coordinate client services coupled with an approach that serves the infant and caregiver needs was feasible and desirable by all stakeholders within a rural setting. Service coordination effectively impacted select caregiver and infant outcomes.