Integrating primary medical care with addiction treatment: a randomized controlled trial.
TL;DR: Individuals with SAMCs benefit from integrated medical and substance abuse treatment, and such an approach can be cost-effective.
Abstract: ContextThe prevalence of medical disorders is high among substance abuse patients,
yet medical services are seldom provided in coordination with substance abuse
treatmentObjectiveTo examine differences in treatment outcomes and costs between integrated
and independent models of medical and substance abuse care as well as the
effect of integrated care in a subgroup of patients with substance abuse–related
medical conditions (SAMCs)DesignRandomized controlled trial conducted between April 1997 and December
1998Setting and PatientsAdult men and women (n = 592) who were admitted to a large health maintenance
organization chemical dependency program in Sacramento, CalifInterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to receive treatment through an integrated
model, in which primary health care was included within the addiction treatment
program (n = 285), or an independent treatment-as-usual model, in which primary
care and substance abuse treatment were provided separately (n = 307) Both
programs were group based and lasted 8 weeks, with 10 months of aftercare
availableMain Outcome MeasuresAbstinence outcomes, treatment utilization, and costs 6 months after
randomizationResultsBoth groups showed improvement on all drug and alcohol measures Overall,
there were no differences in total abstinence rates between the integrated
care and independent care groups (68% vs 63%, P =
18) For patients without SAMCs, there were also no differences in abstinence
rates (integrated care, 66% vs independent care, 73%; P = 23) and there was a slight but nonsignificant trend of higher costs
for the integrated care group ($36796 vs $32409, P
= 19) However, patients with SAMCs (n = 341) were more likely to be abstinent
in the integrated care group than the independent care group (69% vs 55%, P = 006; odds ratio [OR], 190; 95% confidence interval
[CI], 122-297) This was true for both those with medical (OR, 338; 95%
CI, 168-680) and psychiatric (OR, 210; 95% CI, 104-425) SAMCs Patients
with SAMCs had a slight but nonsignificant trend of higher costs in the integrated
care group ($47081 vs $42795, P = 14) The incremental
cost-effectiveness ratio per additional abstinent patient with an SAMC in
the integrated care group was $1581ConclusionsIndividuals with SAMCs benefit from integrated medical and substance
abuse treatment, and such an approach can be cost-effective These findings
are relevant given the high prevalence and cost of medical conditions among
substance abuse patients, new developments in medications for addiction, and
recent legislation on parity of substance abuse with other medical benefits
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: It is concluded that neuroscience continues to support the brain disease model of addiction, which has led to the development of more effective methods of prevention and treatment and to more informed public health policies.
Abstract: This article reviews scientific advances in the prevention and treatment of substance-use disorder and related developments in public policy. In the past two decades, research has increasingly supported the view that addiction is a disease of the brain. Although the brain disease model of addiction has yielded effective preventive measures, treatment interventions, and public health policies to address substance-use disorders, the underlying concept of substance abuse as a brain disease continues to be questioned, perhaps because the aberrant, impulsive, and compulsive behaviors that are characteristic of addiction have not been clearly tied to neurobiology. Here we review recent advances in the neurobiology of addiction to clarify the link between addiction and brain function and to broaden the understanding of addiction as a brain disease. We review findings on the desensitization of reward circuits, which dampens the ability to feel pleasure and the motivation to pursue everyday activities; the increasing strength of conditioned responses and stress reactivity, which results in increased cravings for alcohol and other drugs and negative emotions when these cravings are not sated; and the weakening of the brain regions involved in executive functions such as decision making, inhibitory control, and self-regulation that leads to repeated relapse. We also review the ways in which social environments, developmental stages, and genetics are intimately linked to and influence vulnerability and recovery. We conclude that neuroscience continues to support the brain disease model of addiction. Neuroscience research in this area not only offers new opportunities for the prevention and treatment of substance addictions and related behavioral addictions (e.g., to food, sex, and gambling) but may also improve our understanding of the fundamental biologic processes involved in voluntary behavioral control. In the United States, 8 to 10% of people 12 years of age or older, or 20 to 22 million people, are addicted to alcohol or other drugs. 1 The abuse of tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs in the United States exacts more than $700 billion annually in costs related to crime, lost work productivity, and health care. 2-4 After centuries of efforts to reduce addiction and its related costs by punishing addictive behaviors failed to produce adequate results, recent basic and clinical research has provided clear evidence that addiction might be better considered and treated as an acquired disease of the brain (see Box 1 for definitions of substance-use disorder and addiction). Research guided by the brain disease model of addiction has led to the development of more effective methods of prevention and treatment and to more informed public health policies. Notable examples include the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, which requires medical insurance plans to provide the same coverage for substance-use disorders and other mental illnesses that is provided for other illnesses, 5 and the proposed bipartisan Senate legislation that From the National Institute on Drug Abuse (N.D.V.) and the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (G.F.K.) — both in Bethesda, MD; and the Treatment Research Institute, Philadelphia (A.T.M.). Address reprint requests to Dr. Volkow at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, 6001 Executive Bld., Rm. 5274, Bethesda, MD 20892, or at nvolkow@ nida . nih . gov.
1,063 citations
01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: Volkow et al. as mentioned in this paper reviewed recent advances in the neurobiology of addiction to clarify the link between addiction and brain function and to broaden the understanding of addiction as a brain disease.
Abstract: This article reviews scientific advances in the prevention and treatment of substance-use disorder and related developments in public policy. In the past two decades, research has increasingly supported the view that addiction is a disease of the brain. Although the brain disease model of addiction has yielded effective preventive measures, treatment interventions, and public health policies to address substance-use disorders, the underlying concept of substance abuse as a brain disease continues to be questioned, perhaps because the aberrant, impulsive, and compulsive behaviors that are characteristic of addiction have not been clearly tied to neurobiology. Here we review recent advances in the neurobiology of addiction to clarify the link between addiction and brain function and to broaden the understanding of addiction as a brain disease. We review findings on the desensitization of reward circuits, which dampens the ability to feel pleasure and the motivation to pursue everyday activities; the increasing strength of conditioned responses and stress reactivity, which results in increased cravings for alcohol and other drugs and negative emotions when these cravings are not sated; and the weakening of the brain regions involved in executive functions such as decision making, inhibitory control, and self-regulation that leads to repeated relapse. We also review the ways in which social environments, developmental stages, and genetics are intimately linked to and influence vulnerability and recovery. We conclude that neuroscience continues to support the brain disease model of addiction. Neuroscience research in this area not only offers new opportunities for the prevention and treatment of substance addictions and related behavioral addictions (e.g., to food, sex, and gambling) but may also improve our understanding of the fundamental biologic processes involved in voluntary behavioral control. In the United States, 8 to 10% of people 12 years of age or older, or 20 to 22 million people, are addicted to alcohol or other drugs. 1 The abuse of tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs in the United States exacts more than $700 billion annually in costs related to crime, lost work productivity, and health care. 2-4 After centuries of efforts to reduce addiction and its related costs by punishing addictive behaviors failed to produce adequate results, recent basic and clinical research has provided clear evidence that addiction might be better considered and treated as an acquired disease of the brain (see Box 1 for definitions of substance-use disorder and addiction). Research guided by the brain disease model of addiction has led to the development of more effective methods of prevention and treatment and to more informed public health policies. Notable examples include the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, which requires medical insurance plans to provide the same coverage for substance-use disorders and other mental illnesses that is provided for other illnesses, 5 and the proposed bipartisan Senate legislation that From the National Institute on Drug Abuse (N.D.V.) and the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (G.F.K.) — both in Bethesda, MD; and the Treatment Research Institute, Philadelphia (A.T.M.). Address reprint requests to Dr. Volkow at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, 6001 Executive Bld., Rm. 5274, Bethesda, MD 20892, or at nvolkow@ nida . nih . gov.
739 citations
01 Nov 2008
TL;DR: There is a reasonably strong body of evidence to encourage integrated care, at least for depression, and there is no discernible effect of integration level, processes of care, or combination on patient outcomes for mental health services in primary care settings.
Abstract: Objectives To describe models of integrated care used in the United States, assess how integration of mental health services into primary care settings or primary health care into specialty outpatient settings impacts patient outcomes and describe barriers to sustainable programs, use of health information technology (IT), and reimbursement structures of integrated care programs within the United States. Data sources MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane databases, and PsychINFO databases, the internet, and expert consultants for relevant trials and other literature that does not traditionally appear in peer reviewed journals. Review methods Randomized controlled trials and high quality quasi-experimental design studies were reviewed for integrated care model design components. For trials of mental health services in primary care settings, levels of integration codes were constructed and assigned for provider integration, integrated processes of care, and their interaction. Forest plots of patient symptom severity, treatment response, and remission were constructed to examine associations between level of integration and outcomes. Results Integrated care programs have been tested for depression, anxiety, at-risk alcohol, and ADHD in primary care settings and for alcohol disorders and persons with severe mental illness in specialty care settings. Although most interventions in either setting are effective, there is no discernible effect of integration level, processes of care, or combination, on patient outcomes for mental health services in primary care settings. Organizational and financial barriers persist to successfully implement sustainable integrated care programs. Health IT remains a mostly undocumented but promising tool. No reimbursement system has been subjected to experiment; no evidence exists as to which reimbursement system may most effectively support integrated care. Case studies will add to our understanding of their implementation and sustainability. Conclusions In general, integrated care achieved positive outcomes. However, it is not possible to distinguish the effects of increased attention to mental health problems from the effects of specific strategies, evidenced by the lack of correlation between measures of integration or a systematic approach to care processes and the various outcomes. Efforts to implement integrated care will have to address financial barriers. There is a reasonably strong body of evidence to encourage integrated care, at least for depression. Encouragement can include removing obstacles, creating incentives, or mandating integrated care. Encouragement will likely differ between fee-for-service care and managed care. However, without evidence for a clearly superior model, there is legitimate reason to worry about premature orthodoxy.
420 citations
Cites background from "Integrating primary medical care wi..."
...Hospitalacquired complications in a randomized controlled clinical trial of a geriatric consultation team JAMA 1987 May 1; 257(17):2313-7....
[...]
...2004 Sep 27;164(17):1839] Archives of Internal Medicine 2004 Jun 28; 164(12):1293-7....
[...]
TL;DR: The conceptual and practical importance of the ASI's multi-dimensional approach to measuring addiction severity, as illustrated by two case presentations, and how this measurement approach has led to some important findings regarding the prediction and measurement of addiction treatment effectiveness are reviewed.
Abstract: The Addiction Severity Index (ASI) is a multi-dimensional interview used to measure the substance use, health, and social problems of those with alcohol and other drug problems, both at admission to treatment and subsequently at follow-up contacts. This article first discusses the conceptual and practical importance of the ASI's multi-dimensional approach to measuring addiction severity, as illustrated by two case presentations. The second section of the paper reviews how this measurement approach has led to some important findings regarding the prediction and measurement of addiction treatment effectiveness. The third section describes the historical and practical considerations that have changed the instrument over time, details the problems with the instrument, and describes our efforts to correct those problems with the ASI-6. Finally, some recent ASI data collected from over 8,400 patients admitted to a nationally representative sample of U.S. addiction treatment programs are presented.
398 citations
DOI•
01 Jan 2009
TL;DR: The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
Abstract: The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers' products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use. Guidelines for the psychosocially assisted pharmacological treatment of opioid dependence. 1.Opioid-related disorders-drug therapy. 2.Opioid-related disorders-psychology. 3.Substance abuse-prevention and control. 4.
397 citations
References
More filters
659 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: In this article, the conceptual basis for the design and use of newly emerging activity-based cost (ABC) systems is described, and a discussion of the application of ABC is presented.
Abstract: This paper describes the conceptual basis for the design and use of newly emerging activity-based cost (ABC) systems. TVaditional cost systems use volume-driven allocation bases, such as direct labor dollars, machine hours, and sales dollars, to assign organizational expenses to individual products and customers. But many ofthe resource demands by individual products and customers are not proportional to the volume of units produced or sold. Thus, conventional systems do not measure accurately the costs of resources used to design and produce products and to sell and deliver them to customers. Companies, including those with excellent traditional cost systems,^ have developed activity-based cost systems so that they can directly link the costs of performing organizational activities to the products and customers for which these activities are performed.
514 citations
TL;DR: The TSR is a 5-minute, technician-administered interview that provides a quantitative profile of the number and types of treatment services received by patients during alcohol and drag abuse rehabilitation and may prove useful in describing and comparing programs in terms of the nature and number of services actually delivered to patients.
Abstract: This paper describes the development and initial testing of the Treatment Services Review (TSR). The TSR is a 5-minute, technician-administered interview that provides a quantitative profile of the number and types of treatment services received by patients during alcohol and drug abuse rehabilitation. Test-retest studies indicated satisfactory reliability administered either in person or over the phone. Tests of concurrent validity showed the ability to discriminate different levels of treatment services and good correspondence with independent measures of treatment provided. While additional studies are still needed with this instrument, the data collected thus far suggest that the TSR may serve two types of needs. First, at the programmatic level, the TSR may prove useful in describing and comparing programs in terms of the nature and number of services actually delivered to patients. At the individual patient level, the TSR may offer a means of evaluating the "match" between a patient's needs and the services actually provided.
426 citations
TL;DR: The committee visited clinics, funding agencies, and referral sources in six states, analyzed data from two recent national surveys, commissioned seven papers, and documented its report with 250 key citations, finding the drug problem to be a public health crisis.
Abstract: On September 19, 1990, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences released a comprehensive report on drug-treatment programs.* The legislation authorizing the report had asked for recommendations on support for the rehabilitation of drug abusers. To satisfy this charge, the institute appointed a committee whose areas of expertise ranged from insurance administration to pharmacology. The committee visited clinics, funding agencies, and referral sources in six states, analyzed data from two recent national surveys, commissioned seven papers, and documented its report with 250 key citations. The Need for Treatment The committee found the drug problem to be a . . .
422 citations
TL;DR: It is argued that decision-makers are most likely to be interested in one-sided tests of hypothesis and that confidence surfaces are better suited to such tests than confidence intervals, and thus the focus on confidence interval estimation for cost-effectiveness ratios in the recent literature has been concerned more with issues of estimation than with problems of decision-making.
Abstract: Although cost-effectiveness analysis is not new, it is only recently that economic analysis has been conducted alongside clinical trials. Whereas in the past economic analysts most often used sensitivity analysis to examine the implications of uncertainty for their results, the existence of patient-level data on costs and effects opens up the possibility of statistical analysis of uncertainty.
Unfortunately, ratio statistics can cause problems for standard statistical methods of confidence interval estimation. The recent health economics literature contains a number of suggestions for estimating confidence limits for ratios. In this paper, we begin by reviewing the different methods of confidence interval estimation with a view to providing guidance concerning the most appropriate method.
We go on to argue that the focus on confidence interval estimation for cost-effectiveness ratios in the recent literature has been concerned more with problems of estimation than with problems of decision-making. We argue that decision-makers are most likely to be interested in one-sided tests of hypothesis and that confidence surfaces are better suited to such tests than confidence intervals. This approach is consistent with decision-making on the cost-effectiveness plane and with the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve approach to presenting uncertainty due to sampling variation in stochastic cost-effectiveness analyses. Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
411 citations