ArticleJournal of substance abuse treatment2018
Feasibility of a care management approach for complex substance use disorders and high acute services utilization.
Article in Journal of substance abuse treatment, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Although care management approaches have potential to improve clinical outcomes and reduce healthcare costs, little is known about the feasibility of these interventions in patients with complex substance use disorders (SUDs), which are characterized by psychosocial, psychological and/or medical needs and high acute healthcare utilization. We assessed the feasibility of recruitment, treatment engagement, compliance with follow-up assessments, and patients' use of a care management model (CMM) at one medical center. This pilot study enrolled patients with complex SUDs and high healthcare utilization in a prospective, 1-year open trial of a CMM adapted for specific needs of this patient population. Patients completed baseline assessment, monthly assessments of treatment progress and follow-up assessments at 6- and 12-months. Patients' use of CMM services were abstracted from medical records. Of 33 eligible patients approached, 23 (69.6%) men enrolled in the study. Approximately 59.1% of patients attended a CMM visit in ≥8 of 12 months enrolled. Patients completed monthly assessments in 4.9 (SD = 3.1) of 12 months enrolled, and 68.2% and 41.0% completed 6- and 12-month follow-up assessments, respectively. The most common CMM service delivered was care coordination/case management, followed by supportive counseling, motivational interviewing, and medication management. Recruitment and engagement results suggest that use of CMM for complex SUDs and high healthcare utilization is feasible. More robust outreach services may be needed to increase engagement among those who did not engage or lost contact with the CMM team. Additional research is needed to evaluate if CMM enhances retention, improves outcomes and reduces acute healthcare utilization of patients with complex SUDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.