Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34225785›Full record

ReviewAddiction science & clinical practice2021

Financial sustainability of payment models for office-based opioid treatment in outpatient clinics.

Dominic Hodgkin, Constance Horgan, Gavin Bart

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Financial Sustainability of Programs to Initiate Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Emergency Department Settings.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Informing evidence-based medicine for opioid use disorder using pharmacoeconomic studies.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Financial Sustainability of Novel Delivery Models in Behavioral Health Treatment.The journal of mental health policy and economics · 2023
    Review
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

3 authors.

Dominic HodgkinInstitute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States. hodgkin@brandeis.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4494-9176
Constance HorganInstitute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States.
Gavin BartDepartment of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School and Division of Addiction Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, United States.

Funding

Suicide Prediction and Prevention for People at Risk for Opioid Use DisorderUG1DA040316 · NIDA · HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GAVIN BART · 2015 to 2026
$42.2M
Research Support CoreP30DA035772 · NIDA · BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY · PI Haiden A Huskamp, SHARON REIF · 2015 to 2026
$11.3M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA035772NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA040316
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOffice-Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) is a delivery model which seeks to make medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), particularly buprenorphine, widely available in general medical clinics and offices. Despite evidence supporting its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, uptake of the OBOT model has been relatively slow. One important barrier to faster diffusion of OBOT may be the financial challenges facing clinics that could adopt it.

methodsWe review key features and variants of the OBOT model, then discuss different approaches that have been used to fund it, and the findings from previous economic analyses of OBOT's impact on organizational finances. We conclude by discussing the implications of these analyses for the financial sustainability of the OBOT delivery model.

resultsLike other novel services, OBOT poses challenges for providers due to its reliance on services which are 'non-billable' in a fee-for-service environment. A variety of approaches exist for covering the non-billable costs, but which approaches are feasible depends on local payer policies. The scale of the challenges varies with clinic size, organizational affiliations and the policies of the state where the clinic operates. Small clinics in a purely fee-for-service environment may be particularly challenged in pursuing OBOT, given the need to fund a dedicated staff and extra administrative work. The current pandemic may pose both opportunities and challenges for the sustainability of OBOT, with expanded access to telemedicine, but also uncertainty about the durability of the expansion.

conclusionThe reimbursement environment for OBOT delivery varies widely around the US, and is evolving as Medicare (and possibly other payers) introduce alternative payment approaches. Clinics considering adoption of OBOT are well advised to thoroughly investigate these issues as they make their decision. In addition, payers will need to rethink how they pay for OBOT to make it sustainable.

Indexed as

BuprenorphineOpioid-Related DisordersAgedAmbulatory Care FacilitiesAnalgesics, OpioidHumansMedicareOpiate Substitution TreatmentPrimary Health CareUnited StatesAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineBuprenorphineFinancial sustainabilityMedicaidMedication treatment of opioid use disorderOffice-based opioid treatmentPayment modelsReimbursement

Identifiers

PMID34225785
PMCPMC8256208

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.