Maureen T Stewart1, Neto Coulibaly2, Daniel Schwartz3, Judith Dey4, Cindy Parks Thomas5. 1. Institute for Behavioral Health, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, 415 South St., Waltham, MA, USA. Electronic address: mstewart@brandeis.edu. 2. Global Health Policy & Management, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, 415 South St., Waltham, MA, USA. Electronic address: netocoulibaly@brandeis.edu. 3. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, USA. Electronic address: Daniel.Schwartz@hhs.gov. 4. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, USA. Electronic address: Judith.Dey@hhs.gov. 5. Schneider Institutes for Health Policy, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, 415 South St., Waltham, MA, USA. Electronic address: cthomas@brandeis.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic remains a public health crisis and most people with opioid use disorder (OUD) do not receive effective treatment. The emergency department (ED) can be a critical entry point for treatment. EDs are developing and implementing ED-based efforts to address OUD to improve access to OUD treatment. This study's objective is to identify features of ED-based OUD treatment programs that relate to program implementation, effectiveness, and sustainability. METHODS: We obtained data through literature review and semistructured interviews with ED physicians and leaders. The study analyzed these data to develop a framework of key components of ED-based efforts and highlight barriers and facilitators to implementation and program effectiveness. RESULTS: We identify five key features of ED-based opioid treatment programs that vary across programs and may influence effectiveness and impact: patient identification methods; treatment approaches; program structure; relationship with community partners; and financing and sustainability. Successful implementation of ED-based OUD treatment includes having a champion, a reliable referral network, and systematic tracking and reporting of data for monitoring and feedback. CONCLUSION: Going forward, attention to these features may help to improve effectiveness. As researchers conduct studies of ED-based care models, they should assess the impact of variation in key features to improve program effectiveness.
BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic remains a public health crisis and most people with opioid use disorder (OUD) do not receive effective treatment. The emergency department (ED) can be a critical entry point for treatment. EDs are developing and implementing ED-based efforts to address OUD to improve access to OUD treatment. This study's objective is to identify features of ED-based OUD treatment programs that relate to program implementation, effectiveness, and sustainability. METHODS: We obtained data through literature review and semistructured interviews with ED physicians and leaders. The study analyzed these data to develop a framework of key components of ED-based efforts and highlight barriers and facilitators to implementation and program effectiveness. RESULTS: We identify five key features of ED-based opioid treatment programs that vary across programs and may influence effectiveness and impact: patient identification methods; treatment approaches; program structure; relationship with community partners; and financing and sustainability. Successful implementation of ED-based OUD treatment includes having a champion, a reliable referral network, and systematic tracking and reporting of data for monitoring and feedback. CONCLUSION: Going forward, attention to these features may help to improve effectiveness. As researchers conduct studies of ED-based care models, they should assess the impact of variation in key features to improve program effectiveness.
Authors: Kenneth D Marshall; Arthur R Derse; Kenneth V Iserson; Nicholas Kluesner; Laura Vearrier Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2019-11-16 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Alice E Welch; Angela Jeffers; Bennett Allen; Denise Paone; Hillary V Kunins Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2019-08-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Marc R Larochelle; Dana Bernson; Thomas Land; Thomas J Stopka; Na Wang; Ziming Xuan; Sarah M Bagley; Jane M Liebschutz; Alexander Y Walley Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Gail D'Onofrio; Patrick G O'Connor; Michael V Pantalon; Marek C Chawarski; Susan H Busch; Patricia H Owens; Steven L Bernstein; David A Fiellin Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-04-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Cindy Parks Thomas; Catherine Anne Fullerton; Meelee Kim; Leslie Montejano; D Russell Lyman; Richard H Dougherty; Allen S Daniels; Sushmita Shoma Ghose; Miriam E Delphin-Rittmon Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2014-02-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Reuben J Strayer; Kathryn Hawk; Bryan D Hayes; Andrew A Herring; Eric Ketcham; Alexis M LaPietra; Joshua J Lynch; Sergey Motov; Zachary Repanshek; Scott G Weiner; Lewis S Nelson Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2020-03-29 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Edward R Melnick; Molly Moore Jeffery; James D Dziura; Jodi A Mao; Erik P Hess; Timothy F Platts-Mills; Yauheni Solad; Hyung Paek; Shara Martel; Mehul D Patel; Laura Bankowski; Charles Lu; Cynthia Brandt; Gail D'Onofrio Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-05-30 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: William C Goedel; Brandon D L Marshall; Elizabeth A Samuels; Mark G Brinkman; Debra Dettor; Kirsten J Langdon; Linda A Mahoney; Roland C Merchant; Tarek Nizami; George A O'Toole; Susan E Ramsey; Jesse L Yedinak; Francesca L Beaudoin Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 2.692