DeJong Cornelis A J, Welle-Strand Gabrielle, Hanafi Enjeline, Pinxten Lucas, Bhad Roshan, Arunogiri Shalini
Behavioral Science Institute, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Norwegian Centre for Addiction Research. University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Eur Addict Res. 2025;31(1):75-86. doi: 10.1159/000542182. Epub 2024 Nov 21.
A minority of addiction patients receive appropriate treatment directly from trained professionals in addiction medicine. Most countries have not recognized addiction medicine (AM) as a specialty in its own right or within psychiatry/other specialties. Therefore, the effectiveness and organization of AM training around the world need to be improved. Unfortunately, standard instruments are rarely used in most studies to assess training needs. This study aimed to determine international competencies in AM among professionals in as many countries as possible using a standard instrument such as the AM Training Needs Assessment (AM-TNA).
We examined competencies in AM with the AM-TNA using an online survey. A General Competency Level in Addiction Medicine (GLOCIAM30) was calculated by dividing the total score by the number of 30 items. This GLOCIAM30 was used to measure the general level of competency in AM and to compare individual competencies.
One hundred ninety-nine respondents from 45 countries completed the survey. Ninety-five of the 199 respondents (49.0%) had a GLOCIAM30 higher or equal to 4 (fairly competent). The highest skill level was found for the competency "Assessing substance use problems by taking the patient's history." Nine of the 45 countries had 8 or more respondents (n = 129). After post hoc analysis, there was no difference between these countries. Respondents could reasonably estimate whether the competency level in their country was higher or lower than the world average.
This study is the first international attempt to examine competencies in AM. Although a much larger study population is needed to establish an overall goal for competencies in AM, our study provided an initial direction for such a gold standard in benchmarking procedures.
少数成瘾患者直接从成瘾医学领域训练有素的专业人员那里接受适当治疗。大多数国家尚未将成瘾医学（AM）视为一门独立的专科，也未将其纳入精神病学/其他专科范畴。因此，全球成瘾医学培训的有效性和组织方式有待改进。遗憾的是，大多数研究很少使用标准工具来评估培训需求。本研究旨在通过使用诸如成瘾医学培训需求评估（AM-TNA）这样的标准工具，尽可能多地确定多个国家专业人员在成瘾医学方面的国际能力。
我们通过在线调查使用AM-TNA来检验成瘾医学方面的能力。通过将总分除以30个项目的数量来计算成瘾医学总体能力水平（GLOCIAM30）。这个GLOCIAM30用于衡量成瘾医学方面的总体能力水平并比较个人能力。
来自45个国家的199名受访者完成了调查。199名受访者中有95名（49.0%）的GLOCIAM30高于或等于4（相当胜任）。在“通过询问患者病史评估物质使用问题”这一能力方面发现技能水平最高。45个国家中有9个国家有8名或更多受访者（n = 129）。事后分析显示，这些国家之间没有差异。受访者能够合理估计本国的能力水平高于还是低于世界平均水平。
本研究是首次在国际上尝试检验成瘾医学方面的能力。尽管需要更大规模的研究群体来确定成瘾医学能力的总体目标，但我们的研究为基准程序中的此类黄金标准提供了初步方向。
