Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31703741›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Making the business case for an addiction medicine consult service: a qualitative analysis.

Kelsey C Priest, Dennis McCarty

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

2 authors.

Kelsey C PriestSchool of Medicine, MD/PhD Program, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Mail Code: L357, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. priest@ohsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3929-8177
Dennis McCartySchool of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University-Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

Western States Node of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (TMS for CUD) UG1DA015815 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Keith N. Humphreys, Philip Todd Korthuis · 2015 to 2026
$24.6M
Oregon's Coordinated Care Organizations Integrate Care for Drug Use DisordersR33DA035640 · NIDA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI LIND, BONNIE · 2014 to 2017
$2.4M
Variation in the Use of Opioid Agonist Treatment in HospitalsF30DA044700 · NIDA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI PRIEST, KELSEY CAROLINE · 2017 to 2020
$186k
NIDA NIH HHS F30 DA044700NIDA NIH HHS R33 DA035640NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA015815
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the drug poisoning crisis worsens in North America and opioid use disorder (OUD)-related hospital admissions increase, policymakers and hospital administrators are beginning to recognize the important role of hospitals in the OUD care continuum. This study explores and describes how U.S. addiction medicine physicians created and presented business propositions to hospital administrators to support the development of addiction medicine consult (AMC) services.

methodsFifteen qualitative interviews were completed with board-certified or board-eligible addiction medicine physicians from 14 U.S. hospitals. The interviews occurred as part of a broader mixed methods study exploring hospital service delivery for patients admitted with OUD. Using a directed content analysis, the transcribed interviews were coded, analyzed, and final themes consolidated.

resultsSemi-structured interviews completed with addiction medicine physicians from established (n = 9) and developing (n = 5) AMC services at 14 U.S. hospitals explored how clinical champions persuaded hospital administrators to support AMC service development. Four elements were foundational to making the "business case": 1) describing the prevalence of substance use disorder (SUD) or OUD in the hospital; 2) identifying the negative financial impacts of not treating SUDs during hospitalization; 3) highlighting the ongoing care quality and treatment gap for hospitalized patients with SUDs; and 4) noting the success of other institutional AMC services. Study findings informed the creation of tools to support AMC service development: 1) an AMC service business case template, and 2) an AMC service design and operations resource list.

conclusionsOUD-related hospital admissions are unlikely to abate. Hospital administrators should consider innovative care delivery mechanisms to improve care for persons with OUD. AMC services may be a promising delivery mechanism to achieve this aim. For clinical and administrative champions, understanding how to communicate the potential effectiveness of this intervention to hospital leaders is an essential first step to AMC service creation.

Indexed as

Addiction MedicineContinuity of Patient CareFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedNarcotic AntagonistsOpiate Substitution TreatmentOpioid-Related DisordersPatient Acceptance of Health CareQuality of Health CareReferral and ConsultationUnited StatesNarcotic AntagonistsAddiction consult serviceAddiction medicine consult serviceBuprenorphine/naloxoneConsultation serviceHospital leadershipHospital managementMethadoneOpioid agonist therapyOpioid use disorderSubstance use disorder

Identifiers

PMID31703741
PMCPMC6842195

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.