Sexual minority (lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer and other non-heterosexual) people experience significant disparities in addiction problems compared with heterosexual people.

We aimed to answer the question, what are the barriers and facilitators to accessing drug/alcohol addiction treatment services for sexual minority adults?’.

A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Sociological Abstracts for any English-language primary research article (qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods) relevant to the study aims, from inception up to 18 April 2025. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT-2018). Barriers and facilitators were categorised into ‘service-related’ and ‘patient-related’ dimensions of accessibility, and synthesised narratively.

We screened 3282 abstracts, with full-text review of 238 articles; 62 studies met the inclusion criteria. Common service-related barriers included explicit harassment, discrimination, violence or abuse toward sexual minority people in services and lack of expertise or ‘culturally competent’ provision for their specific addiction problems. Facilitators included affirming, non-judgemental staff attitudes and sexual minority-specific treatment or outreach services. Patient-related barriers included ambivalence around drug/alcohol use and a fear of stigma (e.g. around sexualised drug use). Facilitators included signposting to services via community networks or peer advocates, and allowing patients to set their own treatment goals.

Although barriers and facilitators vary across global contexts and time periods, both qualitative and quantitative research highlighted similar key issues. Implementing practical changes to address these may improve sexual minority people’s access to addiction services, reducing the burden of addiction-related health inequity for this community.

People with opioid use disorder (OUD) have substantially higher standardised mortality rates compared with the general population. However, lack of individualised prognostic information presents challenges in personalisation of addiction treatment delivery.

To develop and validate the first prognostic models to estimate 6-month all-cause and drug-related mortality risk for people diagnosed with OUD using indicators recorded at baseline assessment in addiction services in England.

Thirteen candidate prognostic variables, including sociodemographic, injecting status and health and mental health factors, were identified from nationally linked addiction treatment, hospital admission and death records from 1 April 2013 to 1 April 2022. Multivariable Cox regression models were developed with a fractional polynomial approach for continuous variables, and missing data were addressed using multiple imputation by chained equations. Validation was undertaken using bootstrapping methods. Discrimination was assessed using Harrel’s C and D statistics alongside examination of observed-to-predicted event rates and calibration curve slopes.

Data were available for 236 064 people with OUD, with 2427 deaths due to any cause, including 1289 due to drug-related causes. Both final models demonstrated good optimism-adjusted discrimination and calibration, with all-cause and drug-related models, respectively, demonstrating Harrell’s C statistics of 0.73 (95% CI 0.71–0.75) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.72–0.76), D-statistics of 1.01 (95% CI 0.95–1.08) and 1.07 (95% CI 0.98–1.16) and calibration slopes of 1.01 (95% CI 0.95–1.08) and 1.01 (95% CI 0.94–1.10).

We developed and internally validated Roberts’ OUD mortality risk, with the first models to accurately quantify individualised absolute 6-month mortality risks in people with OUD presenting to addiction services. Independent validation is warranted to ensure these models have the optimal utility to assist wider future policy, commissioning and clinical decision-making.

The UK and USA currently report their highest number of drug-related deaths since records began, with higher rates among individuals experiencing homelessness.

Given that overdose prevention in homeless populations may require unique strategies, we evaluated whether substances implicated in death differed between (a) housed decedents and those experiencing homelessness and (b) between US and UK homeless populations.

We conducted an internationally comparative retrospective cohort study utilising multilevel multinomial regression modelling of coronial/medical examiner-verified drug-related deaths from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2021. UK data were available for England, Wales and Northern Ireland; US data were collated from eight county jurisdictions. Data were available on decedent age, sex, ethnicity, housing status and substances implicated in death.

Homeless individuals accounted for 16.3% of US decedents versus 3.4% in the UK. Opioids were implicated in 66.3 and 50.4% of all studied drug-related deaths in the UK and the USA respectively. UK homeless decedents had a significantly increased risk of having only opioids implicated in death compared with only non-opioids implicated (relative risk ratio RRR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.76–1.98, P < 0.001); conversely, US homeless decedents had a significantly decreased risk (RRR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.29–0.48, P < 0.001). Methamphetamine was implicated in two-thirds (66.7%) of deaths among US homeless decedents compared with 0.4% in the UK.

Both the rate and type of drug-related deaths differ significantly between homeless and housed populations in the UK and USA. The two countries also differ in drugs implicated in death. Targeted programmes for country-specific implicated drug profiles appear warranted.

Clinical substance misuse presentations are commonly managed by Psychiatry Core Trainees (CTs) out of hours. However, specialist teaching is not included in the Maudsley Training Program (MTP) induction. We aimed to investigate whether this was of clinical concern and, if so identify interventions to address it.

The association of substance misuse disorder and mental illness is widely recognised. The Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2014 reported that half of people dependent on drugs other than cannabis were receiving mental health treatment. Substance use substantially impacts clinical risk; 57% of patient suicides in 2017 had a history of substance misuse. It also effects emergency psychiatric services: 55-80% of patients detained under S136 are intoxicated. Therefore, it is imperative for patient safety that CTs can assess and manage these patients appropriately.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists recognises the need for specialist substance misuse knowledge and skills, and lists this as a key ‘Intended Learning Outcome’ for CTs. Unfortunately, the availability of specialist drug and alcohol service placements for CTs has significantly declined. Only one placement is available per MTP rotation. Teaching is therefore relied upon to gain these competencies.

Using a cross-sectional survey we explored CTs confidence in recognising and managing substance misuse presentations, knowledge of where to seek guidance and asked for teaching suggestions. We surveyed two CT1 cohorts in 2017 and 2019.

Fifty-one CTs took the survey. Of these 92% did not feel prepared to manage acute substance intoxication or withdrawal and 96% would like relevant teaching at the start of CT1. Furthermore, 67% did not know where they could seek guidance.

CTs felt confident at recognising and managing alcohol related presentations. However, they were less confident in recognising opioid withdrawal, how to safely prescribe opioid substitution therapy (OST), and the usual doses of OST (65%, 94%, 94% rated ‘neither confident nor not confident’ or below, respectively). CTs were not confident at recognising GBL and cannabinoid withdrawal, principles of harm minimisation, assessing readiness to change, delivering Brief Interventions and teaching patients to use Naloxone.

The results were exceptionally similar between cohorts, demonstrating reliability of our findings and that CTs lack of substance misuse knowledge is a significant clinical concern.

To address this deficit of knowledge, we are writing an introductory lecture with supporting guidance in the induction pack, developing an online video resource, and moving key substance misuse lectures to earlier in the MTP taught programme.

Since 2012 England has seen year-on-year reductions in people accessing specialist community alcohol treatment, and year-on-year increases in alcohol-related hospital admissions.

We examined perceived barriers to accessing specialist treatment, and perceived reasons behind hospital admission increases.

We conducted focus groups (n = 4) with service users and semi-structured interviews (n = 16) with service providers and service commissioners at four specialist community alcohol services in England, which experience either high or low rates of alcohol dependence prevalence and treatment access. Themes and subthemes were generated deductively drawing upon Rhodes’ risk environment thesis. Data were organised using the framework approach.

Data reveal a treatment sector profoundly affected at all levels by changes implemented in the Health and Social Care Act (HSCA) 2012. Substantial barriers to access exist, even in services with high access rates. Concerns regarding funding cuts and recommissioning processes are at the forefront of providers’ and commissioners’ minds. The lack of cohesion between community and hospital alcohol services, where hospital services exist, has potentially created an environment enabling the reduced numbers of people accessing specialist treatment.

Our study reveals a treatment sector struggling with a multitude of problems; these pervade despite enaction of the HSCA, and are present at the national, service provider and individual service level. Although we acknowledge the problems are varied and multifaceted, their existence is echoed by the united voices of service users, service providers and service commissioners.