Coproduction in the Treatment of Substance Use Disorder and Its Relationship to Clinics' Service Output Patterns.

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL WORK Social Service Review Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI:10.1086/710706
Sunggeun Ethan Park
{"title":"Coproduction in the Treatment of Substance Use Disorder and Its Relationship to Clinics' Service Output Patterns.","authors":"Sunggeun Ethan Park","doi":"10.1086/710706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health, social, and human service providers seek diverse ways to engage service users in the service production process. This approach to engagement with users is known as \"coproduction.\" In addition to conventional user-provider coproduction (i.e., patient-centered care), providers attending to stigmatized and marginalized groups may hire staff who share life experiences with user groups. These providers are known as \"user representatives,\" and their service provision is known as \"peer coproduction.\" Using nationally representative data from substance use disorder treatment clinics in the United States, I investigate how clinics' use of patient-centered care and peer coproduction mechanisms is associated with organizational service availability and utilization patterns. Results demonstrate the potential and limitations of the two coproduction mechanisms in substance use disorder treatment. This study is a critical examination of working conditions and the impact of user-engagement mechanisms and calls for a more empowered work environment in human service organizations.</p>","PeriodicalId":47665,"journal":{"name":"Social Service Review","volume":"94 1","pages":"607-645"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11142637/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Service Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/710706","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Health, social, and human service providers seek diverse ways to engage service users in the service production process. This approach to engagement with users is known as "coproduction." In addition to conventional user-provider coproduction (i.e., patient-centered care), providers attending to stigmatized and marginalized groups may hire staff who share life experiences with user groups. These providers are known as "user representatives," and their service provision is known as "peer coproduction." Using nationally representative data from substance use disorder treatment clinics in the United States, I investigate how clinics' use of patient-centered care and peer coproduction mechanisms is associated with organizational service availability and utilization patterns. Results demonstrate the potential and limitations of the two coproduction mechanisms in substance use disorder treatment. This study is a critical examination of working conditions and the impact of user-engagement mechanisms and calls for a more empowered work environment in human service organizations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
药物使用障碍治疗中的协同生产及其与诊所服务产出模式的关系
卫生、社会和人类服务提供商寻求多种方式让服务用户参与服务生产过程。这种与用户互动的方法被称为“合作生产”。除了传统的用户-提供者合作生产(即以患者为中心的护理)外,照顾被污名化和边缘化群体的提供者可能会雇佣与用户群体分享生活经验的工作人员。这些提供者被称为“用户代表”,他们的服务提供被称为为“同行合作生产”。我利用美国药物使用障碍治疗诊所的全国代表性数据,调查了诊所对以患者为中心的护理和同行合作生产机制的使用与组织服务的可用性和利用模式之间的关系。结果证明了这两种协同作用机制在治疗物质使用障碍方面的潜力和局限性。这项研究对工作条件和用户参与机制的影响进行了批判性的审查,并呼吁在人类服务组织中建立一个更强大的工作环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Service Review
Social Service Review SOCIAL WORK-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Founded in 1927, Social Service Review is devoted to the publication of thought-provoking, original research on social welfare policy, organization, and practice. Articles in the Review analyze issues from the points of view of various disciplines, theories, and methodological traditions, view critical problems in context, and carefully consider long-range solutions. The Review features balanced, scholarly contributions from social work and social welfare scholars, as well as from members of the various allied disciplines engaged in research on human behavior, social systems, history, public policy, and social services.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of brain activation and functional outcomes between physical and virtual reality box and block test: a case study. Economic Outcomes of Shared Placement among Divorced Mothers in Wisconsin Unusual Branchial Cleft Cyst at Parapharyngeal Space: Case Report and a Review of Literature. Social Work and the Platform Economy: A Labor Process Theory Analysis Of the State, against the State: Public Defenders, Street-Level Bureaucracy, and Discretion in Criminal Court
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1