ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2026
Frontline staff experiences of bridging dual diagnosis treatments - Determinants for implementing a cross-sectoral collaboration model.
Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is estimated that 30-70% of patients in psychiatry have co-existing psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders, also called dual diagnosis. This condition often results in a complex clinical condition that affects the treatment trajectory and outcomes. Although the two conditions are intertwined, they are handled in two different sectors in Denmark, and therefore mostly treated separately. To overcome this divide, a coordination model was developed, with the aim of coordinating treatment between psychiatric outpatient FACT teams and municipal substance use treatment facilities for patients with dual diagnosis. The aim of this study was to assess the barriers and facilitators to a cross-sectoral coordination model as perceived by frontline staff during implementation.
methods24 semi-structured interviews with frontline staff were performed in both sectors. The interview guide and analysis are based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) in combination with Qualitative Content Analysis.
resultsDuring implementation of the coordination model, frontline staff perceived barriers and facilitators in outpatient psychiatry and substance use treatment centers within all domains of CFIR, yet overall, participants were positive about the benefits and potentials of the model. During implementation they experienced an improvement in coordination practices, although patients were still rejected despite use of implementation strategies aimed at knowledge and skills, staff in both sectors did not feel competent to treat the target group and called for more training and concrete action plans. The flexibility required by this target group was considered hard to attain due to a lack of time and staff resources.
conclusionAccording to frontline staff, a sustainable effort and stronger cross-sector collaboration calls for extensive management support, an ongoing focus on culture- and behavior changes, and enhancement of competences associated with addressing, detecting, and treating dual diagnosis.
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.