84 Methods to screen caregivers for previous and current substance use in the paediatric office: A scoping review

Abstract Background Paediatric healthcare providers have been shown to miss opportunities to screen caregivers for substance use. Individuals who use or have used substances face general healthcare barriers and may disengage with the system to avoid stigma or discrimination. Poorly worded or administered substance use screening practices by paediatricians could lead to retraumatization or judgment of caregivers that may affect the ability to continue providing healthcare to the child. There is limited information in the literature regarding best approaches for screening caregivers for substance use in paediatrics. Objectives The unique objective of this review was to identify current methods for, approaches to, and acceptability of caregiver substance use screening in paediatric offices. Design/Methods Searches were performed in CINAHL, PsycInfo, MEDLINE, and Social Sciences Abstracts databases with results limited from 2000 to 2023. Keywords included “perinatal”, “postnatal” “paediatric OR paediatric”, “substance use” OR “substance abuse” OR substances OR “alcohol use” OR “alcohol abuse” OR “addiction”, AND “screening”. Studies must have been conducted in Canada, the USA, Australia, or Scandinavia. Literature that was published in a language other than English, described screening caregivers for substance use using biological samples, or that focused solely on screening pregnant caregivers for substance use was excluded. Individual approaches to and provider and patient perspectives on screening were identified. Three authors completed title, abstract, and full text screening in Covidence screening software. Qualitative thematic coding identified geographical setting, the specific paediatric clinical setting, substances for which each study screened, characteristics of the participants, method of screening, and feedback related to acceptability, outcomes, or methods of screening. Results Practitioners used standardized and informal substance use screening tools. This review found that paediatric practitioners reported gaps in guidance on how best to screen caregivers for substance use and a desire for more improvement. Lack of guidance made it uncomfortable to screen caregivers. Increased comfort with screening was noted when a social needs survey was used as guidance. Caregivers were generally highly comfortable being screened for substance use and felt it was an acceptable action for paediatricians to undertake. However, the input of families in caregiver substance use screening methods was otherwise lacking. Substance use questions were often paired with questions asking caregivers to rate acceptability while other studies simply used the openness of being approached or absence of objections as acceptance of being screened. None of the studies identified in this review included the ability for families to participate more fully in screening acceptability or design. Conclusion Family engagement in research regarding the ideal acceptability and design of screening methods is lacking while paediatric healthcare providers continue to be uncomfortable screening caregivers for substance use and wish for improved methods that facilitate trust with families. Further research into the design of trauma-informed caregiver substance use screening in paediatric settings may be needed.