Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42046533›Full record

SynthesisAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026

Evaluating comparative effect of non-pharmacological interventions adjunctive to opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder: A systematic review with network meta-analysis.

Bei Lv, Yu-Xin Zhang, Qing-Feng Tao, Li Lin, Xin-Yu Li, Bo-Zhu Chen, Hui Zheng

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

7 authors.

Bei LvThe Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4600-5689
Yu-Xin ZhangThe Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Qing-Feng TaoThe Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Li LinThe Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Xin-Yu LiThe Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Bo-Zhu ChenThe Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Hui ZhengThe Acupuncture and Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0494-1217

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsNon-pharmacological therapies are critical for disease management, particularly when pharmacological approaches are limited. Investigating their role as adjuncts to pharmacotherapy to improve outcomes in opioid use disorder (OUD) is of substantial clinical importance. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of non-pharmacological therapies as adjuncts to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) management for OUD.

methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, Embase and Web of Science from inception to 8 February 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OAT alone versus OAT combined with non-pharmacological interventions in OUD. Outcomes of interest included treatment retention [assessed via odds ratios (ORs)], negative urine test results (specimen and the longest duration of continuous drug abstinence) and opioid craving scores [both evaluated via standard mean differences (SMDs)]. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) using a random-effects consistency model was conducted to compare the relative effects of all non-pharmacological interventions. Local inconsistency was evaluated through node-splitting analysis, and global inconsistency was assessed using the non-consistency model. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE framework (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) for network meta-analysis.

resultsForty-two RCTs involving 5113 participants were included. For treatment retention, contingency management (CM) combined with OAT likely results in an increase [low-certainty evidence; OR = 1.64, 95% credible interval (CrI) = 1.03-2.57], while the combination of OAT with contingency management plus cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT + CM; very low-certainty evidence; OR = 2.47, 95% CrI = 1.10-5.67) or with enhanced methadone services (EMS; very low-certainty evidence; OR = 5.48, 95% CrI = 1.47-22.61) may result in an increase, compared with OAT alone. No intervention statistically significantly improved opioid-negative urine tests over OAT alone (very low certainty). For craving, acupuncture (very low certainty; SMD = -2.13, 95% CrI = - 3.09 to -1.15) and sham acupuncture (low certainty; SMD = -1.49, 95% CrI = - 2.69 to -0.31) combined with OAT may reduce craving scores.

conclusionContingency management, as adjunctive therapies for opioid agonist therapy (OAT), may improve treatment retention in patients with opioid use disorder compared with traditional OAT. Enhanced methadone services and contingency management plus cognitive behavioral therapy may improve treatment retention too but the evidence is very uncertain. Compared with OAT, sham acupuncture as an adjunct therapy may help reduce opioid cravings; acupuncture may reduce cravings too but evidence is very uncertain.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidOpiate Substitution TreatmentOpioid-Related DisordersCognitive Behavioral TherapyCombined Modality TherapyHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAnalgesics, Opioidadjunctive treatmentnetwork meta‐analysisnon‐pharmacological interventionsopioid agonist therapyopioid use disordersystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42046533
PMCPMC13486951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.