Qualitative study highlights challenges and benefits of remote working for alcohol support workers, suggesting a hybrid delivery model.
Background: Drug and alcohol support workers play a vital role in addressing the growing burden of substance-related harm and mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic led to an abrupt and significant shift towards home working for many in this workforce. This study explores these workers’ home working experiences, addressing a research gap and providing valuable insights for staff, organisations delivering public health services, and service users. Design and methods: This qualitative study explores home working experiences of 30 drug and alcohol support workers in northern England during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data collection included innovative digital methods: (1) digital timelines ( n = 16); (2) in-depth interviews ( n = 17); (3) five focus groups ( n = 12). Timeline text was treated as qualitative text data. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Data were subject to Framework Analysis. Results: Seven themes were identified: (1) Difficulty balancing and separating work and home life; (2) Importance of setup, infrastructure and conducive work environment; (3) The move to remote/home working – a process; (4) Convenience and efficiency benefits; (5) Loss of the social – reductions in social connectedness and feelings of isolation; (6) The importance of the ‘office’ for connection, communication, socialising, and information sharing; (7) Managing remotely – the development and implementation of strategies and ways of coping. Conclusions: While home working offers some benefits for substance use support workers, providers, and service users, it also introduces significant challenges. Understanding these is critical for service optimisation. A hybrid (in-person/remote) delivery model, combining home and co-located, office-based working may be optimal.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lloyd et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: