Digitalisering av offentlig sektor i Norge har vært på dagordenen i en årrekke. Norge anses som et foregangsland når det gjelder digitalisering, og norske borgere er ofte først ute med å ta i bruk ny teknologi (Hansen, Lundberg & Syltevik, 2018). Til tross for dette har svært få statlig initierte digitale løsninger blitt innført i barnevernet, sett i forhold til andre sammenlignbare offentlige sektorer som NAV (Breit, 2019). Samtidig endres forventningene fra både tjenestemottakere og profesjonelle innenfor sosialt arbeid i takt med samfunnsendringen med økt bruk av digitale medier (López Peláez, Pérez García & Aguilar-Tablada Massó, 2018). Få studier er gjort der implikasjoner ved bruk av sosiale og digitale medier har vært undersøkt generelt (Lindgren, Madsen, Hofmann & Melin, 2019), og innen barnevern spesielt (Breyette & Hill, 2015). Det finnes også lite forskning som tematiserer hvordan teknologi, sosiale medier og digitale medier påvirker selve profesjonsutøvelsen (Björktomta & Hansen, 2021; Buffat, 2015; Sage, Wells, Sage & Devlin, 2017). I vår artikkel spør vi oss hva som skjer med den profesjonelle praksisen når digitale og sosiale medier inngår i barnevernets arbeidspraksis. Studien som artikkelen baserer seg på, er del av en større studie om digitalisering i barnevernet. Sosiale medier er digitale sosiale nettverk tilrettelagt for å skape og dele innhold, slik som Facebook, Instagram og Snapchat, mens digitale medier i vår studie viser til bruk av digitale kommunikasjonsverktøy som e-post og SMS (Rasmussen, Liestøl & Hannemyr, 2015). I denne artikkelen er det et poeng å skille mellom digitale og sosiale medier, da de har ulike formål og brukes med ulik hensikt.

Care transitions between specialist and primary healthcare services for people with concurrent substance abuse and mental health problems are characterised by vulnerability and arbitrariness. By studying factors that influence integration in a Norwegian context, this study aims to investigate, from a municipal perspective, why care transitions are still tricky after the introduction of the key Coordination Reform. This study has an explorative approach based on interviews with managers and front-line professionals in primary care. We applied the conceptual framework of functional and normative integration of the Rainbow Model. The municipal actors emphasise that integration is hampered by limited cooperation with general practitioners in referrals to hospital, challenges of communication and loss of meeting points. They experienced close cooperation with sociomedical polyclinics for substance abuse, while challenges in cooperation with district psychiatric centres indicated an interdependence of functional and normative integration. Questioning hospital discharge of patients to primary care was a recurring theme for the municipal actors. Thus, the governing framework of the Coordination Reform has coexisted with fragmentation in organisational structures and divided professional cultures. The coexistence of the new and the old regimes seems to hamper functional and normative integration in care transitions.

SAMMENDRAG Som ledd i arbeidet med å redusere sykefravaeret gjennomførte NAV-Østfold i 2016/17 et prosjekt med det de kalte «virksomhetsbaserte team» i fem bykommuner i Østfold. Det innebar at man foretok to sentrale organisatoriske grep. Det ene var at sykefravaersoppfølgingen ble organisert ut fra virksomhet-ikke etter fødselsdato som ellers. I tillegg organiserte man

Aims: Research has identified the use of anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS) as a gap between treatment needs and available facilities for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment in Norway. State policy emphasizes the need for measures to ensure coordinated treatment services. This study aims to explore whether clinical pathways of mental health and substance abuse and team-based organisation function as intended in the treatment of patients with AAS use. Design: A qualitative research design was used. Individual semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with eight professionals who we assumed had experience with this patient group. The participants were asked about the clarification process regarding assessment and treatment for AAS and internal and external cooperation. Everyday work, roles and task distribution, structure and routines, and knowledge of AAS were topics that were addressed. We analysed by interpreting the data considering relevant theoretical perspectives of organisational- and sociology of profession perspective. Results: We found that it was arbitrary whether AAS use was discovered, which may indicate a lack of attention to this form of abuse. Organisation in teams seems to as an adequate horizontal coordination mechanism within SUD treatment. However, the teams lacked both knowledge of AAS as well medical expertise, which may lead to a lack of a treatment programme that is in line with the patient's needs. Conclusion: There still seems to be a need for increased awareness of AAS among the professionals and organisations involved. Team-based organisation within SUD seemed to function well, however loss of coordination between SUD and local services may indicate that the clinical pathway for mental health and substance abuse do not function as intended.