View in EDS

'There’s a lot of people who love them, so why call ‘em junkies?': clinician and patient perspectives about words used to describe people who use drugs

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: 'There’s a lot of people who love them, so why call ‘em junkies?': clinician and patient perspectives about words used to describe people who use drugs
Authors: Gayathri Sundaram, Taisuke Sato, Brindet Socrates, Alysse Wurcel
Source: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, Vol 20, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2025)
Publisher Information: BMC, 2025.
Publication Year: 2025
Collection: LCC:Medicine (General)
LCC:Social pathology. Social and public welfare. Criminology
Subject Terms: PWUD, Stigma, Person-first language, Qualitative research, Medicine (General), R5-920, Social pathology. Social and public welfare. Criminology, HV1-9960
Description: Abstract Background There is increasing attention in clinician care to the importance of using person-first language. Clinicians’ words can reinforce clinicians’ pre-existing stigmas and biases. People who use drugs (PWUD) continue to face stigma from clinicians. Person-first language is a way to reduce stigma and perpetuation of bias. Methods Through specific structured in-person interviews, we examined the usage of stigmatizing language in the care of PWUD by surveying key clinicians– such as physicians, nurses, and social workers—and patients who self-identified as PWUD at Tufts Medical Center (Boston, MA) between July 2022-September 2022. Interview guides were created using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0 as a framework. We evaluated perceptions of person-first language and barriers to using person-first language amongst participants. Interviews were coded with Dedoose Software and inductive thematic analysis (ITA) methods were used until all themes were captured; CFIR 2.0 determinants used during interview guide creation were used as preliminary themes and modified as needed. Results We interviewed thirty-four people, including eleven PWUD at time of interview. Most clinicians agreed that language is important and matters when talking to patients and during documentation. Almost all patients agreed that language was important to them and impacted their relationship with their provider. However, there were responders that felt that person-first language was unnecessary, ineffective, and overly verbose in the medical setting. Major barriers to using person-first language were unawareness, lack of formal training, and perceived generational differences in appropriate language. Conclusion Addressing language usage is a critical opportunity to promote inclusion and reduce bias amongst PWUD. As medical charts become increasingly accessible by patients, the use of language by the clinician becomes increasingly important. To create and maintain equitable systems of care, it is important to meet clinicians where they are at and to work with them to address these issues. This can include targeted educational sessions and resources informing clinicians on preferred language use and curriculum for providers-in-training.
Document Type: article
File Description: electronic resource
Language: English
ISSN: 1940-0640
Relation: https://doaj.org/toc/1940-0640
DOI: 10.1186/s13722-025-00591-w
Access URL: https://doaj.org/article/31ad3d05911f48b8a9c545a2d7851f5b
Accession Number: edsdoj.31ad3d05911f48b8a9c545a2d7851f5b
Database: Directory of Open Access Journals
Description
Abstract:Abstract Background There is increasing attention in clinician care to the importance of using person-first language. Clinicians’ words can reinforce clinicians’ pre-existing stigmas and biases. People who use drugs (PWUD) continue to face stigma from clinicians. Person-first language is a way to reduce stigma and perpetuation of bias. Methods Through specific structured in-person interviews, we examined the usage of stigmatizing language in the care of PWUD by surveying key clinicians– such as physicians, nurses, and social workers—and patients who self-identified as PWUD at Tufts Medical Center (Boston, MA) between July 2022-September 2022. Interview guides were created using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0 as a framework. We evaluated perceptions of person-first language and barriers to using person-first language amongst participants. Interviews were coded with Dedoose Software and inductive thematic analysis (ITA) methods were used until all themes were captured; CFIR 2.0 determinants used during interview guide creation were used as preliminary themes and modified as needed. Results We interviewed thirty-four people, including eleven PWUD at time of interview. Most clinicians agreed that language is important and matters when talking to patients and during documentation. Almost all patients agreed that language was important to them and impacted their relationship with their provider. However, there were responders that felt that person-first language was unnecessary, ineffective, and overly verbose in the medical setting. Major barriers to using person-first language were unawareness, lack of formal training, and perceived generational differences in appropriate language. Conclusion Addressing language usage is a critical opportunity to promote inclusion and reduce bias amongst PWUD. As medical charts become increasingly accessible by patients, the use of language by the clinician becomes increasingly important. To create and maintain equitable systems of care, it is important to meet clinicians where they are at and to work with them to address these issues. This can include targeted educational sessions and resources informing clinicians on preferred language use and curriculum for providers-in-training.
ISSN:19400640
DOI:10.1186/s13722-025-00591-w