Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Level 2, 5 Arnold Street, Box Hill, Victoria, 3128, Australia; Turning Point, Eastern Health, 54-62 Gertrude Street, Fitzroy, Victoria, 3065, Australia.
Monash Institute of Cognitive and Clinical Neurosciences, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia; School of Sociology, College of Arts & Social Sciences, Australian National University, Acton, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Int J Drug Policy. 2018 Mar;53:73-82. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.12.008. Epub 2017 Dec 27.
Online counselling services for a range of health conditions have proliferated in recent years. However, there is ambiguity and tension around their role and function. It is often unclear whether online counselling services are intended to provide only a brief intervention, the provision of information or referral, or constitute an alternative to face-to-face treatment. In line with recent analyses of alcohol and other drug (AOD) policy and interventions that draw on a critical social science perspective, we take an evidence-making intervention approach to examine how online counselling in the AOD field is made in policy and through processes of local implementation. In this article, we analyse how online AOD counselling interventions and knowledges are enacted in Australia's AOD policy, and compare these enactments with an analysis of information about Australia's national online AOD counselling service, Counselling Online, and transcripts of counselling sessions with clients of Counselling Online. We suggest that while the policy enacts online counselling as a brief intervention targeting AOD use, and as an avenue to facilitate referral to face-to-face treatment services, in its implementation in practice online counselling is enacted in more varied ways. These include online counselling as attempting to attend to AOD use and interconnected psychosocial concerns, as a potential form of treatment in its own right, and as supplementing face-to-face AOD treatment services. Rather than viewing online counselling as a singular and stable intervention object, we suggest that multiple 'online counsellings' emerge in practice through local implementation practices and knowledges. We argue that the frictions that arise between policy and practice enactments need to be considered by policy makers, funders, clinicians and researchers as they affect how the concerns of those targeted by the intervention are attended to.
近年来,针对各种健康状况的在线咨询服务大量涌现。然而,这些服务的角色和功能仍存在模糊性和紧张性。通常情况下,不清楚在线咨询服务是仅提供短暂干预、提供信息或转介,还是替代面对面治疗。与最近基于批判性社会科学视角对酒精和其他药物(AOD)政策和干预措施的分析一致,我们采用循证干预方法来研究 AOD 领域中的在线咨询是如何在政策中制定的,并通过地方实施过程来制定的。在本文中,我们分析了澳大利亚 AOD 政策中在线 AOD 咨询干预措施和知识是如何制定的,并将这些制定与对澳大利亚国家在线 AOD 咨询服务 Counselling Online 的信息分析以及与 Counselling Online 客户的咨询会话记录进行比较。我们认为,尽管政策将在线咨询作为针对 AOD 使用的简短干预措施,并作为促进转介到面对面治疗服务的途径,但在实践中的实施过程中,在线咨询的制定方式更加多样化。这些包括将在线咨询作为尝试解决 AOD 使用和相互关联的心理社会问题的方法,作为一种潜在的治疗形式,以及作为面对面 AOD 治疗服务的补充。我们建议,不要将在线咨询视为单一和稳定的干预对象,而是通过地方实施实践和知识,在实践中出现多种“在线咨询”。我们认为,政策和实践制定之间出现的摩擦需要政策制定者、资助者、临床医生和研究人员考虑,因为这会影响到干预对象的关注问题得到关注的方式。