IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0358880.html

Implementation of the Trigger Checklist and assertive outreach to reduce drug-related harm in the Emergency Department: A realist evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Michelle Beattie
  • Lesley Campbell
  • Bev Fraser
  • Anna Terje

Abstract

Background: Drug-related harm is a major global public health concern, with opioids implicated in over 70% of drug-related deaths. Scotland reports the highest drug-related mortality rate in Europe, with remote and rural communities facing additional barriers to accessing harm reduction and treatment services. Assertive outreach is increasingly recognised as a key strategy to engage individuals at risk who are disconnected from traditional services. This study evaluates the use of a Trigger Checklist to identify and outreach individuals within 48 hours of referral in a rural Emergency Department (ED). Methods: A realist evaluation explored how and why the Trigger Checklist works within the complexity of an ED setting. Guided by Pawson and Tilley’s framework, the evaluation followed three stages: theory gleaning, refining, and consolidation. Initial programme theories were developed using literature and advisory group input, then refined through 13 realist interviews with ED clinicians and outreach workers (OW). Data were analysed using Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configurations and linked to middle-range theories. Results: Three programme theories emerged: (1) Confident decision-making, where certainty, conversational aids, ethical reasoning, and outreach worker prompts influenced checklist use; (2) Trusting relationships, shaped by OWs’ approachability, situational awareness, and mutual respect; and (3) Perceived value, driven by altruism, narrative feedback, and perceived reductions in ED visits. Relational coordination theory explained how shared goals, knowledge, and respect – reinforced by timely, accurate communication – enabled coordinated action. OW presence and recovery discussions were critical to foster confident and appropriate referrals among ED clinicians. Conclusions: The Trigger Checklist can support timely outreach potentially reducing drug-related harm in rural ED settings, but its success depends on relational dynamics, perceived value, and organisational integration. To avoid checklist fatigue or tokenistic use, it should be embedded with the support of OWs who foster trust. These relationships will enhance use of the checklist as a meaningful intervention within complex care systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Michelle Beattie & Lesley Campbell & Bev Fraser & Anna Terje, 2026. "Implementation of the Trigger Checklist and assertive outreach to reduce drug-related harm in the Emergency Department: A realist evaluation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(10), pages 1-14, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0358880
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0358880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358880
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358880&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0358880?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0358880. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.