D. Paul Moberg1, Jason Paltzer2. 1. University of Wisconsin-Madison Population Health Institute, Madison, Wisconsin. 2. Department of Public Health, Robbins College of Health and Human Sciences, Baylor University, Waco, Texas.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs have been effective for moderate reductions of alcohol use among participants in universal settings. However, there has been limited evidence of effectiveness in referring individuals to specialty care, and the literature now often refers to screening and brief intervention (SBI). This study examines documentation of substance use disorder (SUD) diagnoses in a low-income Medicaid population to evaluate the effect of universal SBIRT on healthcare system recognition of SUDs, a first step to obtaining a referral to treatment (RT) for individuals with SUDs. METHOD: SBI patient data from Wisconsin's Initiative to Promote Healthy Lifestyles (WIPHL) were linked to Wisconsin Medicaid claims data. A comparison group of Medicaid beneficiaries was identified from a matched sample of non-SBIRT clinics (total study N = 14,856). Hierarchical generalized linear modeling was used to assess rates of SUD diagnosis in the 12 months following receipt of SBIRT in WIPHL clinics compared with rates in non-SBIRT clinics. Analysis controlled for clinic, individual patient's health status, demographics, and baseline substance use diagnoses. RESULTS: SBIRT was associated with greater odds of being diagnosed with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), alcohol abuse or dependence as well as drug abuse or dependence over the 12 months subsequent to receipt of the screen. The overall diagnostic rate for any DSM-IV substance abuse or dependence was 9.9% at baseline and 12.2% during the follow-up year. SBIRT patients had 42% (p = .003) greater odds of being diagnosed with a substance use disorder within 12 months relative to comparison clinic patients. However, there were very few claims for specialty SUD services. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of SBIRT in a primary care clinic appears to increase the awareness and recognition of patients with SUDs and a greater willingness of healthcare providers to diagnose patients with an alcohol or drug use disorder on Medicaid claims. Further research is needed to determine if this increase in diagnosis reflects integrated care for SUDs or if it leads to improved access to specialty care, in which case abandonment of the RT component of SBIRT may be premature.
OBJECTIVE: Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs have been effective for moderate reductions of alcohol use among participants in universal settings. However, there has been limited evidence of effectiveness in referring individuals to specialty care, and the literature now often refers to screening and brief intervention (SBI). This study examines documentation of substance use disorder (SUD) diagnoses in a low-income Medicaid population to evaluate the effect of universal SBIRT on healthcare system recognition of SUDs, a first step to obtaining a referral to treatment (RT) for individuals with SUDs. METHOD: SBI patient data from Wisconsin's Initiative to Promote Healthy Lifestyles (WIPHL) were linked to Wisconsin Medicaid claims data. A comparison group of Medicaid beneficiaries was identified from a matched sample of non-SBIRT clinics (total study N = 14,856). Hierarchical generalized linear modeling was used to assess rates of SUD diagnosis in the 12 months following receipt of SBIRT in WIPHL clinics compared with rates in non-SBIRT clinics. Analysis controlled for clinic, individual patient's health status, demographics, and baseline substance use diagnoses. RESULTS: SBIRT was associated with greater odds of being diagnosed with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), alcohol abuse or dependence as well as drug abuse or dependence over the 12 months subsequent to receipt of the screen. The overall diagnostic rate for any DSM-IV substance abuse or dependence was 9.9% at baseline and 12.2% during the follow-up year. SBIRT patients had 42% (p = .003) greater odds of being diagnosed with a substance use disorder within 12 months relative to comparison clinic patients. However, there were very few claims for specialty SUD services. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of SBIRT in a primary care clinic appears to increase the awareness and recognition of patients with SUDs and a greater willingness of healthcare providers to diagnose patients with an alcohol or drug use disorder on Medicaid claims. Further research is needed to determine if this increase in diagnosis reflects integrated care for SUDs or if it leads to improved access to specialty care, in which case abandonment of the RT component of SBIRT may be premature.
Authors: Antoinette Krupski; Jeanne M Sears; Jutta M Joesch; Sharon Estee; Lijian He; Chris Dunn; Alice Huber; Peter Roy-Byrne; Richard Ries Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2010-03-26 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Janice L Pringle; David K Kelley; Shannon M Kearney; Arnie Aldridge; William Dowd; William Johnjulio; Arvind Venkat; Michael Madden; John Lovelace Journal: Med Care Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Bertha K Madras; Wilson M Compton; Deepa Avula; Tom Stegbauer; Jack B Stein; H Westley Clark Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2008-10-16 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Jason Paltzer; Richard L Brown; Marguerite Burns; D Paul Moberg; John Mullahy; Ajay K Sethi; David Weimer Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 1.505