Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25534151›Full record

Trial reportJournal of substance abuse treatment2015

Lessons learned for follow-up phone booster counseling calls with substance abusing emergency department patients.

Dennis M Donovan, Mary A Hatch-Maillette, Melissa M Phares, Ernest McGarry, K Michelle Peavy, Julie Taborsky

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of substance abuse treatment, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Dennis M DonovanAlcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA; Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. Electronic address: ddonovan@u.washington.edu.
Mary A Hatch-MailletteAlcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA; Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
Melissa M PharesAlcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA.
Ernest McGarryAlcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA.
K Michelle PeavyAlcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA.
Julie TaborskyAlcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA.

Funding

CLINICAL TRIALS NETWORK: PACIFIC NORTHWEST NODEU10DA013714 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DONOVAN, DENNIS MICHAEL, ROLL, JOHN M. · 2001 to 2015
$25.5M
Clinical Trials Network: Pacific Northwest Node (CTN-0082, -0131, -0139 and dissemination library)UG1DA013714 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Mary Akiko Hatch, John M. Roll · 2015 to 2026
$19.8M
The Healing of the CanoeR24MD001764 · NIMHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DONOVAN, DENNIS MICHAEL · 2005 to 2015
$5.4M
NIDA NIH HHS 5U10DA013714NIDA NIH HHS U10 DA013714NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013714NIMHD NIH HHS R24 MD001764
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPost-visit "booster" sessions have been recommended to augment the impact of brief interventions delivered in the emergency department (ED). This paper, which focuses on implementation issues, presents descriptive information and interventionists' qualitative perspectives on providing brief interventions over the phone, challenges, "lessons learned", and recommendations for others attempting to implement adjunctive booster calls.

methodAttempts were made to complete two 20-minute telephone "booster" calls within a week following a patient's ED discharge with 425 patients who screened positive for and had recent problematic substance use other than alcohol or nicotine.

resultsOver half (56.2%) of participants completed the initial call; 66.9% of those who received the initial call also completed the second call. Median number of attempts to successfully contact participants for the first and second calls were 4 and 3, respectively. Each completed call lasted an average of about 22 minutes. Common challenges/barriers identified by booster callers included unstable housing, limited phone access, unavailability due to additional treatment, lack of compensation for booster calls, and booster calls coming from an area code different than the participants' locale and from someone other than ED staff.

conclusionsSpecific recommendations are presented with respect to implementing a successful centralized adjunctive booster call system. Future use of booster calls might be informed by research on contingency management (e.g., incentivizing call completions), smoking cessation quitlines, and phone-based continuing care for substance abuse patients. Future research needs to evaluate the incremental benefit of adjunctive booster calls on outcomes over and above that of brief motivational interventions delivered in the ED setting.

Indexed as

CounselingDrug UsersTelephoneAdultEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSubstance-Related DisordersYoung AdultBooster callsBrief interventionEmergency departmentMotivational interviewingSubstance abuse

Identifiers

PMID25534151
PMCPMC4305001

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.