Corrigendum to "Developing an opioid use disorder treatment cascade: A review of quality measures" [Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 91 (2018) 57-68].
Corrigendum to "Developing an opioid use disorder treatment cascade: A review of quality measures" [Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 91 (2018) 57-68].
复制标题
“开发阿片类药物使用障碍治疗级联：质量措施审查”的勘误表 [Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 91 (2018) 57-68]。
DOI：
10.1016/j.jsat.2018.06.015
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Olfson,Mark
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Williams,ArthurRobin;Nunes,EdwardV;Bisaga,Adam;Pincus,HaroldA;Johnson,KimberlyA;Campbell,AimeeN;Remien,RobertH;Crystal,Stephen;Friedmann,PeterD;Levin,FrancesR;Olfson,Mark
报告了亚瑟罗宾威廉姆斯、爱德华V.努内斯、亚当比萨加、哈罗德A. Pincus，Kimberly A.作者：约翰逊坎贝尔，雷米安·H.放大图片作者：Peter D.作者：Friedmann，Frances R. Levin和Mark Olfson（药物滥用治疗杂志，2018年[8月]，1991年，57-68）。作者Robert H. Remien被错误地标记为Remien H。在原始文件中Remien。该名称现在正确地出现在本勘误表和原始记录中。(The尽管阿片类药物过量死亡率不断增加，但阿片类药物使用障碍（OUD）治疗的可用性和质量仍然存在问题。三种FDA批准的药物（美沙酮，丁丙诺啡和纳洛酮）有高质量的证据支持它们的使用，但大多数OUD患者没有接受它们，许多人在护理事件后复发。在一个统一的框架下制定和组织质量措施，如级联护理，可以改善系统层面的做法和治疗结果。在这种情况下，进行了审查，现有的质量措施有关的治疗OUD和文献评估这些措施在社区practice.MethodsSystematic搜索的效用的两个国家的质量措施交换所（国家质量论坛和机构的医疗保健研究和质量）的措施，可以适用于治疗OUD。措施分为结构性措施、过程性措施或结果性措施。第二阶段的搜索，然后进行奥维德/Medline集中在已发表的研究调查的可行性，可靠性和有效性的措施，预测他们的满意度，和相关的临床outcome.ResultsSeven质量措施，确定适用于治疗OUD。所有七项措施都是评估服务提供模式的过程措施。最近批准的一项措施解决了OUD患者药物辅助治疗的保留问题。确定了29项已发表的研究，评估质量措施，主要集中在一般成瘾治疗护理的启动和参与。大多数措施和相关研究并没有具体纳入证据基础的治疗OUD或评估患者水平的结果，如overset.ConclusionDespite相当大的进步，差距存在于OUD治疗的质量措施。制定统一的质量衡量框架，如“开放式发展的治疗级联”，将需要进一步阐述和完善现有的跨人群和跨环境的衡量标准。这样的框架可以成为在临床、组织和政策层面应用战略的基础，以扩大获得优质护理的机会并降低阿片类药物相关死亡率。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2021阿帕，保留所有权利）
Reports an error in" Developing an opioid use disorder treatment cascade: A review of quality measures" by Arthur Robin Williams, Edward V. Nunes, Adam Bisaga, Harold A. Pincus, Kimberly A. Johnson, Aimee N. Campbell, Remien H. Remien, Stephen Crystal, Peter D. Friedmann, Frances R. Levin and Mark Olfson (Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2018 [Aug], Vol 91, 57-68). The author Robert H. Remien was incorrectly labelled Remien H. Remien in the original paper. The name now appears correctly in this erratum and in the original record.(The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2018-30304-009).BackgroundDespite increasing opioid overdose mortality, problems persist in the availability and quality of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Three FDA-approved medications (methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone) have high quality evidence supporting their use, but most individuals with OUD do not receive them and many experience relapse following care episodes. Developing and organizing quality measures under a unified framework such as a Cascade of Care could improve system level practice and treatment outcomes. In this context, a review was performed of existing quality measures relevant to the treatment of OUD and the literature assessing the utility of these measures in community practice.MethodsSystematic searches of two national quality measure clearinghouses (National Quality Forum and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) were performed for measures that can be applied to the treatment of OUD. Measures were categorized as structural, process, or outcome measures. Second stage searches were then performed within Ovid/Medline focused on published studies investigating the feasibility, reliability, and validity of identified measures, predictors of their satisfaction, and related clinical outcomes.ResultsSeven quality measures were identified that are applicable to the treatment of OUD. All seven were process measures that assess patterns of service delivery. One recently approved measure addresses retention in medication-assisted treatment for patients with OUD. Twenty-nine published studies were identified that evaluate the quality measures, primarily focused on initiation and engagement in care for addiction treatment generally. Most measures and related studies do not specifically incorporate the evidence base for the treatment of OUD or assess patient level outcomes such as overdose.ConclusionDespite considerable progress, gaps exist in quality measures for OUD treatment. Development of a unified quality measurement framework such as an OUD Treatment Cascade will require further elaboration and refinement of existing measures across populations and settings. Such a framework could form the basis for applying strategies at clinical, organizational, and policy levels to expand access to quality care and reduce opioid-related mortality.(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)