ArticleHarm reduction journal2026
"The alternative is they're not getting care at all": a qualitative interview study of opioid use disorder treatment providers' perspectives on quality and appropriateness of telehealth for buprenorphine access.
Article in Harm reduction journal, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOpioid use disorder (OUD) is a major source of morbidity and mortality in the United States. While substantial evidence supports the effectiveness of medications for opioid disorder (MOUD), 80% of people with OUD receive no treatment, and of those who do, less than half receive MOUD. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been a substantial increase in the use of telehealth to deliver MOUD care. While telehealth has shown promise for increasing access and improving retention in treatment, its ongoing uptake and provision will depend on its acceptance and implementation by providers. This qualitative, interview-based study aims to explore how providers understand, experience, and assess telehealth for MOUD in the wake of its rapid expansion.
methodsWe conducted 25 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with MOUD providers in Southeastern Pennsylvania, including prescribing clinicians, clinic staff, mental health counselors, program administrators/leadership and pharmacists. We recruited from diverse substance use disorder treatment settings, using purposive and snowball sampling. Interviews were conducted over Zoom, transcribed, and coded and analyzed using iterative thematic coding.
resultsWhile most providers hold largely positive views of telehealth for MOUD due to its ability to improve access, they differed in their assessments of how such care compares to in-person MOUD treatment and for whom it is most appropriate and effective. Our findings show that debates over telehealth center on perceived quality of care and the "stability" of patients. Despite these disagreements, providers largely agree that telehealth is "better than nothing."
conclusionsWhile most providers hold largely positive views of telehealth for MOUD, hesitation towards telehealth is linked to assumptions about the broader empirical state of in-person MOUD treatment and about patient needs, preferences, and capacities to engage in care. Understanding when and why providers may oppose the use of telehealth for MOUD is critical to improving care for patients and reducing barriers to a form of treatment that can increase access to much-needed care for the most vulnerable patients.
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.