Skip to main content

Table 1 Overview of all strategies

From: Good practice in reaching and treating refugees in addiction care in Germany – a Delphi study

 

Strategy

Second round ratings

M

Third round ratings

Number of Experts with 4 or 5 Rating

Category

M

SD

Min

Max

Consensus

Mdn

SD

Min

Max

Consensus

Good Practice Strategies

1. Opening all existing addiction services to refugees

4.5

0.9

3

5

Yes

4.6

5

1

3

5

Yes

17

Care system

4. Overcoming municipally-based support structures

4.2

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.4

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

19

6. Ensuring consistency of addiction support services

4.9

0.5

3

5

Yes

4.9

5

0

3

5

Yes

20

9. nationwide equal opportunities for refugees with regard to entitlement of benefits and right of use

4.7

0.6

3

5

Yes

4.8

4.5

0

4

5

Yes

21

Framework conditions

10. Reduction of structural factors that facilitate or maintain addiction

4.7

0.6

3

5

Yes

4.8

4.5

0

4

5

Yes

21

11. Addressing people in their mother tongue as a gesture of welcome

4.2

0.8

3

5

Yes

4.3

5

1

3

5

Yes

18

Multilingualism

12 Nationwide implementation of language mediation in addiction support facilities

4.5

0.7

3

5

Yes

4.6

4.5

1

4

5

Yes

21

13. Ensuring funding of language mediators

4.6

0.6

3

5

Yes

4.6

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

14 Fast and low-threshold availability of language mediators

4.5

0.8

3

5

Yes

4.7

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

15. Professionalism of the language mediators employed

4.6

0.6

3

5

Yes

4.6

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

16 Supervision for language mediators

4.3

0.7

3

5

Yes

4.4

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

17 Multilingualism of documents of the facility process

4.2

0.8

3

5

Yes

4.4

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

19

18. Provision of centrally designed, multilingual information on substances, substance use and addiction

4.3

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.3

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

18

Information and Education

19. Passing on (bundled or centrally designed) multilingual information on addiction-related care services and framework conditions

4.3

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.4

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

19

20. Outreach information work in the living environment of refugees.

4.4

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.5

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

19

21. Raising awareness of addiction issues among those involved in refugee assistance

4.6

0.7

3

5

Yes

4.6

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

Access

22. Use of key persons as door openers

4.3

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.4

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

20

24. Qualification of and work with “bridge builders

4.1

0.8

3

5

Yes

4.3

4

1

3

5

Yes

19

25. Ensuring low-threshold access to addiction support services

4.6

0.7

2

5

Yes

4.6

5

1

2

5

Yes

20

Service-Level

26. Emphasis on discretion and anonymity

4.7

0.6

3

5

Yes

4.7

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

27. Ensuring participation and active involvement of people affected by addiction in the process of developing services and materials

4.2

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.3

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

19

28. Participation of refugees in self-help activities

4.3

0.9

3

5

Yes

4.5

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

29. Early intervention for substance use among refugees

4.3

1

2

5

Yes

4.4

4

1

2

5

Yes

17

31. Outreach counseling in the immediate surroundings of refugees

4.3

0.8

2

5

Yes

4.4

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

20

32. Outreach work in places where drugs are consumed

4.3

1

2

5

Yes

4.5

5

1

3

5

Yes

19

33. Outreach work to build up relationships

4.4

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.6

5

1

3

5

Yes

19

34. Regularity and durability in the relational work with refugees

4.3

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.4

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

19

35. Accompanying clients

4.3

0.7

3

5

Yes

4.3

5

1

3

5

Yes

19

36. Trainings for addiction support professionals that addresses the living situation of refugees

4.6

0.6

3

5

Yes

4.7

4.5

0

4

5

Yes

21

Employe-Level

38 Promoting diversity in teams

4.5

0.8

3

5

Yes

4.6

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

39. Understanding and acceptance of substance use as a coping strategy

4.6

0.7

3

5

Yes

4.7

5

0

4

5

Yes

21

Employe-Attitudes

40 Adopting an appreciative, living environment-oriented attitude

4.6

0.7

3

5

Yes

4.7

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

41 Cross- and transcultural competences in attitude and reflection

4.5

0.8

2

5

Yes

4.6

4.5

1

3

5

yes

20

42. Adopting a gender-sensitive attitude

4.2

1.1

1

5

No

4.3

4.5

1

1

5

No

18

43 Coping mechanisms and setting boundaries as a competence of professionals

4.1

0.9

3

5

Yes

4.2

4.5

1

0

5

Yes

17

44. Networking of all stakeholders involved in the care of drug users

4.5

0.6

3

5

Yes

4.5

5

1

3

5

Yes

20

Networking

45. Multidisciplinary networking beyond addiction support services

4.3

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.3

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

18

47. Considering networking financially and conceptually

4.1

0.9

2

5

Yes

4.2

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

18

48. Establishment of in-depth inter-institutional cooperation

4.1

0.7

3

5

Yes

4.3

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

20

Strategies not considered good practice

2. Creation of specific services for refugees

4.2

1

2

5

No

4.3

5

1

3

5

Yes

16

Strategies without consensus

3. Establishment of services for individual subgroups of refugees

3.9

0.9

2

5

Yes

4

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

15

5.Enabling flexible project development and implementation

4

1.1

1

5

No

4.1

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

15

7. Management of requirements planning by policy-makers (federal government, state governments and municipalities)

3.4

1

2

5

Yes

3.6

4.5

1

2

5

Yes

10

8. Integration of science and practice

3.8

1

1

5

No

3.7

4

1

1

5

Yes

13

23. Working with relatives

4

0.9

2

5

Yes

4

4

1

2

5

Yes

15

30. Creating and maintaining a welcoming environment across all services

3.7

1.2

1

5

No

3.5

4.5

1

1

5

No

12

37. Cultural sensitivity of professionals [1]

3.8

1.3

1

5

No

3.7

4

1

1

5

No

13

46. Networking with civil society stakeholders

4

0.8

3

5

Yes

4

4.5

1

3

5

Yes

14

  1. [1] Cultural sensitivity as it is used here does refer to a static understanding of culture. It draws back to the need of knowledge about norms, values and attitudes of specific cultures while dismissing heterogeneity and transitions within and between cultures and individuals [46]