Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36804347›Full record

ArticleJournal of substance use and addiction treatment2023

Facilitators and barriers to collaboration between drug courts and community-based medication for opioid use disorder providers.

Ekaterina Pivovarova, Faye S Taxman, Alexandra K Boland, David A Smelson, Stephenie C Lemon, Peter D Friedmann

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of substance use and addiction treatment, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Ekaterina PivovarovaDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. Electronic address: ekaterina.pivovarova@umassmed.edu.
Faye S TaxmanSchar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA. Electronic address: ftaxman@gmu.edu.
Alexandra K BolandDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. Electronic address: Alexandra.boland@umassmed.edu.
David A SmelsonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. Electronic address: david.smelson@umassmed.edu.
Stephenie C LemonDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. Electronic address: stephenie.lemon@umassmed.edu.
Peter D FriedmannDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA; Baystate Health, Springfield, MA, USA. Electronic address: peter.friedmann@baystatehealth.org.

Funding

Increasing Referrals to Medications for Opioid Use Disorders from Drug Treatment Courts using Organizational Linkage InterventionK23DA049953 · NIDA · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI PIVOVAROVA, EKATERINA · 2020 to 2022
$612k
NIDA NIH HHS K23 DA049953
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAccess to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is limited for individuals in drug courts - programs that leverage sanctions for mandatory substance use treatment. Drug courts rely on community agencies to provide MOUD. However, relationships with MOUD agencies, which impact access to treatment, are understudied. We examined barriers and facilitators from drug court staffs' perspectives to understand how to enhance collaborations with MOUD providers.

methodsDrug court staff (n = 21) from seven courts participated in semi-structured interviews about their experience in collaborating with MOUD providers. Interviews were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Inductive (theory-based) and deductive (ground-up) approaches were used for analyses.

resultsFacilitator and barrier themes centered around the needs and resources of drug court participants, external policies such MOUD access in jails, networking with external agencies, and beliefs about MOUD providers. Drug court staff preferred working with agencies that offered MOUD alongside comprehensive services. Drug courts benefited when jails offered MOUD in-house and facilitated community referrals. Existing relationships with providers and responsive communication eased referrals and served to educate the courts about MOUD. Barriers included logistical limitations (limited hours, few methadone providers) and inadequate communication patterns between providers and drug court staff. A lack of confidence in providers' prescribing practices and concerns around perceived overmedication of participants impacted referrals, interagency collaboration, and further burdened the participants.

conclusionsCollaboration between drug courts and MOUD providers was driven by patient needs, external policies, communication patterns, and perceptions. Interventions to increase access MOUD for drug court participants will need to incorporate collaboration strategies while considering the unique features of drug courts.

Indexed as

Opioid-Related DisordersCommunicationHumansJailsMental ProcessesMethadoneMethadoneBarriersDrug courtFacilitatorsLegalMedication assisted treatmentMedications for opioid use disorderOpioid use disorder

Identifiers

PMID36804347
PMCPMC12947163

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.