Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY (AJ); Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Brown University, Providence, RI (PPC); Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY (CEF); Division of Biostatistics, Columbia University and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY (CJC); Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY (PSA).
J Addict Med. 2021;15(4):285-291. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000847.
Civil commitment (CC) for substance use disorders (SUDs) is a legal mechanism, initiated by family members, healthcare professionals, or others, that compels individuals with substance use problems into involuntary treatment. With the recent rise of US overdose deaths, more states are considering these laws. Yet little is known about physicians' perspectives regarding CC in treating patients with SUDs.
We conducted a web-based survey of American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) physician members regarding their awareness of, attitudes towards, and experiences with CC for adults with SUDs.
One hundred sixty-five addiction physicians completed the survey; 60.7% favored, 21.5% opposed, and 17.8% were unsure regarding CC for SUDs. More than a third (38.4%) were unfamiliar with these laws and more than a quarter (28.8%) were unsure if CC for SUDs was permitted in their state. Support for CC was strongest for SUDs involving heroin (79.0%), alcohol (74.7%), and nonheroin opioids (74.7%). Those opposing CC were more likely to believe it would jeopardize patient rapport (P < 0.001), would be ineffective for unmotivated individuals (P < 0.001), and should only be permitted for certain substances (P = 0.007). A majority of respondents endorsed the need for more clinician education (91.5%) and research (87.1%) on this topic.
Although most addiction physicians in this study approve of CC for SUDs, enthusiasm for this compulsory intervention is mixed with strongest support for patients with opioid and alcohol use disorders. At the same time, many respondents are unfamiliar with these laws and most believe more education and research are needed.
民事承诺(CC)用于物质使用障碍(SUD)是一种法律机制,由家庭成员、医疗保健专业人员或其他人发起,强制有物质使用问题的个人接受非自愿治疗。随着美国药物过量死亡人数的最近上升,更多的州正在考虑这些法律。然而,人们对医生在治疗 SUD 患者方面对 CC 的看法知之甚少。
我们对美国成瘾医学学会(ASAM)的医生成员进行了一项关于他们对 CC 的认识、态度和经验的网络调查,以治疗患有 SUD 的成年人。
165 名成瘾医生完成了调查;60.7%赞成,21.5%反对,17.8%对 CC 治疗 SUD 不确定。超过三分之一(38.4%)不熟悉这些法律,超过四分之一(28.8%)不确定其所在州是否允许 CC 治疗 SUD。对 CC 的支持最强的是涉及海洛因(79.0%)、酒精(74.7%)和非海洛因类阿片(74.7%)的 SUD。反对 CC 的人更有可能认为这会危及医患关系(P < 0.001),对没有动机的人无效(P < 0.001),并且只应允许用于某些物质(P = 0.007)。大多数受访者认为有必要对这一主题进行更多的临床医生教育(91.5%)和研究(87.1%)。
尽管这项研究中的大多数成瘾医生都赞成 CC 治疗 SUD,但对这种强制性干预的热情喜忧参半,最支持阿片类药物和酒精使用障碍患者。与此同时,许多受访者不熟悉这些法律,大多数人认为需要更多的教育和研究。