ArticleResearch square2025
Multidisciplinary Perspectives on a New Hospital Addiction Consult Service: A Mixed- Methods Study.
Article in Research square, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Hospital-based Addiction Consult Services (ACS) are increasingly implemented to improve care for patients with substance use disorders (SUD). While ACS are generally well-regarded, clinicians of various roles may hold different perceptions of their impact. Methods: We conducted a web-based survey of physicians, advanced practice providers (APP), and nurses at a Philadelphia academic hospital from August-September 2024, approximately 18 months years after ACS implementation. The survey assessed attitudes and perceptions of the ACS with 6 questions using a 5-point Likert scale. These data were integrated with results from semi-structured interviews with physicians, APP, and nurses from November 2023-January 2024, 7-9 months after ACS implementation, to provide a richer understanding of provider perspectives on the impact of the ACS. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the samples and analyzed survey data by clinician group chi-squared tests. Interviews were analyzed using thematic content analysis. Results: Of 793 clinicians surveyed, 311 responded (39%), including 128 nurses (41%), 108 resident physicians (35%), 49 attending physicians (16%), and 26 APPs (8%). Most providers reported that the ACS positively impacted patient care. Surveyed nurses reported significantly smaller perceived improvements in quality of care and communication compared to other clinicians (43-63% nurses vs. 77-98% other clinicians, p < 0.001, for 5 of 6 questions). While qualitative feedback was positive across groups, nursing interview narratives emphasized communication gaps, limited integration between nursing and the ACS, and a desire for additional training and education around SUD care. Conclusions: While inpatient ACS improve key aspects of SUD care across professional groups, their impact may be enhanced through intentional integration of all frontline providers. Embedding nurses or nurse educators into ACS structures, strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration, and providing standardized SUD training may enhance team cohesion and ensure that all providers feel equipped and supported in caring for patients with SUD.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.