Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34243831›Full record

SynthesisValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2021

Economic Evaluations of Pharmacologic Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Systematic Literature Review.

Erica N Onuoha, Jared A Leff, Bruce R Schackman, Kathryn E McCollister, Daniel Polsky, Sean M Murphy

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Cost per Opioid-Free Year: A Systematic Review and Summary Analysis.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Insurance coverage and provision of opioid disorder treatment: Evidence from Medicare.Journal of policy analysis and management : [the journal of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management] · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Analyzing quality of life among people with opioid use disorder from the National Institute on Drug Abuse Data Share initiative: implications for decision making.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  16. Informing evidence-based medicine for opioid use disorder using pharmacoeconomic studies.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Erica N OnuohaDepartment of Healthcare Policy & Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: ero4002@med.cornell.edu.
Jared A LeffDepartment of Healthcare Policy & Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Bruce R SchackmanDepartment of Healthcare Policy & Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Kathryn E McCollisterDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
Daniel PolskyJohns Hopkins Carey Business School, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sean M MurphyDepartment of Healthcare Policy & Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Cornell University · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Miami · US

Funding

Utilization of health services after engagement with opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment provider by individuals with and without post-traumatic stress disorderP30DA040500 · NIDA · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI Benjamin P. Linas · 2015 to 2026
$20.7M
Economic Evaluation of Medication-Assisted Substance Abuse TreatmentR01DA035808 · NIDA · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI SCHACKMAN, BRUCE R · 2014 to 2017
$1.6M
Health and Economic Outcomes of Treatment with Extended-Release Naltrexone Among Pre-Release Prisoners with Opioid Use DisorderR01DA046721 · NIDA · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI MURPHY, SEAN M. · 2019 to 2022
$1.6M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA040500NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA035808NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA046721
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe crisis of opioid use puts a strain on resources in the United States and worldwide. There are 3 US Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for treatment of opioid use disorder: methadone, buprenorphine, and injectable extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). The comparative effectiveness and cost vary considerably among these 3 medications. Economic evaluations provide evidence that help stakeholders efficiently allocate scarce resources. Our objective was to summarize recent health economic evidence of pharmacologic treatment of opioid use disorder interventions.

methodsWe searched PubMed for peer-reviewed studies in English from August 2015 through December 2019 as an update to a 2015 review. We used the Drummond checklist to evaluate and categorize economic evaluation study quality. We summarized results by economic evaluation methodology and pharmacologic treatment modality.

resultsWe identified 105 articles as potentially relevant and included 21 (4 cost-offset studies and 17 cost-effectiveness/cost-benefit studies). We found strengthened evidence on buprenorphine and methadone, indicating that these treatments are economically advantageous compared with no pharmacotherapy, but found limited evidence on XR-NTX. Only half of the cost-effectiveness studies used a generic preference-based measure of effectiveness, limiting broad comparison across diseases/disorders. The disease/disorder-specific cost-effectiveness measures vary widely, suggesting a lack of consensus on the value of substance use disorder treatment.

conclusionWe found studies that provide new evidence supporting the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine compared with no pharmacotherapy. We found a lack of evidence supporting superior economic value for buprenorphine versus methadone, suggesting that both are attractive alternatives. Further economic research is needed on XR-NTX, as well as other emerging pharmacotherapies, treatment modalities, and dosage forms.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAdolescentAdultDrug TherapyHumansMiddle AgedOpioid-Related DisordersUnited StatesYoung Adultcost-benefit analysiscost-effectiveness analysiscost offsethealthcare utilizationopioid use disordersystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34243831
PMCPMC8591614
OpenAlexW3163245341

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.