1 - 2 of 2
rss atomLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
  • Public defence: 2019-05-10 13:00 Forum Humanum, Jönköping
    Monwell, Bodil
    Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, HHJ, Dep. of Social Work. Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, HHJ. SALVE (Social challenges, Actors, Living conditions, reseach VEnue).
    En dyster parentes – opiatregeln i svensk LARO-behandling 2010–20162019Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Opioids are well documented to arouse euphoria, relieve pain, and to have a high dependency potential. Opioid dependence is a serious chronic condition with a high risk of extensive worsened health, relapse and premature death.

    Opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) is well researched and has strong scientific support. In Sweden, OMT over time was subjected to polarised and infected political debate and has been strictly regulated by the National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW). During 2010–2016 NBHW redefined the diagnostic concept of “opiate dependence” in the regulation SOSFS 2009:27. Dependence to only three opioids: heroin, opium or morphine, could give eligibility to OMT (here called the “opiate rule”). The purpose stated was to prevent those dependent to other opioides, e.g. buprenorphine,from receiving OMT. Applicants with severe opioid dependence were thereby divided into two subgroups: those with “opiate” dependence related to heroin, morphine or opium, and those with opioid dependence who lacked documentation in relation to the three opiates. The question is whether there were differences between these groups concerning problem severity or substance-related diagnostics that could justify differences in access to OMT?

    A population (n = 127) actualised for OMT during 2005-2011 in Jönköping County is studied regarding severity of problems, diagnostics and trajectories in and out of treatment. In order to provide precise drug use data, a cognitive tool for taking anamnestic information, called the Drug List, was developed.

    In Study I, using the Addiction Severity Index, the two groups were found to be quite similar in severity of health problems, social situation and drug problems, including overdoses and injections.

    In Study II, the Drug List was found to be superior to a traditional way of taking anamnestic data, more sensitive and giving more precise data, without taking more time. Validity was shown in relation to faked drugs.

    In Study III, using a structured diagnostic interview, ADDIS, with the Drug List, showed that both two groups qualified for severe opioid dependence, that opiates and other opioids had contributed equally to the development of opioid dependency, and that the two groups also had similar additional substance dependence problems.

    Study IV investigated how “the opiate rule” affected practice by interviewing representatives of OMT clinics as well as a representative of a users’ association. The regulation created dilemmas for clinics as well as for users. Users developed a strategy of getting "negative merits" for being eligible to OMT. Clinicians developed strategies to find ways “around” the regulation in order to admit patients in OMT.

    Study V followed those who had applied for OMT and found four trajectory subgroups – those denied OMT, those discharged, those readmitted, and those who remained in treatment. The study provides evidence for a more positive development being related to more involvment in OMT concerning health, social situation as well as substance use problems. Being denied or discharged is related to increased risks of a negative development.

    The thesis conclude that there was no support for dividing applicants according to “the opiate rule”. The purpose of top-down control using regulations, is to guarantee uniform and knowledge-based care. In this case the regulation had negative effects in these respects, increasing risks for the applicants, and lost credibility from the profession. The opiate rule in SOSFS 2009:27 is therefore a dismal parenthesis in the history of OMT in Sweden, and could be studied to prevent similar mistakes in the future.

  • Public defence: 2019-05-17 13:00 Forum Humanum, Jönköping
    Kapetanovic, Sabina
    Jönköping University, School of Health and Welfare, HHJ. SALVE (Social challenges, Actors, Living conditions, reseach VEnue).
    Mutual actions - Developmental links between aspects of the parent-adolescent relationship and adolescent risk behaviors2019Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Adolescence is a critical time for the onset or intensification of engagement in risk behaviors, such as delinquency and alcohol use. Parents are often advised to supervise adolescents or set rules for behavior control in order to protect their adolescents from harm. But are such parenting strategies advantageous in preventing adolescents from engaging in risk behaviors? Little is known about what role adolescents play in the parent- adolescent relationship and their own psychosocial development? The overall aim of the dissertation was to investigate how parent- and adolescent-driven communication efforts occurring in the parent-adolescent relationship relate to risk behaviors in early to mid- adolescence.

    Findings show that adolescent-driven communication efforts (i.e. disclosure about their everyday activities) play a prominent role in the parent-adolescent relationship and adolescent engagement in risk behaviors. Adolescent disclosure is linked to parental knowledge of an adolescent’s whereabouts, parent-adolescent emotional connectedness, and decreases in adolescent risk behaviors over time. While parental behavioral control of adolescent whereabouts can indeed be protective of adolescent engagement in risk behaviors, parents’ soliciting efforts are related to higher levels of engagement in delinquency and substance use. This is particularly true for boys and adolescents with detached and fearless temperament. However, when adolescents are willing to communicate, parents can elicit more disclosure from their adolescents through soliciting efforts.

    This dissertation suggests that parents and adolescents both play important roles in parenting and parent-adolescent relationships. Parents can protect their adolescents from engagement in risk behaviors, especially when adolescents share information with their parents.