ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2026
Linking Patients to Residential Substance Use Disorder Treatment Through Peer Coaches and a Clinical Decision Unit.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Efforts to improve substance use disorder (SUD) care in the emergency department (ED) include deploying peer recovery coaches (PRCs). PRCs operate through a window of lived experience, providing motivational interviewing and linkage to recovery resources. This may include placement into residential treatment, which can be difficult from the ED given time constraints. We describe a novel clinical decision unit (CDU) pathway wherein PRCs facilitated discharge to residential SUD treatment. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients presenting to a single hospital between June 2023 and May 2024. The sample was drawn from the consult list of PRCs. Data were obtained through direct export and manual extraction from the medical record. We performed χ Results: In total, 75 encounters were included: 49 men (65.3%), 26 women (34.7%); age range, 18 to 69 years (median, 45 years). Forty-nine (65.3%) encounters were identified as Black, 19 (25.3%) as White, and 7 (9.3%) as other; 24 (32%) had a primary ED diagnosis related to substance use, and 38 (50.6%) had a primary psychiatric diagnosis (eg, suicidal ideation). PRCs placed 53 patients (70.6%) in residential treatment. Three patients had a change in clinical status and were admitted to the hospital. Median CDU length of stay was 27 hours (IQR, 21-44 hours). Forty-five (85%) of those placed were insured. Of the 15 uninsured patients, 8 (53%) were placed. No differences in pathway success were observed based on race, insurance status, or primary substance used. The pathway was more successful for men than for women (difference between groups, 34%; 95% CI, 10%-56%). The most common reason for pathway failure was patient-directed discharge (10 [45.5%] pathway failures). Conclusion: In this CDU pathway, PRCs were able to place the majority of patients into residential SUD treatment. Further study is required to examine long-term patient outcomes.
Indexed as
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.