Substance use & addiction journal · 2026
Shared Medical Appointments for Substance Use Disorders: A Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sehgal Kush, Leal Ana Carolina, Barbetta Leticia Mara Dos Santos, Nero Neil, Anand Akhil
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Shared medical appointments (SMAs) integrate group-based clinical care with individual medical management and are increasingly used in the treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs) to improve access, engagement, and care coordination. However, their use, outcomes, and implementation in SUD care have not been systematically synthesized.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review registered with PROSPERO (CRD42025639504). MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Cochrane Central were searched from database inception through September 2025. Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and qualitative studies examining SMAs among adults with SUDs were included. Outcomes of interest included treatment engagement and retention, substance use outcomes, mental health and patient-reported outcomes, and implementation characteristics. Study quality was assessed across quantitative and qualitative designs, and findings were synthesized descriptively.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies, representing approximately 578 participants, met inclusion criteria. Twelve studies focused exclusively on opioid use disorder, 1 included both alcohol and opioid use disorders, and 1 did not specify substance type. Treatment retention was reported in 6 studies, with a median 6-month retention of 72.9%. Three studies reported reductions in substance use outcomes, and 2 reported improvements in depression or anxiety. Qualitative studies consistently described high patient satisfaction, peer support, and shared accountability. Implementation studies demonstrated feasibility across diverse outpatient settings, with substantial heterogeneity across study designs and outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: SMAs appear feasible and acceptable for addiction care and may support treatment retention and patient experience. Evidence remains heterogeneous and largely observational, highlighting the need for rigorous comparative studies to better define effectiveness and implementation.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review registered with PROSPERO (CRD42025639504). MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Cochrane Central were searched from database inception through September 2025. Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and qualitative studies examining SMAs among adults with SUDs were included. Outcomes of interest included treatment engagement and retention, substance use outcomes, mental health and patient-reported outcomes, and implementation characteristics. Study quality was assessed across quantitative and qualitative designs, and findings were synthesized descriptively.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies, representing approximately 578 participants, met inclusion criteria. Twelve studies focused exclusively on opioid use disorder, 1 included both alcohol and opioid use disorders, and 1 did not specify substance type. Treatment retention was reported in 6 studies, with a median 6-month retention of 72.9%. Three studies reported reductions in substance use outcomes, and 2 reported improvements in depression or anxiety. Qualitative studies consistently described high patient satisfaction, peer support, and shared accountability. Implementation studies demonstrated feasibility across diverse outpatient settings, with substantial heterogeneity across study designs and outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: SMAs appear feasible and acceptable for addiction care and may support treatment retention and patient experience. Evidence remains heterogeneous and largely observational, highlighting the need for rigorous comparative studies to better define effectiveness and implementation.