PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced

Important Notice

PubMed Central Canada to be taken offline in February 2018

On February 23, 2018, PubMed Central Canada (PMC Canada) will be taken offline permanently. No author manuscripts will be deleted, and the approximately 2,900 manuscripts authored by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)-funded researchers currently in the archive will be copied to the National Research Council’s (NRC) Digital Repository over the coming months. These manuscripts along with all other content will also remain publicly searchable on PubMed Central (US) and Europe PubMed Central, meaning such manuscripts will continue to be compliant with the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications.

Read more

Results 1-19 (19)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
more »
Year of Publication
more »
1.  The ‘Outcome Reporting in Brief Intervention Trials: Alcohol’ (ORBITAL) framework: protocol to determine a core outcome set for efficacy and effectiveness trials of alcohol screening and brief intervention 
Trials  2017;18:611.
Background
The evidence base to assess the efficacy and effectiveness of alcohol brief interventions (ABI) is weakened by variation in the outcomes measured and by inconsistent reporting. The ‘Outcome Reporting in Brief Intervention Trials: Alcohol’ (ORBITAL) project aims to develop a core outcome set (COS) and reporting guidance for its use in future trials of ABI in a range of settings.
Methods/design
An international Special Interest Group was convened through INEBRIA (International Network on Brief Interventions for Alcohol and Other Drugs) to inform the development of a COS for trials of ABI. ORBITAL will incorporate a systematic review to map outcomes used in efficacy and effectiveness trials of ABI and their measurement properties, using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. This will support a multi-round Delphi study to prioritise outcomes. Delphi panellists will be drawn from a range of settings and stakeholder groups, and the Delphi study will also be used to determine if a single COS is relevant for all settings. A consensus meeting with key stakeholder representation will determine the final COS and associated guidance for its use in trials of ABI.
Discussion
ORBITAL will develop a COS for alcohol screening and brief intervention trials, with outcomes stratified into domains and guidance on outcome measurement instruments. The standardisation of ABI outcomes and their measurement will support the ongoing development of ABI studies and a systematic synthesis of emerging research findings. We will track the extent to which the COS delivers on this promise through an exploration of the use of the guidance in the decade following COS publication.
doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2335-3
PMCID: PMC5741954  PMID: 29273070
Consensus methods; Core outcome set; Delphi technique; Screening; Brief intervention; Alcohol; Measurement; Alcohol brief intervention; Trial; Outcomes standardisation
2.  Proceedings of the 14th annual conference of INEBRIA 
Holloway, Aisha S. | Ferguson, Jennifer | Landale, Sarah | Cariola, Laura | Newbury-Birch, Dorothy | Flynn, Amy | Knight, John R. | Sherritt, Lon | Harris, Sion K. | O’Donnell, Amy J. | Kaner, Eileen | Hanratty, Barbara | Loree, Amy M. | Yonkers, Kimberly A. | Ondersma, Steven J. | Gilstead-Hayden, Kate | Martino, Steve | Adam, Angeline | Schwartz, Robert P. | Wu, Li-Tzy | Subramaniam, Geetha | Sharma, Gaurav | McNeely, Jennifer | Berman, Anne H. | Kolaas, Karoline | Petersén, Elisabeth | Bendtsen, Preben | Hedman, Erik | Linderoth, Catharina | Müssener, Ulrika | Sinadinovic, Kristina | Spak, Fredrik | Gremyr, Ida | Thurang, Anna | Mitchell, Ann M. | Finnell, Deborah | Savage, Christine L. | Mahmoud, Khadejah F. | Riordan, Benjamin C. | Conner, Tamlin S. | Flett, Jayde A. M. | Scarf, Damian | McRee, Bonnie | Vendetti, Janice | Gallucci, Karen Steinberg | Robaina, Kate | Clark, Brendan J. | Jones, Jacqueline | Reed, Kathryne D. | Hodapp, Rachel M. | Douglas, Ivor | Burnham, Ellen L. | Aagaard, Laura | Cook, Paul F. | Harris, Brett R. | Yu, Jiang | Wolff, Margaret | Rogers, Meighan | Barbosa, Carolina | Wedehase, Brendan J. | Dunlap, Laura J. | Mitchell, Shannon G. | Dusek, Kristi A. | Gryczynski, Jan | Kirk, Arethusa S. | Oros, Marla T. | Hosler, Colleen | O’Grady, Kevin E. | Brown, Barry S. | Angus, Colin | Sherborne, Sidney | Gillespie, Duncan | Meier, Petra | Brennan, Alan | de Vargas, Divane | Soares, Janaina | Castelblanco, Donna | Doran, Kelly M. | Wittman, Ian | Shelley, Donna | Rotrosen, John | Gelberg, Lillian | Edelman, E. Jennifer | Maisto, Stephen A. | Hansen, Nathan B. | Cutter, Christopher J. | Deng, Yanhong | Dziura, James | Fiellin, Lynn E. | O’Connor, Patrick G. | Bedimo, Roger | Gibert, Cynthia | Marconi, Vincent C. | Rimland, David | Rodriguez-Barradas, Maria C. | Simberkoff, Michael S. | Justice, Amy C. | Bryant, Kendall J. | Fiellin, David A. | Giles, Emma L. | Coulton, Simon | Deluca, Paolo | Drummond, Colin | Howel, Denise | McColl, Elaine | McGovern, Ruth | Scott, Stephanie | Stamp, Elaine | Sumnall, Harry | Vale, Luke | Alabani, Viviana | Atkinson, Amanda | Boniface, Sadie | Frankham, Jo | Gilvarry, Eilish | Hendrie, Nadine | Howe, Nicola | McGeechan, Grant J. | Ramsey, Amy | Stanley, Grant | Clephane, Justine | Gardiner, David | Holmes, John | Martin, Neil | Shevills, Colin | Soutar, Melanie | Chi, Felicia W. | Weisner, Constance | Ross, Thekla B. | Mertens, Jennifer | Sterling, Stacy A. | Shorter, Gillian W. | Heather, Nick | Bray, Jeremy | Cohen, Hildie A. | McPherson, Tracy L. | Adam, Cyrille | López-Pelayo, Hugo | Gual, Antoni | Segura-Garcia, Lidia | Colom, Joan | Ornelas, India J. | Doyle, Suzanne | Donovan, Dennis | Duran, Bonnie | Torres, Vanessa | Gaume, Jacques | Grazioli, Véronique | Fortini, Cristiana | Paroz, Sophie | Bertholet, Nicolas | Daeppen, Jean-Bernard | Satterfield, Jason M. | Gregorich, Steven | Alvarado, Nicholas J. | Muñoz, Ricardo | Kulieva, Gozel | Vijayaraghavan, Maya | Adam, Angéline | Cunningham, John A. | Díaz, Estela | Palacio-Vieira, Jorge | Godinho, Alexandra | Kushir, Vladyslav | O’Brien, Kimberly H. M. | Aguinaldo, Laika D. | Sellers, Christina M. | Spirito, Anthony | Chang, Grace | Blake-Lamb, Tiffany | LaFave, Lea R. Ayers | Thies, Kathleen M. | Pepin, Amy L. | Sprangers, Kara E. | Bradley, Martha | Jorgensen, Shasta | Catano, Nico A. | Murray, Adelaide R. | Schachter, Deborah | Andersen, Ronald M. | Rey, Guillermina Natera | Vahidi, Mani | Rico, Melvin W. | Baumeister, Sebastian E. | Johansson, Magnus | Sinadinovic, Christina | Hermansson, Ulric | Andreasson, Sven | O’Grady, Megan A. | Kapoor, Sandeep | Akkari, Cherine | Bernal, Camila | Pappacena, Kristen | Morley, Jeanne | Auerbach, Mark | Neighbors, Charles J. | Kwon, Nancy | Conigliaro, Joseph | Morgenstern, Jon | Magill, Molly | Apodaca, Timothy R. | Borsari, Brian | Hoadley, Ariel | Scott Tonigan, J. | Moyers, Theresa | Fitzgerald, Niamh M. | Schölin, Lisa | Barticevic, Nicolas | Zuzulich, Soledad | Poblete, Fernando | Norambuena, Pablo | Sacco, Paul | Ting, Laura | Beaulieu, Michele | Wallace, Paul George | Andrews, Matthew | Daley, Kate | Shenker, Don | Gallagher, Louise | Watson, Rod | Weaver, Tim | Bruguera, Pol | Oliveras, Clara | Gavotti, Carolina | Barrio, Pablo | Braddick, Fleur | Miquel, Laia | Suárez, Montse | Bruguera, Carla | Brown, Richard L. | Capell, Julie Whelan | Paul Moberg, D. | Maslowsky, Julie | Saunders, Laura A. | McCormack, Ryan P. | Scheidell, Joy | Gonzalez, Mirelis | Bauroth, Sabrina | Liu, Weiwei | Lindsay, Dawn L. | Lincoln, Piper | Hagle, Holly | Wallhed Finn, Sara | Hammarberg, Anders | Andréasson, Sven | King, Sarah E. | Vargo, Rachael | Kameg, Brayden N. | Acquavita, Shauna P. | Van Loon, Ruth Anne | Smith, Rachel | Brehm, Bonnie J. | Diers, Tiffiny | Kim, Karissa | Barker, Andrea | Jones, Ashley L. | Skinner, Asheley C. | Hinman, Agatha | Svikis, Dace S. | Thacker, Casey L. | Resnicow, Ken | Beatty, Jessica R. | Janisse, James | Puder, Karoline | Bakshi, Ann-Sofie | Milward, Joanna M. | Kimergard, Andreas | Garnett, Claire V. | Crane, David | Brown, Jamie | West, Robert | Michie, Susan | Rosendahl, Ingvar | Andersson, Claes | Gajecki, Mikael | Blankers, Matthijs | Donoghue, Kim | Lynch, Ellen | Maconochie, Ian | Phillips, Ceri | Pockett, Rhys | Phillips, Tom | Patton, R. | Russell, Ian | Strang, John | Stewart, Maureen T. | Quinn, Amity E. | Brolin, Mary | Evans, Brooke | Horgan, Constance M. | Liu, Junqing | McCree, Fern | Kanovsky, Doug | Oberlander, Tyler | Zhang, Huan | Hamlin, Ben | Saunders, Robert | Barton, Mary B. | Scholle, Sarah H. | Santora, Patricia | Bhatt, Chirag | Ahmed, Kazi | Hodgkin, Dominic | Gao, Wenwu | Merrick, Elizabeth L. | Drebing, Charles E. | Larson, Mary Jo | Sharma, Monica | Petry, Nancy M. | Saitz, Richard | Weisner, Constance M. | Young-Wolff, Kelly C. | Lu, Wendy Y. | Blosnich, John R. | Lehavot, Keren | Glass, Joseph E. | Williams, Emily C. | Bensley, Kara M. | Chan, Gary | Dombrowski, Julie | Fortney, John | Rubinsky, Anna D. | Lapham, Gwen T. | Forray, Ariadna | Olmstead, Todd A. | Gilstad-Hayden, Kathryn | Kershaw, Trace | Dillon, Pamela | Weaver, Michael F. | Grekin, Emily R. | Ellis, Jennifer D. | McGoron, Lucy | McGoron, Lucy
doi:10.1186/s13722-017-0087-8
PMCID: PMC5606215
3.  Measuring benefits of opioid misuse treatment for economic evaluation: health related quality of life of opioid dependent individuals and their spouses as assessed by a sample of the US population 
Addiction (Abingdon, England)  2015;111(4):675-684.
Aims
To understand how the general public views the quality of life effects of opioid misuse and opioid use disorder on an individual and his/her spouse, measured in terms used in economic evaluations.
Design
Cross-sectional internet survey of a US-population-representative respondent panel conducted December 2013-January 2014.
Setting
USA.
Participants
2,054 randomly-selected adults; 51% male (before weighting).
Measurements
Mean (95% CI) and median health “utility” for 6 opioid misuse and treatment outcomes: active injection misuse; active prescription misuse; methadone maintenance therapy at initiation, and when stabilized in treatment; and buprenorphine therapy at initiation, and when stabilized. Utility is a numerical representation of health-related quality of life used in economic evaluations to “adjust” estimated survival to include peoples' preferences for health states. Utilities are determined by surveying the general population to estimate the value they assign to particular health states—on a scale where 0=the value of being dead, and 1.0=the value of being in perfect health. Spouse spillover utility is assigned to a spouse of an individual who is in a particular health state.
Findings
Mean individual utility ranged from 0.574 (95%CI: 0.538, 0.611) for active injection opioid misuse to 0.766 for stabilized buprenorphine therapy (95%CI: 0.738, 0.795), with other states in between. Female respondents assigned higher utility to the active prescription misuse and buprenorphine therapy at initiation states than did males (p<0.05); all other states did not differ by respondent gender. Mean spousal utilities were significantly lower than 1.0 but mostly higher than individual utility, and were similar between male and female respondents.
Conclusions
In the opinion of the US public, injection opioid misuse results in worse health-related quality of life than prescription misuse, and methadone therapy results in worse health-related quality of life than buprenorphine therapy. Spouses are negatively affected by their partner's opioid misuse and early treatment.
doi:10.1111/add.13219
PMCID: PMC5034732  PMID: 26498740
4.  Impact of Illicit Drug Use on Health-Related Quality of Life in Opioid Dependent Patients Undergoing HIV Treatment 
Objective
To assess the impact of illicit drug use on health-related quality of life (health utility) among opioid-dependent, HIV-infected patients.
Design
Secondary analyses of data from the Buprenorphine-HIV Evaluation and Support (BHIVES) cohort of HIV-infected patients with opioid dependence in 9 U.S. HIV clinics between 2004 and 2009. Health status (Short Form-12 (SF-12)), combination antiretroviral treatment (ART) status, CD4 cell count, HCV antibody status, current drug use, and demographics were assessed at an initial visit and quarterly follow-up visits for up to one year. Short Form-6D health utility scores were derived from the SF-12. Multivariate mixed effects regression models were used to assess the impact of illicit drug use on health utility controlling for demographic, clinical and social characteristics.
Results
Health utility was assessed among 307 participants, 67% male, with median age 46 at 1089 quarterly assessments. In multivariate analyses, illicit opioid use, non-opioid illicit drug use, not being on ART and being on ART with poor adherence were associated with lower health utility. The observed decrement in health utility associated with illicit opioid use was larger for those on ART with good adherence (beta = −0.067; p<0.01) or poor adherence (−0.049; p<0.01) than for those not on ART.
Conclusions
Illicit opioid and non-opioid drug use are negatively associated with health utility in patients with HIV, however the relative effect of illicit opioid use is smaller than that of not being on ART. Postponing ART until initiation of opioid substitution therapy or abstinence may have limited benefits from the perspective of maximizing health utility.
doi:10.1097/QAI.0000000000000768
PMCID: PMC4607646  PMID: 26218410
Health Utility; HIV; Illicit drug use; Opioid; Opiate
5.  Proceedings of the 13th annual conference of INEBRIA 
Watson, Rod | Morris, James | Isitt, John | Barrio, Pablo | Ortega, Lluisa | Gual, Antoni | Conner, Kenneth | Stecker, Tracy | Maisto, Stephen | Paroz, Sophie | Graap, Caroline | Grazioli, Véronique S | Daeppen, Jean-Bernard | Collins, Susan E | Bertholet, Nicolas | McNeely, Jennifer | Kushnir, Vlad | Cunningham, John A. | Crombie, Iain K | Cunningham, Kathryn B | Irvine, Linda | Williams, Brian | Sniehotta, Falko F | Norrie, John | Melson, Ambrose | Jones, Claire | Briggs, Andrew | Rice, Peter | Achison, Marcus | McKenzie, Andrew | Dimova, Elena | Slane, Peter W | Grazioli, Véronique S. | Collins, Susan E. | Paroz, Sophie | Graap, Caroline | Daeppen, Jean-Bernard | Baggio, Stéphanie | Dupuis, Marc | Studer, Joseph | Gmel, Gerhard | Magill, Molly | Grazioli, Véronique S. | Tait, Robert J. | Teoh, Lucinda | Kelty, Erin | Geelhoed, Elizabeth | Mountain, David | Hulse, Gary K. | Renko, Elina | Mitchell, Shannon G. | Lounsbury, David | Li, Zhi | Schwartz, Robert P. | Gryczynski, Jan | Kirk, Arethusa S. | Oros, Marla | Hosler, Colleen | Dusek, Kristi | Brown, Barry S. | Finnell, Deborah S. | Holloway, Aisha | Wu, Li-Tzy | Subramaniam, Geetha | Sharma, Gaurav | Wallhed Finn, Sara | Andreasson, Sven | Dvorak, Robert D. | Kramer, Matthew P. | Stevenson, Brittany L. | Sargent, Emily M. | Kilwein, Tess M. | Harris, Sion K. | Sherritt, Lon | Copelas, Sarah | Knight, John R. | Mdege, Noreen D | McCambridge, Jim | Bischof, Gallus | Bischof, Anja | Freyer-Adam, Jennis | Rumpf, Hans-Juergen | Fitzgerald, Niamh | Schölin, Lisa | Toner, Paul | Böhnke, Jan R. | Veach, Laura J. | Currin, Olivia | Dongre, Leigh Z. | Miller, Preston R. | White, Elizabeth | Williams, Emily C. | Lapham, Gwen T. | Bobb, Jennifer J. | Rubinsky, Anna D. | Catz, Sheryl L. | Shortreed, Susan | Bensley, Kara M. | Bradley, Katharine A. | Milward, Joanna | Deluca, Paolo | Khadjesari, Zarnie | Watson, Rod | Fincham-Campbell, Stephanie | Drummond, Colin | Angus, Kathryn | Bauld, Linda | Baumann, Sophie | Haberecht, Katja | Schnuerer, Inga | Meyer, Christian | Rumpf, Hans-Jürgen | John, Ulrich | Gaertner, Beate | Barrault-Couchouron, Marion | Béracochéa, Marion | Allafort, Vincent | Barthélémy, Valérie | Bonnefoi, Hervé | Bussières, Emmanuel | Garguil, Véronique | Auriacombe, Marc | Saint-Jacques, Marianne | Dorval, Michel | M’Bailara, Katia | Segura-Garcia, Lidia | Ibañez-Martinez, Nuria | Mendive-Arbeloa, Juan Manuel | Anoro-Perminger, Manel | Diaz-Gallego, Pako | Piñar-Mateos, Mª Angeles | Colom-Farran, Joan | Deligianni, Marianthi | Yersin, Bertrand | Adam, Angeline | Weisner, Constance | Chi, Felicia | Lu, Wendy | Sterling, Stacy | Kraemer, Kevin L. | McGinnis, Kathleen A. | Fiellin, David A. | Skanderson, Melissa | Gordon, Adam J. | Robbins, Jonathan | Zickmund, Susan | Korthuis, P. Todd | Edelman, E. Jennifer | Hansen, Nathan B. | Cutter, Christopher J. | Dziura, James | Fiellin, Lynn E. | O’Connor, Patrick G. | Maisto, Stephen A. | Bedimo, Roger | Gilbert, Cynthia | Marconi, Vincent C. | Rimland, David | Rodriguez-Barradas, Maria | Simberkoff, Michael | Justice, Amy C. | Bryant, Kendall J. | Berman, Anne H | Shorter, Gillian W | Bray, Jeremy W | Barbosa, Carolina | Johansson, Magnus | Hester, Reid | Campbell, William | Souza Formigoni, Maria Lucia O. | Andrade, André Luzi Monezi | Sartes, Laisa Marcorela Andreoli | Sundström, Christopher | Eék, Niels | Kraepelien, Martin | Kaldo, Viktor | Fahlke, Claudia | Hernandez, Lynn | Becker, Sara J. | Jones, Richard N. | Graves, Hannah R. | Spirito, Anthony | Diestelkamp, Silke | Wartberg, Lutz | Arnaud, Nicolas | Thomasius, Rainer | Gaume, Jacques | Grazioli, Véronique | Fortini, Cristiana | Malan, Zelra | Mash, Bob | Everett-Murphy, Katherine | Grazioli, Véronique S. | Studer, Joseph | Mohler-Kuo, M. | Bertholet, Nicolas | Gmel, Gerhard | Doi, Lawrence | Cheyne, Helen | Jepson, Ruth | Luna, Vanesa | Echeverria, Leticia | Morales, Silvia | Barroso, Teresa | Abreu, Ângela | Aguiar, Cosma | Stewart, Duncan | Abreu, Angela | Brites, Riany M. | Jomar, Rafael | Marinho, Gerson | Parreira, Pedro | Seale, J. Paul | Johnson, J. Aaron | Henry, Dena | Chalmers, Sharon | Payne, Freida | Tuck, Linda | Morris, Akula | Gonçalves, Cátia | Besser, Bettina | Casajuana, Cristina | López-Pelayo, Hugo | Balcells, María Mercedes | Teixidó, Lídia | Miquel, Laia | Colom, Joan | Hepner, Kimberly A. | Hoggatt, Katherine. J. | Bogart, Andy | Paddock, Susan. M. | Hardoon, Sarah L | Petersen, Irene | Hamilton, Fiona L | Nazareth, Irwin | White, Ian R. | Marston, Louise | Wallace, Paul | Godfrey, Christine | Murray, Elizabeth | Sovinová, Hana | Csémy, Ladislav
doi:10.1186/s13722-016-0062-9
PMCID: PMC5032602  PMID: 27654147
6.  The Cost of Screening and Brief Intervention in Employee Assistance Programs 
Few studies examine the costs of conducting screening and brief intervention (SBI) in settings outside health care. This study addresses this gap in knowledge by examining the employer-incurred costs of SBI in an employee assistance program (EAP) when delivered by counselors. Screening was self-administered as part of the intake paperwork, and the brief intervention (BI) was delivered during a regular counseling session. Training costs were $76 per counselor. The cost of a screen to the employer was $0.64; most of this cost comprised the cost of the time the client spent completing the screen. The cost of a BI was $1.86. The cost of SBI is lower than cost estimates of SBI conducted in a health care setting. The low costs for the current study suggest that only modest gains in outcomes would likely be needed to justify delivering SBI in an EAP setting.
doi:10.1007/s11414-011-9253-z
PMCID: PMC4714701  PMID: 21938602
screening and brief intervention; cost; employee assistance program; alcohol; workplace
7.  A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Health Care Utilization Outcomes in Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention Trials 
Medical care  2011;49(3):287-294.
Objective
This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the effect of screening and brief intervention (SBI) on outpatient, emergency department (ED), and inpatient health care utilization outcomes. Much of the current literature speculates that SBI provides cost savings through reduced health care utilization, but no systematic review or meta-analysis examines this assertion.
Method
Publications were abstracted from online journal collections and targeted Web searches. The systematic review included any publications that examined the association between SBI and health care utilization. Each publication was rated independently by two study authors and assigned a consensus methodological score. The meta-analysis focused on those studies examined in the systematic review, but it excluded publications that had incomplete data, low methodological quality, or a cluster randomized design.
Results
Systematic review results suggest that SBI has little to no effect on inpatient or outpatient health care utilization, but it may have a small, negative effect on ED utilization. A random effects meta-analysis using the Hedges method confirms the ED result for SBI delivered across settings (SMD = −.06, I-squared = 13.9%) but does not achieve statistical significance (CI: −0.15, 0.03).
Conclusions
SBI may reduce overall health care costs, but more studies are needed. Current evidence is inconclusive for SBI delivered in ED and non-ED hospital settings. Future studies of SBI and health care utilization should report the estimated effects and variance, regardless of the effect size or statistical significance.
doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e318203624f
PMCID: PMC4691530  PMID: 21263359
Screening and brief intervention; health care utilization; systematic review; meta-analysis
8.  Program- and service-level costs of seven screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment programs 
This paper examines the costs of delivering screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) services within the first seven demonstration programs funded by the US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Service-level costs were estimated and compared across implementation model (contracted specialist, inhouse specialist, inhouse generalist) and service delivery setting (emergency department, hospital inpatient, outpatient). Program-level costs were estimated and compared across grantee recipient programs. Service-level data were collected through timed observations of SBIRT service delivery. Program-level data were collected during key informant interviews using structured cost interview guides. At the service level, support activities that occur before or after engaging the patient comprise a considerable portion of the cost of delivering SBIRT services, especially short duration services. At the program level, average costs decreased as more patients were screened. Comparing across program and service levels, the average annual operating costs calculated at the program level often exceeded the cost of actual service delivery. Provider time spent in support of service provision may comprise a large share of the costs in some cases because of potentially substantial fixed and quasifixed costs associated with program operation. The cost structure of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment is complex and discontinuous of patient flow, causing annual operating costs to exceed the costs of actual service provision for some settings and implementation models.
doi:10.2147/SAR.S62127
PMCID: PMC4085323  PMID: 25114610
screening; brief intervention; brief treatment; SBIRT; cost
9.  An Integrative, Multilevel, and Transdisciplinary Research Approach to Challenges of Work, Family, and Health 
Recognizing a need for rigorous, experimental research to support the efforts of workplaces and policymakers in improving the health and wellbeing of employees and their families, the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention formed the Work, Family & Health Network (WFHN). The WFHN is implementing an innovative multisite study with a rigorous experimental design (adaptive randomization, control groups), comprehensive multilevel measures, a novel and theoretically based intervention targeting the psychosocial work environment, and translational activities. This paper describes challenges and benefits of designing a multilevel and transdisciplinary research network that includes an effectiveness study to assess intervention effects on employees, families, and managers; a daily diary study to examine effects on family functioning and daily stress; a process study to understand intervention implementation; and translational research to understand and inform diffusion of innovation. Challenges were both conceptual and logistical, spanning all aspects of study design and implementation. In dealing with these challenges, however, the WFHN developed innovative, transdisciplinary, multi-method approaches to conducting workplace research that will benefit both the research and business communities.
doi:10.3768/rtipress.2013.mr.0024.1303
PMCID: PMC3947908  PMID: 24618878
13.  Conducting economic evaluations of screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking: Methods and evidence to date for informing policy 
Drug and alcohol review  2010;29(6):623-630.
Issues
Many policy review articles have concluded that alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is both cost-effective and cost-beneficial. Yet a recent cost-effectiveness review for the United Kingdom’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence suggests that these conclusions may be premature.
Approach
This article offers a brief synopsis of the various types of economic analyses that may be applied to SBI, including cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and other types of economic evaluation. A brief overview of methodological issues is provided, and examples from the SBI evaluation literature are provided.
Key Findings, Implications, and Conclusions
The current evidence base is insufficient to draw firm conclusions about the cost, cost-effectiveness, or cost-benefit of SBI and about the impact of SBI on health care utilisation.
doi:10.1111/j.1465-3362.2010.00238.x
PMCID: PMC2965557  PMID: 20973847
screening and brief intervention; hazardous drinking; economic evaluation; cost analysis; cost-effectiveness analysis; cost-utility analysis; cost-benefit analysis
14.  Revisiting the Cost-Effectiveness of the COMBINE Study for Alcohol Dependent Patients: The Patient Perspective 
Medical care  2010;48(4):306-313.
Objective
Most cost and cost-effectiveness studies of substance abuse treatments focus on the costs to the provider/payer. Although this perspective is important, the costs incurred by patients should also be considered when evaluating treatment. This paper presents estimates of patients’ costs associated with the COMBINE alcohol treatments and evaluates the treatments’ cost-effectiveness from the patient perspective.
Study Design
A prospective cost-effectiveness study of patients in COMBINE, a randomized controlled clinical trial of 9 alternative alcohol treatment regimens involving 1,383 patients with diagnoses of primary alcohol dependence across 11 U.S. clinic sites. We followed a micro-costing approach that allowed estimation of patients’ costs for specific COMBINE treatment activities. The primary clinical outcomes from COMBINE are used as indicators of treatment effectiveness.
Results
The average total patient time devoted to treatment ranged from about 30 hours to 46 hours. Time spent traveling to and from treatment sessions and participation in self-help meetings accounted for the largest portion of patient time costs. The cost-effectiveness results indicate that 6 of the 9 treatments were economically dominated and only 3 treatments are potentially cost-effective depending on patient’s willingness to pay for the considered outcomes: medical management + placebo, medical management + naltrexone, and medical management + naltrexone + acamprosate.
Conclusions
Few studies consider the patient’s perspective in estimating costs and cost-effectiveness even though these costs may have a substantial impact on a patient’s treatment choice, ability to access treatment, or treatment adherence. For this study, the choice of the most cost-effective treatment depends on the value placed on the outcomes by the patient, and the conclusions drawn by the patient may differ from that of the provider/payer.
PMCID: PMC3140763  PMID: 20355261
15.  The Impact of Alcohol Treatment on Social Costs of Alcohol Dependence: Results from the COMBINE Study 
Medical care  2010;48(5):396-401.
Background
The COMBINE (Combined Pharmacotherapies and Behavioral Intervention) clinical trial recently evaluated the efficacy of pharmacotherapies, behavioral therapies, and their combinations for the treatment of alcohol dependence. Previously, the cost and cost-effectiveness of COMBINE have been studied. Policy makers, patients, and nonalcohol-dependent individuals may be concerned not only with alcohol treatment costs but also with the impact of alcohol interventions on broader social costs and outcomes.
Objectives
To estimate the sum of treatment costs plus the costs of health care utilization, arrests, and motor vehicle accidents for the 9 treatments in COMBINE 3 years post-randomization.
Research Design
A cost study based on a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Subjects
786 participants 3 years post-randomization.
Results
Multivariate results show no significant differences in mean costs between any of the treatment arms as compared to medical management (MM) + placebo for the 3-year post-randomization sample. The median costs of MM + acamprosate, MM + naltrexone, MM + acamprosate + naltrexone, and MM + acamprosate + combined behavioral intervention were significantly lower than the median cost for MM + placebo.
Conclusions
The results show that social cost savings are generated relative to MM + placebo by 3 years post-randomization, and the magnitude of these cost savings is greater than the costs of the COMBINE treatment received 3 years prior. Our study suggests that several alcohol treatments may indeed lead to reduced median social costs associated with health care, arrests, and motor vehicle accidents.
doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d68859
PMCID: PMC3130073  PMID: 20393362
alcohol treatment; social costs; cost offsets
16.  Cost and Cost-Effectiveness of the COMBINE Study for Alcohol-Dependent Patients 
Archives of general psychiatry  2008;65(10):1214-1221.
Context
The COMBINE clinical trial recently evaluated the efficacy of medications, behavioral therapies, and their combinations for the outpatient treatment of alcohol dependence. The costs and cost-effectiveness of these combinations are unknown and of interest to clinicians and policy makers.
Objective
To evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of the COMBINE interventions at the end of 16 weeks of treatment.
Design, Setting, and Participants
A prospective cost and cost-effectiveness study of patients in COMBINE, a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) involving 1383 patients with diagnoses of primary alcohol dependence across 11 US clinical sites.
Interventions
Nine treatment arms, with 4 arms receiving medical management with 16 weeks of naltrexone (100 mg/d) or acamprosate (3 g/d), both, and/or placebo; 4 arms receiving the same options as above but delivered with combined behavioral intervention (CBI); and 1 arm receiving CBI only.
Main Outcomes Measures
Incremental cost per percentage point increase in percent days abstinent (PDA), incremental cost per patient of avoiding heavy drinking, and incremental cost per patient of achieving a good clinical outcome.
Results
Based on the mean values of cost and effectiveness, 3 interventions are cost-effective options relative to the other interventions for all three outcomes: medical management (MM) with placebo ($409 cost per patient), MM + naltrexone ($671 cost per patient), and MM + naltrexone + acamprosate ($1003 cost per patient).
Conclusions
This is only the second prospective RCT-designed cost-effectiveness study that has been performed for the treatment of alcohol dependence. Focusing just on effectiveness, MM + naltrexone + acamprosate is not significantly better than MM + naltrexone. However, looking at cost and effectiveness, MM + naltrexone + acamprosate may be a cost-effective choice, depending on whether the cost of the incremental increase in effectiveness is worth it to the decision maker.
doi:10.1001/archpsyc.65.10.1214
PMCID: PMC3095105  PMID: 18838638
17.  Getting There from Here: Research on the Effects of Work–Family Initiatives on Work–Family Conflict and Business Outcomes 
Many employing organizations have adopted work–family policies, programs, and benefits. Yet managers in employing organizations simply do not know what organizational initiatives actually reduce work–family conflict and how these changes are likely to impact employees and the organization. We examine scholarship that addresses two broad questions: first, do work–family initiatives reduce employees’ work–family conflict and/or improve work–family enrichment? Second, does reduced work–family conflict improve employees’ work outcomes and, especially, business outcomes at the organizational level? We review over 150 peer-reviewed studies from a number of disciplines in order to summarize this rich literature and identify promising avenues for research and conceptualization. We propose a research agenda based on four primary conclusions: the need for more multi-level research, the necessity of an interdisciplinary approach, the benefits of longitudinal studies that employ quasi-experimental or experimental designs and the challenges of translating research into practice in effective ways.
doi:10.1080/19416520802211610
PMCID: PMC2892913  PMID: 20589229
18.  Healthcare Utilization of Individuals with Opiate Use Disorders: An Analysis of Integrated Medicaid and State Mental Health/Substance Abuse Agency Data 
Data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s Integrated Database (IDB) were used to examine the service use patterns of individuals with possible opiate use disorders in Washington State. Results indicate that regardless of Medicaid enrollment status, individuals who received mental health (MH) or substance abuse (SA) services only through state agencies received no inpatient substance abuse service. Furthermore, when compared with individuals who received at least one MH/SA service through Medicaid, those who received services only through the state agencies were less likely to have received any MH services and were more likely to have received residential SA services. This analysis highlights the importance of using integrated client data in providing a more comprehensive understanding of services to inform policy and raises significant questions about how regulatory requirements affecting different funding mechanisms might drive settings of care in ways not related to the care needed.
doi:10.1007/s11414-007-9067-1
PMCID: PMC2214828  PMID: 17554630
opiate use disorder; MH/SA service utilization; Medicaid; state MH/SA agencies
19.  Alcohol Drinking Patterns and Health Care Utilization in a Managed Care Organization 
Health Services Research  2004;39(3):553-570.
Objective
To estimate the relationship between current drinking patterns and health care utilization over the previous two years in a managed care organization (MCO) among individuals who were screened for their alcohol use.
Study Design
Three primary care clinics at a large western MCO administered a short health and lifestyle questionnaire to all adult patients on their first visit to the clinic from March 1998 through December 1998. Patients who exceeded the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) guidelines for moderate drinking were given a more comprehensive alcohol screening using a modified version of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Health care encounter data for two years preceding the screening visit were linked to the remaining individuals who responded to one or both instruments. Using both quantity–frequency and AUDIT-based drinking pattern variables, we estimated negative binomial models of the relationship between drinking patterns and days of health care use, controlling for demographic characteristics and other variables.
Principal Findings
For both the quantity–frequency and AUDIT-based drinking pattern variables, current alcohol use is generally associated with less health care utilization relative to abstainers. This relationship holds even for heavier drinkers, although the differences are not always statistically significant. With some exceptions, the overall trend is that more extensive drinking patterns are associated with lower health care use.
Conclusions
Based on our sample, we find little evidence that alcohol use is associated with increased health care utilization. On the contrary, we find that alcohol use is generally associated with decreased health care utilization regardless of drinking pattern.
doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00244.x
PMCID: PMC1361024  PMID: 15149478
Alcohol; health care utilization; alcohol screening

Results 1-19 (19)