Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40745341›Full record

ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2025

Spatial accessibility of substance use disorder treatment programs, compared with other health care facilities, in New York State, 2024.

Marcus A Bachhuber, Chinazo O Cunningham, Pat Lincourt, Ashly E Jordan

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Marcus A BachhuberNew York State Office of Addiction Services and Supports, 501 7Th Avenue, New York, NY, 10018, USA. bachhmar@ohsu.edu.
Chinazo O CunninghamNew York State Office of Addiction Services and Supports, 501 7Th Avenue, New York, NY, 10018, USA.
Pat LincourtNew York State Office of Addiction Services and Supports, 501 7Th Avenue, New York, NY, 10018, USA.
Ashly E JordanNew York State Office of Addiction Services and Supports, 501 7Th Avenue, New York, NY, 10018, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpatial accessibility of substance use disorder (SUD) treatment is a crucial component of access and a comprehensive analysis can help to identify if and where a lack of spatial accessibility is a barrier to treatment.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of spatial accessibility of SUD treatment (outpatient, opioid treatment program, and residential) in New York State (NYS). We estimated two measures of spatial accessibility: one-way travel time (i.e., drive time for NYS outside of New York City [NYC] and public transit time for NYC) and robustness (i.e., the difference in travel time between the closest and fifth closest facility). Comparison facilities included Federally Qualified Health Centers, dialysis facilities, and hospitals. We compared travel time and robustness by urbanicity (NYC, urban non-NYC, rural) and NYS economic development region using population-weighted paired t-tests.

resultsThe percentage of NYS residents within 30 min travel time was 97.2% for outpatient SUD treatment programs and 82.3% for opioid treatment programs. Mean statewide travel time to outpatient SUD treatment programs was comparable to travel time to Federally Qualified Health Centers (difference: 1.0 min [95%CI 0.9 to 1.1; P < 0.001]) and dialysis facilities (difference: 0.1 min [95%CI 0.03 to 0.2; P = 0.01]), and significantly shorter than to hospitals (difference: 5.6 min [95%CI 5.4 to 5.7; P < 0.001]). Travel time to opioid treatment programs was significantly longer than to Federally Qualified Health Centers (difference: -7.4 min [95%CI - 7.6 to - 7.2; P < 0.001]), dialysis facilities (difference: -8.2 min [95%CI - 8.4 to - 8.1; P < 0.001]), and hospitals (difference: - 2.8 min [95%CI - 3.0 to - 2.6; P < 0.001]). Compared with NYC, mean travel time to each type of SUD treatment program was significantly shorter in urban non-NYC areas and longer in rural areas. For robustness, compared with NYC, there was no significant difference in urban non-NYC areas for outpatient and residential SUD treatment programs, but more limited robustness for opioid treatment programs in urban non-NYC areas and all types of SUD treatment programs in rural areas.

conclusionWe identified widespread spatial accessibility of SUD treatment facilities across NYS. Recent opportunities such as revised federal regulations on opioid treatment program mobile medication units, increased flexibility in using telehealth in opioid treatment programs and other settings, and opioid settlement funding can be leveraged to increase access in rural areas.

Indexed as

Health FacilitiesHealth Services AccessibilitySubstance Abuse Treatment CentersSubstance-Related DisordersCross-Sectional StudiesHumansNew YorkOpioid-Related DisordersRural PopulationTravelOpioid treatment programsOutpatient treatmentResidential treatmentSpatial accessibilitySubstance use disorder

Identifiers

PMID40745341
PMCPMC12312488

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.