Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39907840›Full record

ArticleHealth & justice2025

Cost analysis of MOUD implementation and sustainability in Massachusetts jails.

Danielle Ryan, Don Lochana Ekanayake, Elizabeth Evans, Edmond Hayes, Thomas Senst, Peter D Friedmann, Kathryn E McCollister, Sean M Murphy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health & justice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

8 authors.

Danielle RyanWeill Cornell, Weill Cornell Medical College, United States. dar4006@med.cornell.edu.
Don Lochana EkanayakeUniversity of Miami, Coral Gables, United States.
Elizabeth EvansUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst Center, United States.
Edmond HayesFranklin County Jail, Greenfield, United States.
Thomas SenstMiddlesex House of Corrections and Jail, North Billerica, United States.
Peter D FriedmannUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, United States.
Kathryn E McCollisterUniversity of Miami, Coral Gables, United States.
Sean M MurphyWeill Cornell, Weill Cornell Medical College, United States.

Funding

Massachusetts Justice Cooperative Opioid Innovation Network (JCOIN) Research CenterUG1DA050067 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST · PI EVANS, ELIZABETH A., FRIEDMANN, PETER D · 2019 to 2023
$10.5M
NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA050067NIDA NIH HHS UG1DA050067
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2018 Massachusetts mandated that county jails offer all FDA-approved medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) to incarcerated individuals with OUD. Estimating costs needed to implement and sustain an MOUD program are not clearly known in jail facilities. The objective of this study was to identify the type of MOUD model deployed by the jails serving as research sites for the Massachusetts JCOIN hub, determine which resources were utilized at each stage of development, and estimate the associated costs.

methodsResources required to implement and sustain the MOUD programs were identified through detailed, site-specific microcosting analyses at six participating jails in Massachusetts. Quantitative resource utilization data were captured primarily through in-person site-visits and semi-structured interviews with key personnel. Unit costs were derived from the Federal Supply Schedule and Bureau Labor of Statistics from a site-specific level perspective. Our customizable budget impact tool, designed to assist jails/prisons with assessing the viability of alternative MOUD models, was used to organize each site's resources and estimate their associated costs. Resources/costs were summarized by site, according to type and phase, and cross-site comparisons were made to identify common program elements and unique models.

resultsThree MOUD models were identified. Model 1 consisted of a vendor hired to deliver and administer methadone daily, while clinical jail staff administered buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone. Model 2 included facilities that hired a certified vendor to operate an in-house opioid treatment program (OTP) to oversee the administration of all MOUD. Jails in Model 3 became certified OTPs, thereby allowing jail staff to manage all aspects of the MOUD program. There was considerable variability in implementation costs, both within and across models, driven by model-specific factors, but also with switching models, expanding infrastructure, etc. Entering the sustainment phase, the per-person costs of care were quite similar across models but differed according to the proportion of costs considered time-dependent vs. variable.

conclusionOur findings represent the most detailed and comprehensive estimates of resource/cost requirements for jail-based MOUD programs. Given the budget constraints faced by jails, the investment required to implement/sustain an MOUD program will likely result in the need to obtain additional funding or reallocate existing resources away from other initiatives.

Indexed as

CostJailsMOUD

Identifiers

PMID39907840
PMCPMC11796061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.