Klingemann Harald
University of Applied Sciences Bern, Bern University of the Arts (BUA), Bern, Switzerland.
Nordisk Alkohol Nark. 2020 Aug;37(4):323-337. doi: 10.1177/1455072520941977. Epub 2020 Aug 17.
The article offers an inventory of controversial basic issues related to treatment responses and their sociocultural political context, highlighting policy failures and successes, with a focus on Europe. As a reference point for this assessment, serves a conceptual framework of an "ideal type of treatment system", which is built upon the following normative assumptions: the objective of harm minimisation or preventing substance-use-related consequences, evidence-based decision making, securing equity and accessibility also from a user perspective as well as efficiency in terms of the diversity and choice of treatment options.
Five major issues of addiction treatment systems, as identified and exemplified by an expert survey among 14 countries conducted in 2014, served as a reference for discussing fundamental gaps between an assumed ideal type of treatment system and the treatment response in practice: (1) Resistance to change, consensus building and innovation, (2) Political influence and target group bias beyond evidence, (3) Assumptions about rationality and universal evidence, (4) Myths of addiction and ethical deficits and (5) The treatment gap and user perspectives.
RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations relevant for politicians, system planners, and clinicians are formulated for each of the five issues, specifically focusing on embeddedness of treatment systems in macro-societal conditions, the abstinence paradigm and outcome diversity, ethnocentric biases of the "evidence credo", learning from self-change as the major road to recovery, and questioning implicit conceptions of the "addict as a human being". Furthermore, it is concluded that theories regarding the diffusion of innovation and knowledge exchange can inform future research.
本文列出了与治疗反应及其社会文化政治背景相关的有争议的基本问题,强调了政策的失败与成功之处,重点聚焦于欧洲。作为这一评估的参考点,采用了一种“理想类型的治疗体系”的概念框架,该框架基于以下规范性假设:将危害最小化或预防与物质使用相关后果的目标、基于证据的决策、从用户角度确保公平性和可及性以及治疗选择的多样性和选择方面的效率。
2014年在14个国家进行的一项专家调查确定并举例说明了成瘾治疗体系的五个主要问题,这些问题作为讨论假定的理想治疗体系类型与实际治疗反应之间的基本差距的参考:(1)对变革的抵制、共识的建立和创新,(2)证据之外的政治影响和目标群体偏见,(3)关于合理性和普遍证据的假设,(4)成瘾神话和伦理缺陷,以及(5)治疗差距和用户视角。
结果/结论:针对这五个问题中的每一个都为政治家、系统规划者和临床医生制定了相关建议,特别关注治疗体系在宏观社会条件下的嵌入性、禁欲范式和结果多样性、“证据信条”的种族中心主义偏见、将自我改变作为康复的主要途径进行学习,以及对“成瘾者作为人”的隐含观念提出质疑。此外,得出的结论是,关于创新传播和知识交流的理论可为未来研究提供参考。