Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBoudreaux, Edwin D.
dc.contributor.authorHaskins, Brianna
dc.contributor.authorHarralson, Tina
dc.contributor.authorBernstein, Edward
dc.date2022-08-11T08:08:34.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T15:59:17Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T15:59:17Z
dc.date.issued2015-10-01
dc.date.submitted2016-03-23
dc.identifier.citationDrug Alcohol Depend. 2015 Oct 1;155:236-42. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.07.014. Epub 2015 Jul 23. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.07.014">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn0376-8716 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.07.014
dc.identifier.pmid26297297
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/30633
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is effective for reducing risky alcohol use across a variety of medical settings. However, most programs have been unsustainable because of cost and time demands. Telehealth may alleviate on-site clinician burden. This exploratory study examines the feasibility of a new Remote Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (R-BIRT) model. METHODS: Eligible emergency department (ED) patients were enrolled into one of five models. (1) Warm Handoff: clinician-facilitated phone call during ED visit. (2) Patient Direct: patient-initiated call during visit. (3) Electronic Referral: patient contacted by R-BIRT personnel post visit. (4) Patient Choice: choice of models 1-3. (5) Modified Patient Choice: choice of models 1-2, Electronic Referral offered if 1-2 were declined. Once connected, a health coach offered assessment, counseling, and referral to treatment. Follow up assessments were conducted at 1 and 3 months. Primary outcomes measured were acceptance, satisfaction, and completion rates. RESULTS: Of 125 eligible patients, 50 were enrolled, for an acceptance rate of 40%. Feedback and satisfaction ratings were generally positive. Completion rates were 58% overall, with patients enrolled into a model wherein the consultation occurred during the ED visit, as opposed to after the visit, much more likely to complete a consultation, 90% vs. 10%, chi(2) (4, N=50)=34.8, p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: The R-BIRT offers a feasible alternative to in-person alcohol SBIRT and should be studied further. The public health impact of having accessible, sustainable, evidence-based SBIRT for substance use across a range of medical settings could be considerable.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=26297297&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.07.014
dc.subjectBrief motivational intervention
dc.subjectReferrals
dc.subjectScreening
dc.subjectSubstance abuse
dc.subjectTechnology
dc.subjectTelehealth
dc.subjectHealth Information Technology
dc.subjectPsychiatry and Psychology
dc.subjectSubstance Abuse and Addiction
dc.titleThe remote brief intervention and referral to treatment model: Development, functionality, acceptability, and feasibility
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleDrug and alcohol dependence
dc.source.volume155
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/faculty_pubs/909
dc.identifier.contextkey8370990
html.description.abstract<p>BACKGROUND: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is effective for reducing risky alcohol use across a variety of medical settings. However, most programs have been unsustainable because of cost and time demands. Telehealth may alleviate on-site clinician burden. This exploratory study examines the feasibility of a new Remote Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (R-BIRT) model.</p> <p>METHODS: Eligible emergency department (ED) patients were enrolled into one of five models. (1) Warm Handoff: clinician-facilitated phone call during ED visit. (2) Patient Direct: patient-initiated call during visit. (3) Electronic Referral: patient contacted by R-BIRT personnel post visit. (4) Patient Choice: choice of models 1-3. (5) Modified Patient Choice: choice of models 1-2, Electronic Referral offered if 1-2 were declined. Once connected, a health coach offered assessment, counseling, and referral to treatment. Follow up assessments were conducted at 1 and 3 months. Primary outcomes measured were acceptance, satisfaction, and completion rates.</p> <p>RESULTS: Of 125 eligible patients, 50 were enrolled, for an acceptance rate of 40%. Feedback and satisfaction ratings were generally positive. Completion rates were 58% overall, with patients enrolled into a model wherein the consultation occurred during the ED visit, as opposed to after the visit, much more likely to complete a consultation, 90% vs. 10%, chi(2) (4, N=50)=34.8, p < 0.001.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: The R-BIRT offers a feasible alternative to in-person alcohol SBIRT and should be studied further. The public health impact of having accessible, sustainable, evidence-based SBIRT for substance use across a range of medical settings could be considerable.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathfaculty_pubs/909
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Emergency Medicine
dc.source.pages236-42


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record