Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29021122›Full record

ArticleJournal of substance abuse treatment2017

Influencing quality of outpatient SUD care: Implementation of alerts and incentives in Washington State.

Deborah W Garnick, Constance M Horgan, Andrea Acevedo, Margaret T Lee, Lee Panas, Grant A Ritter, Kevin Campbell, Jason Bean-Mortinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of substance abuse treatment, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Deborah W GarnickInstitute for Behavioral Health, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, United States. Electronic address: garnick@brandeis.edu.
Constance M HorganInstitute for Behavioral Health, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, United States.
Andrea AcevedoInstitute for Behavioral Health, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, United States; Department of Community Health, Tufts University, United States.
Margaret T LeeInstitute for Behavioral Health, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, United States.
Lee PanasInstitute for Behavioral Health, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, United States.
Grant A RitterInstitute for Behavioral Health, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, United States.
Kevin CampbellThe Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, Washington State Behavioral Health Administration, United States.
Jason Bean-MortinsonThurston Mason Behavioral Health Organization, United States.

Funding

Research Support CoreP30DA035772 · NIDA · BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY · PI Haiden A Huskamp, SHARON REIF · 2015 to 2026
$11.3M
Incentives and Alerts for Improving Performance in Washington StateR01DA033468 · NIDA · BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY · PI GARNICK, DEBORAH W. · 2012 to 2016
$2.0M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA035772NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA033468
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Financial incentives for quality improvement and feedback on specific clients are two approaches to improving the quality of treatment for individuals with substance use disorders. We examined the impacts of these interventions in Washington State by randomizing outpatient substance use treatment agencies into intervention and control groups. From October 2013 through December 2015, agencies could earn financial incentives for meeting performance goals incorporating both achievement relative to a benchmark and improvement from agencies' own baselines. Weekly feedback was e-mailed to agencies in the alert or alert plus incentives arms. Difference-in difference regressions controlling for client and agency characteristics showed that none of the interventions significantly affected client engagement after outpatient admissions, overall or for sub-groups based on race/ethnicity, age, rural residence, or agency baseline performance. Treatment agencies offered insights related to several themes: delivery system context (e.g., agency time and resources needed during transition to a managed behavioral healthcare system), implementation (e.g., data lag), agency issues (e.g., staff turnover), and client factors (e.g., motivation). Interventions took place during a time of Medicaid expansion and planning for statewide integration of mental health and substance use disorder treatment into a managed care model, which may have resulted in agencies not responding to the interventions. Moreover, incentives and alerts at the agency-level may not be effective when factors are at play beyond the agency's control.

Indexed as

MotivationAdultAmbulatory CareFeedbackFemaleHumansMaleQuality ImprovementSubstance-Related DisordersWashingtonAlertsIncentivesOutpatient treatment engagementPerformance measuresSubstance use disorder

Identifiers

PMID29021122
PMCPMC5653287

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.