Thứ Sáu, 29 tháng 6, 2018

Auto news on Youtube Jun 29 2018

Hi I'm Beverly Glasspell a massage therapist here at A&M Chiropractic Wellness Center.

I am a massage therapist here and I'm also a patient of Dr. Milne receiving the NATE

treatments.

For years I've been diagnosed with Urticaria, which is pressure induced hives.

Basically if I carry something heavy, a purse over my arm or my massage table over my shoulder,

I break out in a huge hive and its very uncomfortable for days.

Upon receiving those NAET treatments after she treated me for calcium, which is maybe

the 3rd or 4th treatment, I was able to carry my massage table and I didn't break out in

a hive.

And I had a couple of those things that I knew would probably break me out in a hive

and it didn't and so I got really excited and I said let me get more of these.

So I received...

I just went through the cycle and after she treated me for B complex I was able to eat

a full-blown fresh salad, which in the past I've been allergic to fruits and vegetables

and it's very uncomfortable to eat those and almost to a point to where I was avoiding

them even though I love them.

For more infomation >> Chiroprator NAET treatments for allergy induced hives - Duration: 1:09.

-------------------------------------------

Opioid Use Disorder: Treatment and Barriers to Employment Among TANF Recipients - Duration: 1:30:49.

Good afternoon everyone, and on behalf of Clarence Carter,

Director of the Office of Family Assistance

and the entire OFA team,

we'd like to thank you for joining today's webinar.

Opioid use disorder in the United States has skyrocketed

since 2010,

yet little contemporary research

has been conducted on the effects of this surge

on the TANF population.

Existing research about the opioid crisis

primarily focuses on its effects in the general population,

while TANF-centered studies

almost exclusively examine general substance use.

Moreover, opioid and substance use disorders

have been shown to be significant barriers

to employment for low-income individuals.

Such an information gap makes it difficult

to properly address TANF recipients'

needs for effective opioid use treatment.

This webinar will explore how opioid use disorder

affects the TANF-recipient population

and also TANF-eligible individuals,

as well as emerging strategies for assessing

and treating these populations.

Through this webinar, we will examine the prevalence of opioid

use disorder among TANF recipients

and the TANF-eligible population,

as well as barriers to employment it creates.

We'll learn two promising programs

connecting TANF-eligible individuals to opioid

use disorder screening,

assessment, and treatment services.

We'll reflect on how state, local,

and community-based opioid use disorder treatment organizations

can address TANF recipients' distinct needs,

and we will hear from the Kentucky

Targeted Assessment Program,

which is a collaborative comprehensive assessment

of multiple barriers to self-sufficiency

for Kentucky residents receiving or eligible for TANF.

We will also hear from the CHARM Collaborative,

a group of ten Vermont medical and social service agencies

providing comprehensive care coordination

for opioid addicted pregnant women,

their families, and their children.

We want to first bring up our first poll

and get some information from you.

To what extent is opioid use disorder

a problem among clients and your program?

I'll give you about 30 seconds to vote.

Again, to what extent is opioid use disorder

a problem among your clients in your program.

It looks like there's quite a bit of unsure.

There's also a large problem, initial problem,

but none at all.

We'll keep collecting those.

First, we want to hear from Justin Germain,

who is a researcher at MES Associates.

At MEF, he is involved with large-scale random assignment

evaluations of employment and training programs,

as well as research on technology's role

in workforce development.

Justin received his Bachelor of Arts degree

from the University of California at Berkley.

As the author of "Opioid Use Disorder Treatment and Barriers

to Employment among TANF Recipients,"

a paper that we at OFA hope to have published

in the next couple weeks,

Germain will present an overview of current research

on the opioid epidemics' effects on TANF recipients

and TANF-eligible individuals.

He will highlight how opioid use disorder

creates barriers to employment,

as well as some promising strategies aimed at assessing

and treating effective populations.

Justin.

Thanks, Damon.

Hello everyone.

Thank you for coming to today's webinar.

My name is Justin Germain,

and I'm a researcher at MEF Associates.

We're a social policy research firm

specializing in rigorous research

to shape the design and implementation

of social programs.

I've been working with OFA to identify the state

of current research

on the prevalence of opioid use disorder and treatment services

among TANF participants

and the TANF-eligible population.

There's a lot of research about the opioid crisis

swelling around these days,

so I've designed my presentation

to curate what would be most helpful to TANF agencies

and administrators for your program.

Now, as a quick roadmap of what I'll be speaking about today,

I'll first provide an overview of the prevalence of opioid

use disorder within the general population

before identifying what we know about its prevalence within TANF

and other low-income families.

Then I'll share some of opioid

use disorders effects on employment,

specifically for low-income individuals.

Finally, I'll tell you about treatment

and prevention strategies

that appear promising for this population,

followed by some of the common challenges

that can prevent these strategies from being effective.

Now, as a disclaimer, while there are many ways

of referring to opioid use disorders,

for this presentation, I'll be using the acronym OUD.

And before diving into the specifics,

I think it's important to quickly look

at how prevalent opioid use disorder

is across the United States.

OUD is a problematic pattern of opioid use,

which includes heroin, Fentanyl, and certain prescription

painkillers that lead to clinically

significant impairment or distress.

As of 2015, two million Americans had a substance use

disorder involving prescription opioids,

and over 590,000 experience a heroin use disorder.

As shown on the slide in front of you,

deaths caused by opioids have more than quadrupled

since 2000 and continue to increase in alarming rates.

According to the CDC, opioids contributed

to over 42,000 American overdose deaths in 2016 alone;

however, a study released just last month

claims that opioid-involved drug deaths

are actually to 20 to 35% higher

due to different state standards of reporting causes of death.

Now, as shown on the map in front of you,

rural areas experience

45% more drug-related deaths per capita that urban centers,

and also have higher rates of opioid overdoses.

Almost twice as many men experienced opioid

overdose deaths as women in 2015;

however, heroin and prescription

OUD rates

have increased much faster for women

in the last 15 years.

This is increasingly important

when we look at opioids' effects on TANF families,

since over 85% of adult TANF participants are women.

Now, OUD influences individuals and communities

differently than other forms of substance use disorders.

The fact that opioids are primarily

taken for pain reduction

is key to understanding how opioids connect to unemployment.

40% of non-working men age 25

to 54 claim that pain prevents them from securing a job.

Furthermore, regions with greater opioid medication rates

have also experienced declines

in their labor force participation.

Now, unlike the general population,

limited research is available

about the prevalence of OUD within the TANF

and TANF-eligible populations.

Much existing data is at least ten years old

and prior to the current opioid crisis.

We do know that individuals in poverty

are more likely to be dependent on opioids

than those with incomes over 200%

of the federal poverty line,

yet, research examining the TANF population

tends to emphasize findings

about general substance use disorders

that aren't specific to any single substance.

One study estimated that the 1996 introduction of TANF

correlated to a 10 to 21% reduction in illicit drug use

by women at risk of welfare.

TANF drug sanctions, work incentives,

and a strong economy likely contributed to this result.

Currently, approximately 5% of TANF clients are estimated

to be addicted to any illicit substance,

and 10% have used an illicit drug in the past month.

Long-term public assistance participants

are more likely to experience a substance use disorder

than a short-term participant.

And although more relevant information is needed,

research into Medicaid can help draw limited parallels

to the TANF system

due to the program's overlapping membership base.

About 636,000 Medicaid enrollees had an opioid use disorder

in 2013,

and subsequent Medicaid expansion

has likely increased this number.

Physicians prescribe painkillers to Medicaid and relief

twice as often as they do for other patients,

increasing their exposure to opioids in the process.

And now it's important, when we go over these studies,

to remember that these studies are not arguing

for a causal link between public assistance receipt

and substance use disorders,

they're simply detailing the correlation between the two.

Furthermore, these prevalence rates must be taken

with a grain of salt.

Many researchers believe that precise rates

are difficult to obtain

because people with substance use disorders

may hide their use.

Individuals across all income levels do this,

while individuals on public assistance

may misreport due to the stigma attached

to substance use disorders

and fears that they'll lose their benefits

if they reveal their addiction.

As of 2005, over 75% of state welfare offices still relied

on participants self-disclosure

of substance use disorder concerns

instead of more comprehensive screening tools.

Concerns over drug testing

exacerbate the fear of disclosure.

Fifteen states had versions of mandatory

drug testing for public assistance participants

as of March 2017.

Depending on the state, positive drug tests

can lead to mandatory treatment,

reduction in assistance,

or even a temporary denial of assistance.

Therefore, the frequency of substance use disorders

among the TANF population may be higher than reported,

which underscores the need for more research,

screening options,

and policies that reduce incentives to hide abuse.

Now, OUD also creates obstacles to the attainment

and maintenance of secure gainful employment.

Opioid use has a direct relationship

to higher workers compensation claims,

costlier medical expenses, and fewer days worked.

42% of individuals with an opioid use disorder

have worked for more than one employer in the past year,

which is twice the national average.

Moreover, a Brookings study suggests

that the increase in opioid prescriptions over the last two

decades could account for nearly 20% of the decline

in American males' labor

force participation rate

and 25% of American women.

Yet, it's important to remember that OUD falls within

a web of co-existing problems

that worsen low income individuals' difficulties

in securing employment.

Many studies conducted on this issue

have focused on low-income women.

A 2003 study found that female TANF participants

who participated in CASAWORKS

for Families, a program created to provide

collaborative case management services

to low-income people with substance use disorders

displayed an average of six different

potential barriers to employment.

Some of these barriers included limited work experience,

domestic violence, low levels of education,

and mental health disorders.

Now, currently a 1% increase in county unemployment rates

correlates to a 3.6% increase in opioid-related death rated.

Yet there's mixed evidence whether employment alone

can decrease substance use disorders.

For example, the National Center for Children in Poverty

recommends using both treatment services and employment

to address substance use disorders.

Multiple studies have also indicated that employment

before or during substance use disorder treatment

can increase retention and success.

Therefore, substance use disorder treatment methods

that consider such coexisting problems

may help decrease barriers to both employment and abstinence.

Now, TANF participants and other low-income individuals

with substance use disorders

typically utilize treatment options

designed to serve the general population.

These are a selection of strategies

that appear promising for OUD,

but which are not representative

of all approaches currently in use.

For those with an opioid use disorder, medical treatments,

typically administered through Methadone, Buprenorphine,

or Naltrexone,

often provide the best chance at recovery.

Medication-assisted treatment, or MAT,

combines counseling with medication

designed to normalize body functions

and relieve opioid withdrawal symptoms.

It's been clinically proven to reduce the need

for in-patient detoxification

and increase patient's ability to gain employment,

yet it isn't used as widely as experts recommend.

This may stem from misconceptions

about drug substitutions,

inadequate physician training,

or the need for daily clinical visits

for patients using methadone.

These barriers make it difficult for TANF participants

to meet work requirements if their treatment

is not an allowable activity

under their state's TANF program.

The 21st Century Cures Act and 29-states expansion of MAT

funding have been to improve these accessibility problems.

Now, strategies aiming to curb improper prescribing practices

have also become widespread.

As of March 2017, all states except Missouri

kept track of controlled substance prescriptions.

Some states require practitioners to check

their state database

before prescribing opioids to patients,

while others have enacted opioid prescribing limits.

A few states have also passed pill mail laws

that heavily regulate providers who prescribe opioids

improperly or for non-medical purposes.

The CDC has also collaborated with the American Pain Society

to create recommendations for providers

about proper prescribing habits.

Contingency management, which provides prizes to people

with an opioid use disorder

when they attend counseling sessions, pass a drug test,

or perform other activities promoting abstinence

is effective at increasing time spent in treatment.

While this can be expensive in resource-limited communities,

lower-cost versions have also

improved treatment attendance and completion.

Finally, community prevention coalitions

initiate collaboration

between multiple stakeholders,

dedicated to decreasing

OUD and overdose rates in their communities.

Some common members of these groups include hospitals,

medical societies, law enforcement agencies,

NGOs, and addiction treatment centers.

Community prevention coalitions focus more on public engagement

and treatment collaboration

than other strategies.

And while there are few OUD treatment and prevention

strategies specifically targeted to the TANF population,

we may be able to identify relevant strategies

by examining practices

used to address general substance use disorders

that are tailored to TANF and other related populations.

Screening and assessment procedures, for instance,

help identify individuals who need assistance

to address their substance addiction.

As mentioned earlier, low-income populations,

especially those on TANF,

are often hesitant to report drug use

due to legal or public assistance concerns.

While generic screening methods,

like caseworker relying on people

to fill out self-disclosure forms,

have limited effectiveness,

specialized screening raises the chance

that a TANF participant will disclose their substance use.

In this method, higher risk populations receive

more screening,

and trained caseworkers conduct one-on-one interviews.

While this is generally used to supplement generic screening,

it's been shown to increase substance use disorder referrals

of New Jersey public assistance participants from 4.4 to 10.3%.

Now, Miss Ramlow will show how the University of Kentucky

has expanded off this method

through the program she oversees.

Intensive case management,

which involves long-term personal monitoring

and social service assistance,

has been shown in a random assignment study

to improve TANF- participants' employment,

substance abstinence, and treatment attendance outcome.

By meeting with participants multiple times a month,

and covering their child care, transportation,

and housing needs before treatment,

caseworkers successfully reduce substance

use disorder rates for women on TANF.

After 15 months of treatment,

43% of intensive case management participants were abstinent,

compared to 26% of a control group

receiving basic screening and referral services.

The individualized placement and support model

of supported employment

has also proven effective in randomized control trials

to improve employment outcomes.

Successful programs have assisted individuals

with substance use disorder and vocational services

and have encouraged employment that promotes recovery.

While most commonly it's been evaluated among individuals

with mental health concerns,

a 2017 randomized control trial

showed this was a promising strategy

to help secure employment

for people with opioid use disorders as well.

After one year, 50% of individualized placement

and support participants with OUD

secured competitive employment,

compared to 22% of a control group.

Finally, family-centered treatment

shows promise at addressing substance use disorders

among women with dependent children.

Women make up over 85% of TANF participants,

and 70% of women entering substance

use disorder treatment programs have children,

making them a crucial demographic to study.

Family-centered treatment includes parenting education,

employment readiness, behavioral therapies,

and close collaboration with the child welfare,

criminal justice, and social service systems.

Our panelists from CHARM will show

that there's promising evidence

to support such treatment methods.

Now, child welfare families are another relevant group

to study in this scenario.

By working with courts involved with these families,

family treatment drug courts promote treatment

through incentives and intensive judicial supervision.

A 2008 study found that these specialized courts

have led to longer treatment participation.

Non-court-based treatment programs

working alongside the child welfare system

have shown mixed engagement and accessibility results.

An Illinois study examined programs with a recovery coach

who conducted repeated outreach,

facilitated access to services,

and ensured that patients were engaged in treatment.

Researchers suggested that completion rates

for this program

could have been improved through services

targeting co-existing problems,

treatment tailored to people's drug of choice,

and additional employment assistance.

Now, TANF service providers and public assistance

policymakers face many challenges

when working to stem the opioid crisis for the TANF

and TANF-eligible populations,

and these are some of the most salient.

There is limited information about opioid

treatment strategies, targeted employment,

and work readiness for TANF participants.

Since there is a scarcity of research

about the effects of opioid crisis on the TANF population,

it's difficult to determine ways to reduce employment barriers.

Secondly, co-existing barriers may hinder the accessibility

of effective treatment services,

especially medication assisted treatment.

Methadone-based medication assisted treatment

requires a patient to visit a clinic daily.

A 2004 study of these programs discovered that bureaucracy,

work schedules, mental health issues,

family situations, discrimination,

and other factors all hindered patients' access to treatment.

This is especially relevant for TANF families,

since low-income individuals

are more likely to receive methadone for treatment

instead of Buprenorphine,

which does not require daily clinic visits.

Also, limited collaboration across social service systems

can hinder screening and treatment.

Public assistance agencies, treatment providers,

and courts often collaborate with each other

to serve individuals with OUD,

yet they may not be doing so enough.

Without sufficient collaboration,

it is difficult to identify

and monitor individuals

requiring treatment.

OUD also harms individuals

throughout the entire workforce system.

In addition to hindering unemployed individuals

and treatment to the workforce,

OUD decreases workforce activity and job tenure.

To improve TANF employment outcomes,

it's important to promote OUD services

for incumbent workers as well.

Finally, individuals at risk of losing public assistance

or custody of their children

simply fear disclosing their opioid use disorder.

To understand the actual prevalence of OUD

among these groups, comprehensive screening measures

and policies reducing incentives to hide abuse are needed.

So, overall, in terms of key takeaways, there are two.

There's limited research about the opioid crisis

among TANF participants, and we simply don't know enough.

Furthermore, OUD is one of many co-existing problems

that worsen difficulties in securing employment.

Finally, in terms of future research,

there is a need for more reserve on the prevalence of OUD

along the TANF and TANF-eligible populations.

And as mentioned previously,

certain treatment strategies have been shown to be effective

and simply could be evaluated for TANF.

The opioid crisis is an incredibly critical situation,

and we need to know more about

how it affects the TANF population

in order to be effective at fighting it.

If you'd like to reach out to me about this research

or want to know where certain assistance come from,

the paper that Damon mentioned will be out

within a few weeks that I authored.

Furthermore, my contact information is on the screen.

Thank you so much, and I really look forward to your questions

at the end of the webinar.

Thank you very much, Justin.

Good afternoon everyone.

My name is Stephen Broyles,

and I'm with the Peer Technical Assistance Team,

and I just wanted to mention a few

housekeeping tips through the webinar.

First of all, the webinar is being recorded

so you are on mute; however,

if you have any questions or comments,

please feel free to use the chat box

or place questions in the question box.

At the end of all of the presentations,

there be a Q&A, so please submit any of those questions

and we'll make sure that the appropriate presenter

gets the information.

Also, during the webinar, if you need any technical assistance

with the webinar platform, please raise your hand.

It's at the top of the screen in the bar

where you see the picture of an individual with the hand raised.

Click on that and we'll reach out to you

or just contact myself,

Steven Boyles or Deidre Young, and we will follow up with you.

Also, there will be an evaluation at the end,

and we just want to make sure that you please stick around

and get the information,

and also, as many of you noticed,

there will be a recording and a transcript of this webinar

that will be posted on the Peer TA website in a few weeks.

So, thank you, and I'm going to turn this back over to Damon.

Thank you, Steven.

And before we get into our next presentation,

time for another poll.

So, everyone, how do you screen and assess your clients

for substance use disorders?

How do you screen and assess your clients

for substance use disorders?

We'll give that a couple seconds.

Okay.

You can keep voting on that while well move

into our next presentation.

Our next presenter, Barbara Ramlow,

is a director and cofounder of the University of Kentucky

Targeted Assessment Program.

A former clinician working in inpatient, outpatient,

and other community non-profit settings,

she has been with University of Kentucky Center

on Drug and Alcohol Research since 1994,

serving as the assistant director of the Institute

on Women and Substance abuse from 1994 to 2003,

and director from 2003 to 2006.

She began to provide consultation

to the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services

during the advent of welfare reform in the mid-1990s

and has partnered with CHFS

and other statewide agencies on multiple

initiatives to improve Kentucky's capacity to identify

and address barriers to employment,

self-sufficiency, family safety, and family stabilities.

The Targeted Assessment Program identifies and addresses

barriers prevalent among low-income parents,

including substance abuse,

substance use, mental health problems,

intimate partner violence,

learning deficits and disabilities,

and basic needs,

as well as participant strengths and engages participants

in action plans to support progress.

This presentation will highlight the key components

of TAP's approach

in the context of the opioid crisis.

Case examples will illustrate engagement strategies,

pretreatment, effective referral and support

for ongoing recovery, individual,

and systems-level interventions.

Barbara.

Thank you, very much.

I'm very pleased to be here today

representing the Kentucky's Targeted Assessment Program.

As noted, our program, which we tall TAP, was developed

and implemented through a partnership

with the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services,

the Department of Community-based Services

and the University of Kentucky Center

on Drug and Alcohol Research,

which is a part of the College of Medicine.

It is supported a hundred percent with TANF funds,

and we are assisting parents involved

in Kentucky's public assistance

and child welfare systems.

The purpose of TAP is to identify and address barriers

to self-sufficiency, family stability and safety,

including, as noted, substance use, mental health,

intimate partner violence, learning problems,

that would be deficits and disabilities,

and basic needs.

Before I talk more about the program and the research,

I'd like to tell a story.

Participants come to us through many, many doors,

and one of the strengths of the program

is that that is possible.

I want to tell you about an individual

who is already involved with a Kentucky Works program,

which is our TANF program.

At the time that we met her --

and I'm going to call her Sandy --

she was a 26-year-old woman with two children.

She was referred to TAP by her Kentucky Works Program

case manager when staff at her community service placement

expressed concerns

because she seemed to be sedated.

In addition, her attendance was inconsistent

and she complained about transportation problems.

The staff were both annoyed with and worried about her.

The TAP assessor got the referral from the case manager

and then arranged to meet with Sandy,

whom she met at her home.

And Sandy agreed to participate in the program.

TAP's assessment revealed that she had a substance use disorder

that was being treated with Suboxone

by a physician with brief monthly check-ins

but no additional treatment services.

Sandy had a history of failed treatment attempts

but found medication-assisted treatment,

or MAT, through recommendation of a relative.

Sandy described a history of childhood abuse

and intimate partner violence

and was experiencing verbal abuse

and controlling isolating behaviors

in her current relationship

with the father of her young child.

She and her children were dependent on him

for transportation, child care, and other supports.

She had an aunt and uncle nearby

who could play a more supportive role in her life

but were kept at a distance by the boyfriend.

Sandy reported she had liked school before she dropped out

when she got pregnant in high school.

She reported current mental health symptoms

that were indicative of depression

and post-traumatic stress disorder.

The assessor developed a plan with Sandy,

and, with release, communicated

with Kentucky Works case manager.

TAP helped Sandy transfer to a different MAT provider,

where her Suboxone dosing was corrected,

and also helped her engage in outpatient evaluation

and counseling for co-occurring disorders, trauma,

and intimate partner violence.

The assessor drove her to her first appointment

and, at Sandy's request, sat in on the first session.

Once Sandy stabilized, TAP provided education about MAT

to the case manager

and the community service placement supervisor,

and Sandy was allowed to return to her placement.

The assessor met with Sandy regularly,

followed up with her treatment providers,

and communicated regularly with the TANF case manager

about her progress.

When Sandy was able to identify her current relationship

was abusive and decided to leave,

TAP helped her to find housing through collaboration

with Kentucky's Domestic Violence Program

that has a HUD grant for victims.

TAP also helped Sandy obtain childcare

and helped her with job applications.

Her aunt and uncle gave her an old car that wasn't working,

and the Kentucky Works Program helped with car repairs.

TAP also helped her with applications

to the local community college,

and she was accepted into Kentucky's Ready to Work Program

that supports TANF recipients attending college.

Through Ready to Work,

Sandy was able to obtain a work steady job,

and this eventually led to regular employment.

She chose to continue her education as well.

She began to talk to her treatment providers

about whether and when she could begin tapering off

Suboxone.

So, back to the barriers and how TAP came to be.

This is all based in the early work

we were doing throughout the country,

research into women and substance use,

because over the dearth of research available

until that began to grow in the '80s and '90s.

And we learned a lot that helped us know how we could do better.

So, estimates of drug and alcohol use disorders

are almost double for individuals who receive TANF.

Women who are receiving TANF and have substance use disorders

report co-occurring depression, anxiety,

and high levels of PTSD.

Studies have shown intimate partner violence

to be higher among women receiving TANF

than other low-income women not receiving TANF.

Mental health problems have also been found

to be more prevalent in the population,

as have childhood experiences and adult trauma.

In terms of learning problems, studies in three states

indicated that between 20 to 50% of women

have some type of learning problem,

and 20 to 25% have IQs of less than 80.

In addition, unmet basic needs have been strongly correlated

with mental health and intimate partner violence.

And finally, the presence of multiple barriers

continues to be the strongest predictor

of non-participation and work activities

and continues to be linked to poor employment

among low-income parents.

I wanted to share with you some data from our program.

This is fiscal year 2017,

when we assessed about 2,200 participants,

both male and female, but mostly female.

And you can see that the highest prevalence

in the four targeted barriers is mental health,

59% for substance use,

and then lesser degrees of intimate partner violence

and learning problems.

Now, individuals might be experiencing these barriers

in combination,

which isn't shown in this particular chart.

What we find is that 63% of the participants in fiscal year

2017 experienced two or more of these barriers,

and some as many as all four.

In terms of unmet basic needs for that same group,

we see our common top two are housing and transportation.

In recent years, social support has come up to be almost equal

with those as a barrier self-reported by participants,

and you can see parenting legal help,

and children's needs follow.

With regard to opioid use, I wanted to share a study

that looked at 2012 to 2016,

and this is lifetime self-reported data

for more than 12,000 TAP participants during that period.

And you could see that opiates are pretty steady up there

at the top, the green line,

as is OxyContin and methadone.

Those are pretty steady.

And Kentucky has long had an opiate problem.

It is not new with this particular crisis

that we're experiencing now.

What you can also see, then,

is the increasing prevalence

of IV drug use

and heroin use, along with Buprenorphine,

which could be used either as a treatment or on the street.

So, our program exists in 35 Kentucky counties.

We hire and place, now, 58 target assessment specialists

at our community-based services offices.

So that's Kentucky Social Service System,

and we are there to receive referrals

from both child welfare

and public assistance referral sources.

The fact that we are co-located with the DCBS staff

is a critical and key component of our program.

Our TAP staff are University of Kentucky employees.

They get their salaries and benefits through the University,

and their travel is paid through the university.

But their computers and their phones and their worksite

is full time

with their coworkers, community -based services workers.

So that eases referrals, that eases communication

and collaboration about cases,

and has made all the difference in terms of,

I believe, increasing the number of individuals

that we're able to serve.

We hire folks who are skilled clinicians.

They are trained in all of the barriers that I've discussed

previously,

and their job, in addition to -- well, first of all,

their job is to develop good relationships

with their colleagues

and with all participants, and with all community partners.

When they meet a participant, or a potential participant,

to offer services,

if the individual agrees to work with TAP,

they conduct a really holistic assessment

across barriers and strengths.

They're not doing one screening,

they're not looking just for substance use disorders,

and they are looking across all of the barriers.

What we believe is that these moms and dads

are people with lives who live in a context,

live within their families and their communities,

and that there is always a lot going on with individuals

living in poverty that make life difficult

and may ease their success or hinder their success,

and the more that we can learn about them, the better.

The more that they feel heard and understood, the better.

So that is part of the process

of conducting a holistic assessment,

is developing a really good rapport, trust,

and mutual trust and understanding,

and they know that they have somebody on their team

who is going to help them,

and that we can offer them help in a wide range of ways.

We provide strength-based case management.

That's one of our evidence-based practices.

We provide pretreatment and intensive case management

and create a customized service plan with the participant.

So, we're going to be identifying what they see

as their most critical needs and help figure out

where they are in their understanding of their problems

and what their readiness is to change.

So, if they do have a substance use problem,

where are they in the stages of change?

We use motivational interviewing

and other evidence-based practice

to help determine where they are

and what are the next best steps to take.

Many referrals have been made at the point that a problem

is identified that a participant doesn't follow through on,

so we use motivational interviewing and pretreatment

to really work to prepare people to engage in treatment

and make good use of that referral.

That can be working on internal barriers,

their understanding of their addiction; for example,

their understanding of the effect of trauma on their life

and their understanding of the resources that are available,

their ability to feel hope about their situation,

their sense of who is their support system.

All of those things are used to help

put together a good plan for each individual,

and that is a very individualized plan.

They have the ability to say, "No."

They have the ability to say, "I don't want to do that,

but I will do this."

For example, they might need a more intensive

in-patient substance abuse treatment service

but if they're not willing to do that,

what are they willing to do?

And we're going to work with them on that

and come up with a plan,

and then try it and see, and continually meet with them

and talk with them about how things are going with their plan

so that they can move forward.

We're also going to be working in that,

as we develop the plan, on any external barriers,

because with low-income populations,

those are often, and certainly in our state,

often things that get in the way.

If they don't have transportation,

which incredibly common in Kentucky,

which is mostly rural, how are they going to get there?

How are they going to keep going to appointments?

If they don't have child care for their kids,

what are the things that need to be put in place?

And sometimes before we ever get to that,

we're working on getting the utilities turned back on

because they don't have heat.

We're working on finding them decent housing

because they don't have that.

We work with many individuals

who are homeless or sleeping on couches

and having their kids in other people's homes

but don't have a stable place to live.

So, working with participants on housing barriers

is often very important and useful,

as well as finding ways to ensure

that they're going to have transportation.

I think some of things that are different, as I said,

we get referrals through the Child Welfare System

and through the TANF Public Assistance Program

here in Kentucky, and the needs of the workers

and the case plans are different in those systems,

and so we're going to be always collaborating

with the referring worker

to make sure that we're helping the participant

make progress on the plan that is set forth within,

that they're able to meet the requirements as best they can.

And sometimes we're able to help shape

the nature of those requirements,

which sometimes are quite unreasonable

and not in keeping with what services

are available in a community.

For example, a service might be ordered for somebody,

and they're required to do something

that simply is not available,

and we're going to be able to advocate

with that referring caseworker about that requirement,

and get it changed, perhaps to something that is doable.

We're going to constantly follow up

with our participants with a referral source

and with a community partner.

So, in many cases, the community partner is a referral for agency

for mental health problems,

for partner violence, for substance use,

and we're going to be -- with a release,

we could communicate back and forth,

so if our participants stop showing up at treatment,

we're going to be in good communication

with that provider.

They're going to get in touch with us.

We're going to be able to get in touch with the participant

and figure out what happened.

Was it a relapse?

Was it their transportation fell through?

Did they have a crisis?

Often yes.

And it's our job to help do that crisis intervention,

that problem solving with that person and help figure out,

okay, what do we need to do to get back on track.

In the TANF program we're working,

also, with job readiness programs,

community services sites, employers.

We get referrals quite often,

as is the example of Sandy, we get referrals,

more often than from the case managers,

we get them from the adult education programs,

from the community service placements,

where they are seeing people on a daily basis

or a few times during the week,

and they're really much more likely to notice

when something isn't right,

something's not going right for somebody,

and they know TAP, they know exactly who to call,

and they know that we're going to do something to help,

and so those collaborations are very, very important.

It's very important that we communicate effectively

with both child welfare agency

and with our case management.

In Kentucky, we have online information system

that has made this quite easy,

and we are required and enabled to communicate

in writing through the online system.

So, we can communicate in real time to the case manager

when there are significant developments,

successes, progress, when things don't work out well

and we're needing to step back and reevaluate the plan.

So that communication has been really, really valuable,

and for both TAP and for the case managers.

We also provide consultation and training

about these multiple barriers

whenever we're asked to do that,

and whenever it seems appropriate.

Sometimes that's in a formal way,

where we're training case managers

about medication-assisted treatment,

but much more often,

it occurs when we are talking about a case, which we do a lot.

We talk in people's offices.

We communicate on e-mail.

And there's a lot of case collaboration

and talking about what's going on

and what needs to happen next.

And through those interactions, we can really help those workers

gain an understanding,

both of the individual that we're serving

and their particular unique needs and circumstances,

but also the nature of addiction,

the nature of intimate partner violence,

the likelihood of relapse,

the likelihood that a woman might return to her perpetrator,

and talk about the cycles

and keep instilling in the TANF agency,

the Child Welfare agency,

that even though these events occur, there is always hope.

There is still hope and that this is

part of the process of people

making their way forward.

So, I think that that's very valuable.

We're right there onsite and we can do

that both informal and formal training,

and case consultation whenever we're asked.

We also provide a lot of information.

We do an extensive report.

Our assistant findings and recommendations with our plan,

which we update.

We do written monthly updates and status reports

on all of the participants that we're serving.

We also have a role in advocacy.

I would say over the years,

since we've been doing this for a while --

I should say we've been doing this now for 18 years,

so have gone through many,

many phases of development

in our own program,

but also changes within the social services systems,

in our economy, in the nature of the substances

that are being used at the time.

The recommendations for treatment

have changed vastly during those year,

and when we first started, MAT was really hardly available.

There were a few methadone clinics in the state

but nothing else.

And now we have Suboxone readily available,

not necessarily well-regulated treatment,

and a lot of misunderstanding of MAT,

a lot of experience of poor quality MAT.

And part of our job is to educate

and advocate for participants,

and that includes identifying those treatment programs

that are of not good quality

and steering our participants

into those programs that are good.

For example, with MAT, it is best practice

that in addition to receiving the medication,

the person is involved in treatment, in counseling,

and if they're not, that's not good treatment.

So, as in the example of Sandy,

we're going to make sure that that happens

and that everybody understands why that needs to happen.

So, we can really support good practice.

We can talk to treatment providers about a rule

that they might have that is really prohibited.

For example, up until somewhat recently,

a lot of our treatment providers

did not allow people into a treatment program

if they were receiving MAT.

And that was a huge barrier and made no sense.

And, actually, most of our providers now,

I think, have changed that practice and have welcomed MAT,

folks on MAT to participant in treatment as well.

TAP exists in several different communities.

There are 35 different counties in our state.

We have regional administrations for community-based services,

and we have a central office in the state,

in our state capital of Frankfort.

And TAP is, from the very beginning,

engaged in multiagency collaborations,

and has found that that has also been essential

to the success of our program.

So that we work with the administrators

at the state level, at the regional level,

and that in our local offices

to make sure that we're implementing the program

according to our protocols, according to best practice;

that we're figuring out how to set up referral mechanisms

in a way that works for the DCBS and works for TAP;

that we are keeping everyone aware of the resources

that are available for participants.

We have multidisciplinary advisory councils in our sites.

They help with the hiring of staff.

They help with implementation through quarterly meetings

and examining our data, and we share data back and forth

and have lots of conversations about both what's working

but also what's not working,

and I think that that's been a key

strength of our program as well,

is that we have always been willing to acknowledge

when something wasn't working and look

at what our part might be in that

and look at solutions with our community partners,

and that has served us well over the years

as we have continued to improve the program and learn as we go.

I wanted to share a little bit of our outcomes.

These are very specific to the Kentucky works Program

and those of you who are in your TANF programs,

those of us who are having to deal

with allowable and accountable activities.

TAP is an allowable component not countable,

which has been a deterrent to referral,

but we persevere nonetheless,

and one of our responsibilities is to ensure

that when we get a referral,

that if they're not already in accountable work activity,

that we're going to get them into accountable activity

as soon as possible.

And another thing is that if someone is looking like

they're going to drop out and fail and they're accountable,

that we're going to help see what can we do to shore them up

so that they can maintain in their accountable activity.

So, of the terminating participants

in the Kentucky's Works Program,

65% of them were participating in accountable work activity

within six months of TAP assessment,

and the average amount of time to enrollment

in that work activity was seven weeks.

TAP has conducted several outcome studies.

I wanted to share one that was published in 2012.

It was a six-month --

from baseline to six months follow-up study.

It was for 322 participants.

And, in general,

we saw statistically significant decreases

during that timeframe in mental health symptoms,

substance use, partner violence,

the percentage of our participants

had an open child welfare case,

a percentage of participants experiencing work difficulty,

and a decrease in reliance on TANF while employment increased.

We don't have perfect outcomes,

and we certainly have individuals

with whom we are not able to help.

A good many we are, and we think it's due

to this really unique approach

that we take, which is very, very personal,

with really skilled compassionate individuals

who then operate in a really non-traditional way.

They're at the DCBS office

but they are able to go to people's homes.

They're able to meet them in other safe locations,

like libraries or McDonalds,

able to work with them on safety planning,

able to drive them to an appointment

if their transportation falls through at the last minute,

able to help them with all sorts of critical basic needs,

and help them address their multiple difficulties

if they have problems in the areas of substance use,

mental health,

and partner violence most prominently,

as well as learning disabilities and deaf silts.

I will say that our data --

we've been collected data now for 18 years,

a lot more data than we share in our reports to the state,

and I think one common thing

that we know in our TAP participants,

be they male or female,

is the prevalence of childhood trauma

in almost all of them,

very, very difficult experiences.

They were not all raised in poverty.

Some were.

But most of them have had really difficult

adverse childhood experiences,

other kinds of trauma, sexual abuse,

and many --

and almost most of the women

have experienced some kind of partner violence

in their teenage years

and in their adult relationships,

and they are all well deserving of our support

and of trauma-informed approach,

which we didn't really even know about trauma-informed care

when we started this program.

We were getting there in terms of the research

and the findings that we were seeing,

but that hadn't been put all together

at the beginning of TAP.

But we have learned,

along with the researchers and service providers,

about the need trauma-informed case,

sensitivity and caring and empowering individuals

to make decisions and choices for their own lives.

We're very grateful that we've been able

to contribute positively.

I have included -- I'm not going to go over these slides.

You'll be able to see the PowerPoint.

The follow-up study is included.

That just will give you a sense.

That's the State of Kentucky, and those the sites where TAP

is currently located across the state,

and that represents very rural communities,

Appalachian communities, and urban communities.

I thank you very much for your attention

and look forward to speaking with you

if you have questions at the end of the presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you so very much, Barbara.

We did get a couple of questions,

and we'll put those in the Q&A queue

for the end of the webinar.

Now we want to bring up another poll.

Do you believe your community

has the adequate resources and services

available to assist low-income individuals

with opioid use disorder?

Do you believe your community has the appropriate resources

to assist low-income individuals

with disorders related to opioids?

It looks like B is a clear winner.

Now we'll move on to our final presentation,

beginning with Sally Borden

who is the executive director of KidSafe Collaborative,

a community-based non-profit organization

in Burlington, Vermont.

Miss Borden started with KidSafe in 1998.

In that role, she leads numerous community

initiatives to preserve the safety, health,

and wellbeing of children,

including the Children And Recovering Mothers,

CHARM, team, a multidisciplinary group,

which coordinates services for pregnant and postpartum women

with a history of opioid use disorder,

and their infants.

Dr. Johnston was a founding member

of CHARM, Children And Recovering Mother,

team approach to working with pregnant women

with a history of opioid dependence and their infants.

She leads the University of Vermont Child

Health Improvement Program, VCHIP,

quality improvement project on Improving Care

for Opioid-Exposed Infants or ICON.

She'll be presenting with Dr. Anne M. Johnston,

who was also a founding member of CHARM

and was working on a team approach

to working with pregnant women

with a history of opioid dependents and their infants.

She, too, leads the University of Vermont Child

Health Improvement Program, VCHIP,

quality improvement project

for Improving Care of Opioid Exposed Infants.

Dr. Johnston developed an interest

in the follow-up care of infants discharged from the NICU,

and in 2000, started a neonatal medical follow-up program

at the University of Vermont Children's Hospital,

then the Fletcher Allen Health Care Center.

At that time, she also developed an interest

in opioid-dependent infants.

With her team, she created a novel way

of weaning infants off opioids

by weaning doses of methadone in the outpatient

setting while in the care of their family.

To date, Dr. Johnston and her team

have followed over 1,200 infants

exposed to opioids during pregnancy,

through getting to know these women and their families

and hearing their struggles remarkable strength

in overcoming their obstacles,

their journey into a life of recovery

has become a passion of Dr. Johnston.

She also has an incredible team that works with her

and shares her passion for the care of these patients.

Anne and Sally.

Yes, this is Anne Johnston, and thank you for the introduction,

and I'm going to get right into it.

And Sally and I have done this presentation a number of times,

and if I go quickly through something,

she will actually remember and talk about it.

So, what we're going to be talking about, the two of us,

is opioid dependence in pregnancy,

and this is very briefly, opioid exposed newborns,

and some of my reflections about that,

and then the CHARM collaborative.

I just wanted to start this with putting out some context here.

People tend to focus on neonatal abstinence syndrome,

and, of course, I feel that neonatal abstinence syndrome

is just an expected event that happens

when the newborn is prenatally exposed to opioids,

and it's a much bigger issue

and what all you are focused on

are the families and the family health,

and I appreciate that from the previous two talks.

And this is an article put out by the CDC,

reviewing neonatal abstinence syndrome,

or NAS, incidence rates in 25 states,

of which Vermont was one,

and Maine and West Virginia

were the highest

in terms

of the neonatal abstinence syndrome rates,

and, also, Vermont had the highest annual rate

increase of states surveyed.

And when we look at that, I had a reaction,

and my reaction was not necessarily

that the opioid problem

was particularly bad in Vermont,

although we have certainly seen it,

and, really, what we have to think about

is what's making this increased diagnosed and increased rate.

And what we know is that this probably represents

increased access to safe treatment,

both prior to pregnancy and during pregnancy,

and that certainly happened in our state,

and Sally will be talking more about that,

and that we have had this increased focus

over the last 18 years

since I started working with these families,

in terms of identifying those families and babies at risk.

And, lastly, this is a good thing.

Now, I do review a few myths,

and perhaps these are well recognized

as myths to all of you,

but they may not be.

So, the first myth is that opioids during pregnancy,

so prenatal exposure of the fetus to opioids,

will result in a damaged baby.

And I still find that a lot of people have that opinion.

So, what's clear is that there's no evidence that opioid

exposure in and of itself results in developmental delay

or any other lasting effects on the exposed child.

On the other hand, alcohol exposure,

as well as tobacco exposure,

nicotine exposure, can result in physical, developmental,

and behavioral effects.

The next myth is that every baby born to a mother on opioids

is born addicted,

and this may be a little bit semantic,

but I refer to opioid-exposed babies

as those who were exposed

prenatally to prescribed or illicit opioids,

"prescribed" meaning methadone or Buprenorphine usually.

Opioid dependent infants and newborns

are those that exhibit signs of withdrawal severe enough

to need medication.

And there is no such thing as opioid-addicted babies.

Infants cannot be addicts.

The disease of addiction requires obsession,

compulsion, loss of control, breaking the rules.

And in our data from Vermont, we really have found

that only 20% of opioid-exposed infants

require pharmacologic treatment.

It used to be higher, but that has been the case

for the last number of years.

There's a lot of reasons for that.

And primarily in other --

the national data shows more like 50 to 60%.

Myth number three, if a baby needs treatment

for opioid withdrawal it must be

because the mother used opioids during pregnancy.

And when I say "used," I say in quotation marks,

obviously supplementally used.

And that is, clearly, not true.

The severity of withdrawal is not associated

with the dose of medication

or whether a mother has used or not during pregnancy.

However, exposure to nicotine and tobacco

can increase the severity of withdrawals,

and certainly higher scorers of abstinence

or withdrawal in a baby

do not indicate that a mother has used during pregnancy.

And myth number four, opioid abuse and pregnancy

leads to child abuse and neglects.

And we have had a fairly broad experience

over a number of years.

We have over 1,500 babies born to opioid-dependent women

through our clinic,

over 80% of these babies were discharged

in the care of their mother or father, or both,

and the majority of parents we see

are actively engaged in treatment

and display good parenting,

although they may need quite a lot of support,

as we've heard, in order to do so,

and have many needs and challenges.

If a parent is not adhering to treatment,

does not want to receive treatment

and is actively using, they may not be ready to parent a child,

and that's certainly something we've seen also.

And why is medication-assisted treatment for pregnant women

with opioid use disorders a standard of care?

It has remarkable health benefits,

both for the mother and the baby,

including decreasing the rate of prematurity,

a decrease in the rate of small babies,

improves the health of the baby, lowers infant mortality,

and it's important to recognize the pregnant woman

does not feel high

but, usually, feels well and has no cravings

if she is on the appropriate dose of MAT.

Successful engagement and treatment

increases the probability of good parenting,

and we generally recommend

that detoxification not occur during pregnancy.

It's rarely successful and can be dangerous to the fetus.

And lastly, one of my concerns, big concerns,

one of our concerns is that anything we do

as a society that drives pregnant --

or as healthcare providers or care providers,

anything that drives pregnant opioid-dependent women

from seeking treatment results in more prematurity,

higher infant mortality

and less probability of successful parenting,

so we have to be very, very careful about that.

What happens when an untreated woman with opioid

use disorder delivers a newborn,

who's probably hiding her opioid use disorder?

We have higher incidents of neonatal complications,

including opioid withdrawal perhaps.

If it's recognize that had the mother is opioid

dependent in the birthing hospital,

there's often Child Protective Services involvement

and there's a challenge of taking care of a newborn

and starting treatment for addiction,

which might result in temporary placement for the child.

And if this is unrecognized and the infant

exhibits no withdrawal in the early period,

after discharge the infant may be particularly irritable,

and that family's ability to cope

is impeded by the fear of discovery,

the mother will probably remain active in her addiction,

continuously flying under the radar,

may expose her baby to unsafe situations,

and is often unwilling to come forward

for fear of losing her child or children.

As we know, the medication part of medication-assisted

treatment,

generally in pregnancy, we use Methadone or Buprenorphine,

with advantages specific to patient populations to both.

We have a very high rate of Buprenorphine

maintenance here in Vermont,

because we were sort of late coming to the game

with Methadone maintenance

and we have a rural population

and did extensive training on Buprenorphine

with our physicians.

And just to clarify and look at some of the issues

that face substance-using pregnant women

and their children,

there's often generational substance use,

untreated mental health problems,

limited parenting skills and resources,

unstable housing, unstable transportation,

some legal involvement,

and then, hugely, exposure to childhood trauma

as we've heard about from Barbara.

And underneath it all is this great degree of shame,

which prevents women from being able to be open

and share the truth

and keeps them in their fear

and fear of discovery.

What we try to do in our program, and also at CHARM,

is build trust,

focus on the respect and strengths,

decrease fear and shame, and promote breastfeeding.

And our hospitalists, as was said,

we do actually treat babies with Methadone,

but only 20% of the exposed babies are treated.

They are discharged home on Methadone,

so not in hospital for very long,

and then we have an infrastructure

putting in a neo med clinic,

where they come within a week,

and every two weeks for weaning of the Methadone

and monitoring of growth and development.

They are tiny amounts of methadone,

Sally is reminding me, so not enough to be abused,

but that was one of the main concerns 18 years ago

when we started this, was how was this going to be safe.

And so, if we look at up until the end of 2016,

how many women or babies we follow born

to moms on Methadone or Buprenorphine at delivery,

you can see that in the red it is predominantly Buprenorphine,

with some on Methadone.

And then just looking at outcomes, for us,

based on 277 babies,

and we have more at this point,

their cognitive, language and motor

outcomes at 7 to 14 months of age are actually excellent.

This is percentiles that you're looking at.

And, in fact, it looked, at one point,

like they did better than the average baby,

and that's sort of evening out now.

And there's certainly no developmental issues

at this early age.

They are, of course, at risk due to their family environments,

to having some learning problems, school problems,

and certainly at risk for addiction,

the disease of addiction or alcoholism,

just based on the genetic potential,

but this is a good start.

I think my key points that I wanted you to get from this

is that the incidence of neonatal

abstinence syndrome is increasing,

but we have to really look at whether this represents

increased identification cases,

increased access to care for pregnant opioid-dependent women,

or what does it represent.

Behind every case of neonatal abstinence syndrome,

it is important to recognize there is a mother,

and perhaps a family, suffering from the disease of addiction,

and this is where efforts need to be the greatest.

We need to decrease our judgment,

increase access to trauma-informed treatment.

Developmental and behavioral outcomes are overall

not affected by opioid exposure in utero

on its own, unlike alcohol exposure,

and community strategies that focus on punishment

will result in increased morbidity and mortality

for children and their families.

And lastly, healthy collaboration between partners,

such as in CHARM,

has been essential to supporting these families.

And I'm going to turn this over to Sally at this point.

Thank you, Dr. Johnston.

Hi. This is Sally Borden,

and I'm going to take a few minutes

to talk about our CHARM team,

which, as you heard in the introduction,

is a multidisciplinary team,

focusing on health and safe outcomes for babies

born to women with a history of opioid use disorder,

and we were cited as a model collaborative

approach by SAMHSA.

And there will be more information sent out to you

with a link to that

if you want more information about the program.

We see, you know, a lot of challenges

that were mentioned earlier for TANF recipients,

and often that is around meeting their work requirements,

as well as housing and childcare.

If they need to go into treatment,

what are the requirements for that treatment program,

and does that interfere

with their other work or requirements?

So, those are all very relevant, as was described earlier.

And we see this also as a promising prevention model,

because it's so important for all of the service providers

to work together,

and for TANF providers to understand

that the standard of care for treatment for pregnant women

does involve being on medication-assisted treatment,

and also to be cognizance of the myths

that Dr. Johnston explained.

So, just a quick view of our beginnings, really, this is just

so that you can see that our collaboratives

did not happen overnight.

It took many years of hard work

to develop the kind of framework for sharing information

and working together that we have in place now.

And we started way back when a few doctors said,

wait a minute, let's work together to figure out

how to best treat and support these women

and make sure they have healthy babies.

So that has evolved as we have gone along over these years.

There are a number of partner organizations involved,

UVM Medical Center, and UVM Children's Hospital --

and UVM is University of Vermont --

are the key sort of foundation of this collaborative approach,

and then child welfare is also a very important partner,

and a number of different state

and community-based organizations come together.

One of the things that's really been significant

is our Public Health Department has developed

a very robust infrastructure

for providing medication-assisted treatment,

and that has really improved access throughout our state.

They call it the "Hub and Spoke System,"

and the hubs are the more intensive treatment locations,

and the spokes, as they were,

are often community-based providers,

providing Buprenorphine and integrated

with other health care

and wellness and treatment services.

Just over the last few years,

we have significantly increased

the number of people on treatment

and decreased our wait time,

which has been tremendously important for this population.

For our CHARM collaborative, there are a few key pieces

that we find are essential to making this work,

this team approach work.

First of all, coming to a shared philosophy,

and this didn't happen overnight, I must say.

It took lots and lots of discussions

even to reach that point.

But really coming to an agreement

that while many of us on that team,

our primary focus for support

is making sure that infants are safe and healthy,

that in order for that to happen,

improving the care and supports for moms

is the most important factor,

and I would say families overall,

but our focus on the team

is really the pregnant and postpartum moms.

So, sharing information is key to child safety

and to healthy outcomes.

We have our memorandum of understanding

that we have developed as a framework for sharing

information and coordinating services,

and we also have a Vermont law

that allows for some information

sharing as an impaneled child protection team.

We have about 11 agencies and departments

that come together, we meet monthly,

and we focus on some of the system issues and case reviews,

and we focus on what are the most important things

that we need to know,

because there are so many patients to review,

like, well who are the pregnant women

who are doing the due in next month,

who are the babies that have just been born,

and who are those that we're most concerned about.

And we start with the prenatal care,

and that care involves confirming the pregnancy,

initiating treatment, medication-assisted treatment,

and other treatment services,

intensive prenatal care for high-risk women.

There may be a residential program option

that's available in our community

where women can go when they're pregnant or with their babies.

We also look at the case management and referrals,

and as others have described in more in-depth

than we have time here,

but really taking a strengths-based focus,

a family-centered focus to address some of the barriers,

such as housing and transportation.

We've recently been able to access some private foundation

funding to provide gift cards

and bus passes

and gas station gift cards,

and so on, to support these women

in accessing the services that they need.

And then, of course, there's the postpartum

and neonatal medical follow ups

that Dr. Johnston described.

We know that we need to start prenatal care

early in pregnancy.

That is really the key element.

It's probably the single key most important element

for patient success,

making sure that pregnant women

receive pharmacological treatment,

whether that's methadone or Buprenorphine,

and that starts as early in pregnancy as possible,

engaging in substance abuse counseling,

and depending on what the level of treatment is needed,

that can vary, coming to their appointments,

and making sure that they are receiving the kinds

of supports and services that they need.

Our numbers are pretty small.

We're a small state.

But it does give you a sense of those

that we review and coordinate services for each year.

Our child protection system, our child welfare system

has taken a very innovative approach,

and that's been a key factor in our collaborative,

and they have started a practice that is pretty unique,

nationally and that is using the differential response system

to begin an assessment approximately a month

before the due date.

And that is not identifying the fetus as a child

but rather looking at the safety of the home environment

that that child will be born into,

and so allowing for a planning process,

again, as an assessment, not a child abuse investigation,

but looking at what kinds of services

and supports a family might need in order

to be able to safely care

for that infant when it's born.

Probably the key outcome there is avoiding

unnecessary placement crises at birth.

We're able to plan much more effectively,

if a child is going to need to come into custody,

to know that ahead of time.

So, what we've found through this process

is more pregnant women are in treatment

earlier with better prenatal care.

We have fewer premature births

and fewer small birth weight infants,

and we look at pregnancy as a real opportunity.

Women are often motivated to engage in treatment,

whereas they wouldn't be otherwise.

Better care for infants, supports for mom,

shorter hospital stays,

and we are really working now

to implement the plans of safe care

that were required by recent changes to federal law.

With child safety we've made,

I think, some very significant inroads,

being able to assess safety and support services,

providing support services,

initiating both of those things prior to birth.

So, we have seen a reduction in the number of emergency

custody orders at the time of birth,

and decisions being able to be made

with input from all of the project partners

has been very important.

For process outcomes, our team participants really value

the time saved,

the amount of information that can be shared

when we're all sitting in the same room

and talking with each other is incredible,

and we've all learned from each other.

Those myths and misconceptions that you heard

from Dr. Johnston are all things that many of us

came to this team with many years ago.

And we've all learned from each other,

and we are so confident that we're able to provide

the quality of services that we do

because of the understanding that we have from each other.

There's so many challenges to collaboration,

and especially challenges to serving this population.

It's very complicated lives that they have.

If somebody needs to go to an IOP,

how are they going to maintain their work or their work search

when they're in treatment for six hours a day,

or if they need to go to residential care,

how are they going to get childcare

for their other children?

So those are the kinds of issue that is continue to,

and will continue to,

be a challenge in working with this population.

But by working together, that's our best chance

for addressing the issues.

Where we're headed, and really long overdue,

is having a much stronger peer support component

to the work that we do.

Like all of us, the women that we're working with

are most likely to listen to others

who have been through the same thing,

and so we're connecting with a new program

in our recovery center.

We're also working on expanding the kinds of supports

that we can offer through addressing

the needs of these women

in having diapers

and gift cards and gas cards.

And listening to you all this afternoon gave me some ideas

about partnering better with our reach out

for TANF providers around doing this

in a more collaborative way.

So, that is really, in a quick nutshell,

what the CHARM team does,

and, again, having that framework

that the health of the baby depends on the mother's health

and the family's health.

And you can get some more information

when this is sent out from the publication in SAMHSA,

as well as some other resources listed here.

So, thank you very much.

Thank you, Doctors Johnston and Borden.

We have time for just one question,

but the rest of the questions we will share with our presenters,

and once we make the presentation available

through the Peer TA website,

we will have the responses to those questions,

so stay tuned for that posting in the next couple of weeks.

The one question for both presenters,

for all three presenters,

four, have there been any training programs,

certifications, or promising practices

that you can share with the presenters,

share with the people on the webinar,

developed for welfare or TANF or workforce development staff

in order to improve their ability

to work with opioid-involved clients?

So, have you come across any training programs

or certifications

or promising practices that TANF programs,

workforce development programs,

and staff can use to work with opioid-involved clients?

So, this is Sally Borden.

I'll jump right in.

Children and Family Futures, based in California,

is a wonderful resource, a national resource,

that provides a lot of information

about working with this population in particular,

and they also operate the National Center

on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare,

so it's not specific to TANF recipients,

but they really provide a wealth of information.

Children and Family Futures, you can Google that

and then find their website,

which can link you to a lot of trainings,

and they do provide national trainings on this topic,

as well as family treatment courts

and other related resources.

This is Justin Germain.

The one program that I'm familiar with

is the can have Life Link program in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

It's a Social Services 501(c)3

nonprofit that runs the SBERT program,

which stands for Screening Brief Intervention

and Referral to Treatment.

I know they work with a lot of other community organizations

in order to offer services that provide trauma-informed care.

While I'm familiar with any specific trauma-informed

care programs or certifications,

the concept of trauma-informed care

has started to grow in terms of social service, welfare,

and workforce providers.

That might be worth looking into it.

And we'll definitely follow up with the presenters

on those promising practices

and those different activities out there

and post them with the materials

that are going to go up with the webinar.

There's one final poll before we close out,

but while you're answer that poll,

I did want to say thank you again to our presenters,

and also to everyone who participated in today's webinar.

Once the webinar closes out,

there will be additional feedback.

We do take very seriously all the feedback

we receive from our webinar participants

because it helps inform future webinars

and other technical assistance.

So, audience poll number four, to help us plan future webinars

that address your interest and needs,

please tell us what topics

you would like to see on future webinars.

So, we'll keep collecting those ideas for future webinar

and technical assistance topics,

and, again, we will collect all the questions

that were submitted through the chat feature.

We'll submit them to the presenters,

and we'll request that once they get a chance to complete those,

we'll post them with the webinar.

So, on behalf of the Office of Family Assistance,

thank you all for logging in today, and have a good day.

For more infomation >> Opioid Use Disorder: Treatment and Barriers to Employment Among TANF Recipients - Duration: 1:30:49.

-------------------------------------------

Does Neem Treatment Work for Head Lice - Duration: 8:18.

Does neem treatment work for head lice

Head lice are parasites that live on the scalp hair and ears which feed on the blood it is one of the common problems

Faced by children a person or child can get head lice

Infestation through head to head contact sharing hair care products like combs and wearing clothing of people who have the head lice

Though head lice spread from one person to another they don't spread or carry any disease with them. They reproduce very quickly

A female louse can lay up to ten eggs per day

They hatch in five days and become mature to lay eggs in another five to seven days

It requires patience and regular inspection for completely eliminating these stubborn head lice

For example, they live up to six hours under the water and live up to 24 hours without human contact

One of the biggest problems about head lice removal is that lice have become resistant to many chemical based or over-the-counter solutions

Even chlorine present in swimming pools is not able to remove the head lice does need more neem oil work for head lice

removal neem or neem oil contains an

Insecticidal ingredient called a Satyricon which disrupts the reproduction and growth of head lice

It restrains the swallowing systems of lice which starve them to death

Lice don't like the pungent smell of neem oil which restricts its crawling into your head the healing and soothing

Properties of it will reduce the irritation attaching

Apart from dealing with head lice it helps to add shine to your hair and moisture to your scalp

How to use neem oil for head lice removal both neem leaves and neem oil can be used to treat head lice

Infestation the methods don't cause any damage to your scalp and hair

In fact, they help in strengthening the hair and prevent the hair loss

We have mentioned different remedies below try any method as per your convenience

Neem for head lice removal the below methods need fresh or dried neem leaves if you have fresh neem leaves

You can dry them and store for regular use one fresh neem leaves

Process one take a handful of neem leaves and boil them in two glasses of water

Let it boil until the liquid turns into green

Remove from the flame strain and let it cool down

After regular shampoo use this neem water to rinse your hair to three times

Repeat the process once in three days

Process to grind handful of neem leaves into a paste apply the paste on the scalp and leave it on for thirty minutes

Rinse off the water with shampoo and lukewarm water

Repeat the process two to three times a week

alternatively, you can blend boiled neem leaves to dried neem leaves blend some dried neem leaves into a

Fine powder or use store-bought neem leaves powder

Combined neem powder and enough amounts of water to make a thick paste

Apply it to the scalp and along the hair leave it on for an hour wash your hair normally with shampoo

repeat the process once in a week neem oil for head lice removal

Use only pure neem oil while trying the below methods

It provides effective results in removing the lice and restricts premature graying of the hair

One neem oil with shampoo add neem oil to your regular shampoo and mix well

Use this shampoo to rinse and wash your hair

Repeat the process two to three times a week

Alternatively, you can use a shampoo that contains neem extracts two neem oil wash and dry your hair thoroughly

Apply undiluted neem oil to the hair and along the hair let it stay for a few minutes

Now the comb along the hair to remove the head lice

Repeat the process twice in a week for extra benefits use a comb that is meant for head lice

Removal three neem oil with coconut oil the fatty content present in coconut oil

suffocates the lice the

Lubricating nature of it restricts its crawling on the scalp mix few drops of neem oil into enough of coconut oil

Massage the mixture into the scalp leave it on for at least an hour rinse off with shampoo and water

Repeat the process once in two to three days for at least one month

alternatively you can use olive instead of coconut oil for

Neem oil with tea tree oil tea tree oil contains an insecticidal property which kills and prevents head lice

Infestation it soothes the irritation caused by scratching

olive oil suffocates the head lice

Combine one part tea tree oil and four parts neem oil add two teaspoons of olive oil and mix well

Apply the solution into the scalp and along the hair leave it on for a few minutes now

Comb the hair thoroughly to remove the lice wash your hair with shampoo and water

repeat the process once in 3 days 5 neem oil with sesame oil sesame oil contains antibacterial

And natural pesticide properties which deal with the head lice

Apart from that it also helps in hair growth

Rinse your hair with dilute apple cider vinegar and let it dry completely in a bowl mix 1/8 cup neem oil

1/4 cup of sesame oil 1 TSP tea tree oil 10 drops each of lavender oil

eucalyptus oil and rosemary essential oil

Stir the ingredients well and apply it into the scalp and along the hair

Cover the hair with shower cap and let it stay overnight in the morning comb the hair thoroughly to remove the head lice

Rinse the hair normally repeat the process once in 3 days until the hair is head lice free

6 neem oil with olive oil olive oil

Suffocates head lice by depriving them of oxygen which makes it easy to remove them by combing

Combine 2 ounces of olive oil and 15 to 20 drops of neem oil

Mix well and apply it on to the scalp and along the hair leave it on for at least 12 hours

Comb through the hair to remove the head lice rinse off normally in that dry completely

repeat the process twice in a week

Seven neem oil with tea tree oil tea tree oil contains pesticide properties, which kill the head lice

Apart from that it soothes the irritated scalp and encourages hair growth this process helps to prevent the head lice

infestation combined neem oil tea tree oil and lavender oil

pour the mixture into a spray bottle

Spray the solution onto the hair repeat the application

Daily tips and precautions if you are allergic to neem then avoid using it dry the remedies

regularly to get rid of head lice completely as head lice spread from one person to another

It is better to avoid head to head contact and share personal belongings with a person who is infested with head lice

Wash the bed sheets clothes towels hats and scarves regularly if you have an infestation

Seats in airplane theater and public transport can have head lice

So cover them with your sweatshirt or jacket before you sit clean your hair accessories and combs regularly

Repeat the process regularly which ensures the newly born head lice are removed to prevent the infestation

Try to use the methods once in a while

For more infomation >> Does Neem Treatment Work for Head Lice - Duration: 8:18.

-------------------------------------------

Harry Kane's penalty box treatment by Tunisia prompted VAR crackdown by FIFA - Duration: 4:59.

 Referees committee chairman Collina, who was named FIFA's 'Best Referee of the Year' six consecutive times between 1998-2003, made the revelation when speaking about video assistant referees (VAR) in Moscow

 The Italian who many consider to be the greatest football referee of all time, was asked why Harry Kane was not given a penalty for being held during the match against Tunisia and also why Serbia's Aleksandar Mitrovic was not awarded a penalty when they played Switzerland

 Collina explained he would not comment on specific incidents, but said: "You might have appreciated there were some incidents that suddenly disappeared or started to be punished

 "It's impossible to be right from the start but because we noticed, we intervened and we fine-tuned

Things have changed during the tournament."  A stoppage-time header from Harry Kane gave England a 2-1 win over Tunisia in their opening World Cup Group G fixture

 After the game England's captain said:  "We could have had a couple of penalties, especially when you look at theirs

  "A few corners, they were trying to grab, hold and stop us running. Maybe a bit of justice to score at the back post at the end

That's football, that's the ref. "It showed good character to get on with it." Collina said he believes that VAR has been a huge success in Russia and while admitting it is "not perfect", he argued it has helped referees make the correct decision

He also revealed that as well as asking referees to be more vigilant to wrestling in the penalty box, officials have been told they can ask for more on-field reviews than had initially been advised

 "We were aware VAR could interrupt the flow of play and time could be lost, so we wanted as few interventions as possible," he said

 "But we noticed there were a few complaints - understandable complaints - about maybe doing more on-field reviews, so we thought it would be a good idea to do that so the decisions were better accepted on the field

" 48 games into the World Cup Collina said there have been 335 incidents checked, resulting in 14 on-field reviews made by referees and three reviews made by the VAR team on "factual decisions", such as off-sides

 Of these incidents, referees had correctly called 95 per cent of them without VAR

However, when using replays, this improved making the correct call to 99.3 per cent

 "We have always said VAR doesn't mean perfection - there could still be the wrong interpretation or a mistake - but I think you would agree 99

3 per cent is very close to perfection," said Collina.  Collina was cautious about whether FIFA would consider allowing the audio between the Referee and VAR to be broadcast

 "Before running you have to learn to walk. I don't know what's possible in the future but I think it's a bit early for that now," he said

 "I agree it would be interesting, though, and would perhaps make decisions better accepted by the football community

" VAR has raised concerns from some that it would cause delays to the game.  During this year's World Cup the ball has been in play for an average of nearly 57 minutes and this is up from 55 minutes during Brazil 2014

As for VAR on average a review has taken 80 seconds. Former England international Stan Collymore said VAR could make the difference to winning or losing and backed the new system

 He tweeted: "World Cup VAR decisions. 95% correct without VAR. 99.3% correct with VAR

 "Decisions checked by VAR, 335. That 4.3% difference? Could be your team winning the league or not, a trophy or not, relegated or not

 "No brainer. VAR is working."

For more infomation >> Harry Kane's penalty box treatment by Tunisia prompted VAR crackdown by FIFA - Duration: 4:59.

-------------------------------------------

Who is involved in my child's treatment on the Adolescent Unit? - Duration: 1:12.

on a 24-hour basis with the children the nurses and the mental health techs are

right there with the patient so at any point during the day your child can

reach out to a mental health tech or they can reach out to a registered nurse

so they are always with your children during the day shift they would have

access to their social worker so if they just needed to talk with somebody or

they say I had a bad phone call or I'm feeling lonely or I miss home they have

a social worker therapist that they can talk to and reach out to they will meet

with their physician during the day so that's also another point of contact for

them they also then have some of the other therapies available to them we

have an art therapist we have music therapists and there's a movement

therapists for the patients to interact with they're mostly going to be

conducting groups but if somebody didn't want to spend a little bit of one-on-one

time or if they wanted a little extra we do everything we can to accommodate that

For more infomation >> Who is involved in my child's treatment on the Adolescent Unit? - Duration: 1:12.

-------------------------------------------

Allergies Asthma helped with NAET treatments - Duration: 1:11.

Hello my name is Philip.

I came to Dr. Milne a few years ago for severe allergies.

I had heard a little bit about NATE, didn't know anything about it.

Dr. Milne was great in describing what the treatment was.

I have to admit the first treatments...

I was like...Oh no what am I doing...where have I gone to.

But after a few and I felt the difference in my body and my allergies began to subside...subside

for the first time in my life.

Because I've had allergies my whole life that's led to asthma, chronic congestion, post nasal

drip, just junk.

I was tired of it and now I'm no longer on drugs.

No longer on over-the-counter stuff.

I don't need it because Nate has made the difference, And I can't even explain that,

all I can say is NATE NATE NATE NATE NATE!

You need to do it.

Don't hesitate.

It's incredible non-invasive, actually a lot of fun.

So I would recommend it to anybody.

Do it today!

For more infomation >> Allergies Asthma helped with NAET treatments - Duration: 1:11.

-------------------------------------------

Separation Anxiety Disorder, Severe Separation Anxiety Disorder Treatment and Permanent Cure - Duration: 5:27.

Separation anxiety disorder what is separation anxiety disorder?

separation anxiety is a normal part of childhood development it commonly occurs in

babies between eight and twelve months old and usually disappears around age two

However, it can also occur in adults

Some children have symptoms of separation anxiety during their grade school and teenage years

This condition is called separation anxiety disorder or sad

Three to four percent of children have sad sad tends to indicate general mood and mental health issues

Around one-third of children with sad will be diagnosed with mental illness as an adult

Symptoms of separation anxiety disorder symptoms of sad occur when a child is separated from parents or caregivers

fear of separation can also cause anxiety

Related behaviors some of the most common behaviors include clinging to parents

extreme and severe crying

refusal to do things that require separation

physical illness such as headaches or vomiting

violent emotional temper tantrums

refusal to go to school poor school performance

failure to interact in a healthy manner with other children

refusing to sleep alone

nightmares risk factors for

Separation anxiety disorder sad is more likely to occur in children with a family history of anxiety or depression

Shy timid personalities low

socioeconomic status

overprotective parents a lack of appropriate parental interaction problems dealing with kids their own age

Sad can also occur after a stressful life events such as moving to a new home

switching schools

Divorce the death of a close family member. How is separation anxiety disorder diagnosed?

Children that experience three or more of the above symptoms may be diagnosed with sad

Your doctor may order additional tests to confirm the diagnosis your doctor might also you interact with your child

This shows whether your parenting style affects how your child deals with anxiety

How is separation anxiety disorder treated therapy and medication are used to treat sad?

Both treatment methods can help a child deal with anxiety in a positive way

therapy, the most effective therapy is cognitive behavioral therapy CBT

with CBT

Children are taught coping techniques for anxiety

Common techniques are deep breathing and relaxation

Parent-child interaction therapy is another way to treat sad

It has three main treatment phases child directed interaction CDI

Which focuses on improving the quality of the parent-child relationship?

It involves warm attention and praise these help strengthen a child's feeling of safety

bravery directed interaction BDI

Which educates parents about why their child feels anxiety your child's therapist will develop a bravery ladder

The ladder shows situations that cause anxious feelings it establishes rewards for positive reactions

Parent directed interaction PDI which teaches parents to communicate clearly with their child

This helps to manage poor behavior. The school environment is another key to successful treatment

Your child needs a safe place to go when they feel anxious

there should also be a way for your child to communicate with you if

Necessary during school's hours or other times when they're away from home

Finally your child's teacher should encourage interaction with other classmates if you have concerns about your child's classroom

Speak with the teacher principal or a guidance counselor

Medication there are no specific

medications for sad

Antidepressants are sometimes used in older children with this condition if other forms of treatment are ineffective

This is a decision that must be carefully considered by the child's parent or guardian and the doctor

Children must be monitored closely for side-effects

Effects of separation anxiety disorder on family life

Emotional and social development are both seriously affected by sad the condition can cause a child to avoid experiences

Crucial to normal development sad can also affect family life

Some of these problems may include family activities that are limited by negative behavior

Parents with little to no time for themselves or each other resulting in frustration

Siblings that become jealous of the extra attention given to the child with sad if your child has sad

Speak with your doctor about treatment options and ways you can help match its effect on family life

For more infomation >> Separation Anxiety Disorder, Severe Separation Anxiety Disorder Treatment and Permanent Cure - Duration: 5:27.

-------------------------------------------

Bear Cub Burned In 416 Fire 'Responding Very Well To Treatment' - Duration: 0:28.

For more infomation >> Bear Cub Burned In 416 Fire 'Responding Very Well To Treatment' - Duration: 0:28.

-------------------------------------------

Greiner Orthopedics Offers a Variety of Treatment and Care Options for All Ages - Duration: 0:34.

Greiner Orthopedics serves patients of all ages with bone, muscle, tendon, and joint

pain or injury and treats everything except the neck area.

Our board-certified orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Robert Greiner II, offers in-office treatments,

arthritis care, and surgical procedures, as well as non-operative treatment options.

Dr. Greiner treats bone and joint injuries, including joint replacement surgery, treatment

for sports injuries, and fracture and trauma management.

Visit our website to schedule an appointment!

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét