Peer Supportive Housing for Consumers of Housing First Who Experience Ongoing Housing Instability

YaminStephanie,; AubryTim,; VolkJennifer,; JettéJonathan,; Bourque, Jimmy; CrouseSusan,

doi:10.7870/cjcmh-2014-034

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stable housing and service programs created a sense of safety, security and stability for individuals with lived experience of homelessness, who often faced hardships in securing safe places for personal belongings and activities [26,56,63,67,68,72,73,76,79,85], “where you don’t have to watch your back all the time” [75]. Women, in particular, found that women-specific programs created safe spaces to engage with one another in an environment free from violence and trauma.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[57] However, male youth had more difficulty trusting providers and accessing services than other groups. [26,57,58,61,64,68,72,79–82,84–86]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[67,72] These individuals also found that the peer support in youth- and women-specific programs was especially beneficial to the development of relationships and in enhancing one’s commitment to seek treatment and participate in programs. [26,54,56,64,67,69,73,84,87]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[17] As an example, many existing effective interventions have the potential to help the homeless and vulnerably housed forge routes out of homelessness. [17,26–28] However, the acceptability of these interventions is necessary for effectiveness, without this participants may fail to adhere to recommendations or benefit from improved outcomes. [29]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Common trust and personal safety issues: A systematic review on the acceptability of health and social interventions for persons with lived experience of homelessness

Magwood¹,

Leki²,

Kpadé³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPersons experiencing homelessness and vulnerable housing or those with lived experience of homelessness have worse health outcomes than individuals who are stably housed. Structural violence can dramatically affect their acceptance of interventions. We carried out a systematic review to understand the factors that influence the acceptability of social and health interventions among persons with lived experience of homelessness.MethodsWe searched through eight bibliographic databases and selected grey literature sources for articles that were published between 1994 and 2019. We selected primary studies that reported on the experiences of homeless populations interacting with practitioners and service providers working in permanent supportive housing, case management, interventions for substance use, income assistance, and women- and youth-specific interventions. Each study was independently assessed for its methodological quality. We used a framework analysis to identify key findings and used the GRADE-CERQual approach to assess confidence in the key findings.FindingsOur search identified 11,017 citations of which 35 primary studies met our inclusion criteria. Our synthesis highlighted that individuals were marginalized, dehumanized and excluded by their lived homelessness experience. As a result, trust and personal safety were highly valued within human interactions. Lived experience of homelessness influenced attitudes toward health and social service professionals and sometimes led to reluctance to accept interventions. Physical and structural violence intersected with low self-esteem, depression and homeless-related stigma. Positive self-identity facilitated links to long-term and integrated services, peer support, and patient-centred engagement.ConclusionsIndividuals with lived experience of homelessness face considerable marginalization, dehumanization and structural violence. Practitioners and social service providers should consider anti-oppressive approaches and provide, refer to, or advocate for health and structural interventions using the principles of trauma-informed care. Accepting and respecting others as they are, without judgment, may help practitioners navigate barriers to inclusiveness, equitability, and effectiveness for primary care that targets this marginalized population.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[57] However, male youth had more difficulty trusting providers and accessing services than other groups. [26,57,58,61,64,68,72,79–82,84–86]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Common trust and personal safety issues: A systematic review on the acceptability of health and social interventions for persons with lived experience of homelessness

Magwood¹,

Leki²,

Kpadé³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The latter findings highlight the complexity of social networks among people who use substances in PSH, as both potential sources of important support and risk [ 76 , 77 ]. Greater integration of harm reduction services and peer support, as well as more landlord collaboration and education, may be beneficial for reducing preventing eviction risks and substance use-related harms, including overdose, in PSH [ 78 – 80 ]. Beyond substance use, studies in this review mostly produced non-significant results on the associations between high-risk behaviours and challenges, and exits from PSH.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing high-risk behaviours and challenges to prevent housing loss in permanent supportive housing: a rapid review

Kerman,

Kidd,

Mutschler

et al. 2023

Harm Reduct J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Permanent supportive housing is an effective intervention for stably housing most people experiencing homelessness and mental illness who have complex support needs. However, high-risk behaviours and challenges are prevalent among this population and have the potential to seriously harm health and threaten housing tenures. Yet, the research on the relationship between high-risk issues and housing stability in permanent supportive housing has not been previously synthesized. This rapid review aimed to identify the housing-related outcomes of high-risk behaviours and challenges in permanent supportive housing settings, as well as the approaches used by agencies and residents to address them. A range of high-risk behaviours and challenges were examined, including risks to self (overdose, suicide/suicide attempts, non-suicidal self-injury, falls/fall-related injuries), and risks to multiple parties and/or building (fire-setting/arson, hoarding, apartment takeovers, physical/sexual violence, property damage, drug selling, sex trafficking). The search strategy included four components to identify relevant academic and grey literature: (1) searches of MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, and CINAHL Plus; (2) hand searches of three journals with aims specific to housing and homelessness; (3) website browsing/searching of seven homelessness, supportive housing, and mental health agencies and networks; and (4) Advanced Google searches. A total of 32 articles were eligible and included in the review. Six studies examined the impacts of high-risk behaviours and challenges on housing tenancies, with overdose being identified as a notable cause of death. Twenty-six studies examined approaches and barriers to managing high-risk behaviours and challenges in PSH programs. These were categorized into eight types of approaches: (1) clinical, (2) relational/educational, (3) surveillant, (4) restrictive, (5) strategic, (6) design-based, (7) legal, and (8) self-defence. Consistent across all approaches was a lack of rigorous examination of their effectiveness. Further, some approaches that are legal, restrictive, surveillant, or strategic in nature may be used to promote safety, but may conflict with other program objectives, including housing stability, or resident empowerment and choice. Research priorities were identified to address the key evidence gaps and move toward best practices for preventing and managing high-risk behaviours and challenges in permanent supportive housing.

show abstract

A comprehensive review of prioritised interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with lived experience of homelessness

Moledina

Magwood

Agbata

et al. 2021

Campbell Systematic Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Homelessness has emerged as a public health priority, with growing numbers of vulnerable populations despite advances in social welfare. In February 2020, the United Nations passed a historic resolution, identifying the need to adopt social-protection systems and ensure access to safe and affordable housing for all.The establishment of housing stability is a critical outcome that intersects with other social inequities. Prior research has shown that in comparison to the general population, people experiencing homelessness have higher rates of infectious diseases, chronic illnesses, and mental-health disorders, along with disproportionately poorer outcomes. Hence, there is an urgent need to identify effective interventions to improve the lives of people living with homelessness.Objectives: The objective of this systematic review is to identify, appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence on the benefits and cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve the health and social outcomes of people experiencing homelessness.Search Methods: In consultation with an information scientist, we searched nine bibliographic databases, including Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL, from database inception to February 10, 2020 using keywords and MeSH terms. We conducted a focused grey literature search and consulted experts for additional studies.Selection Criteria: Teams of two reviewers independently screened studies against our inclusion criteria. We included randomised control trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies conducted among populations experiencing homelessness in high-income countries. Eligible interventions included permanent supportive housing (PSH), income assistance, standard case management (SCM), peer support, mental health interventions such as assertive community treatment (ACT), intensive case management (ICM), critical time intervention (CTI) and injectable antipsychotics, and substance-use interventions, including supervised consumption facilities (SCFs), managed alcohol programmes and opioid

show abstract

Peer Supportive Housing for Consumers of Housing First Who Experience Ongoing Housing Instability

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

Common trust and personal safety issues: A systematic review on the acceptability of health and social interventions for persons with lived experience of homelessness

Common trust and personal safety issues: A systematic review on the acceptability of health and social interventions for persons with lived experience of homelessness

Managing high-risk behaviours and challenges to prevent housing loss in permanent supportive housing: a rapid review

A comprehensive review of prioritised interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with lived experience of homelessness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About