Developing and implementing a Drug reduce University Diploma for health practitioners in Uruguay: challenges and future directions

In Uruguay, there is a shortage of trained professionals in drug prevention, intervention, and resolution of drug-related issues, particularly among health personnel in domains such as rehabilitation, prevention, schools, communities, and incarceration. These professionals often lack specific training and rely solely on job experience. Recognizing this gap, there is a pressing need to establish university programs that offer foundational understanding, essential skills, and practical abilities.

To address this need, we developed a diploma at the Catholic University of Uruguay, aligned with the country's needs, informed by evidence-based programs, academic curricula, and learning outcomes. We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of local training requirements and existing approaches to treatment, prevention, and education. This process involved outlining a vision, defining target participants, identifying their profiles and needs, and creating an assessment plan for learning outcomes.

Guided by the International Consortium of Universities for Drug Demand Reduction (ICUDDR), we engaged with local rehabilitation centers, drug policy experts, the National Center for Adolescent Forensic Rehabilitation, the National Drug Board, the Colombo Plan group for South Latin America, and CICAD-OEA for Latin America and the Caribbean.

The curriculum consists of eight modules, which covers basic concepts, pharmacology, legal frameworks, public policies, global contexts, neuropsychology, comorbidity, family dynamics, adolescent drug use, prevention, and treatment perspectives. It incorporates diverse evidence-based approaches, addressing issues such as stigma, ethics, and the needs of vulnerable populations. Some modules integrate content from UTP modules of the Colombo Plan that students are required to take.

To assess the program's transfer and applicability, we used the model  ITTEM framework (Nielsen & Shepard, 2022) for evaluation of mental health training programs which includes: pre-training examination of motivational variables and work context, evaluation of student engagement, post-training assessment of academic satisfaction and self-efficacy, and follow-up exploration of students' experiences applying knowledge through focus groups.