Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here

take action
For every $1 states spend dollar sign on substance misuse and addiction, 94 cents go to shovel up the consequences instead of for treatment and prevention. TELL YOUR LEGISLATORS

What Can I Do?



Continuing Education
Free online courses for addiction counselors LEARN ONLINE

Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP

 

Proposed Accreditation Standards Could Compel U.S. Hospitals to Screen Patients for Addictions
September 11, 2009

Share Share Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Feature
By Bob Curley

A proposal to include screening and brief intervention for addictions in national quality and accreditation standards for hospitals could be one of the most important developments ever for addiction treatment -- or wind up being something far less significant, depending upon the outcome of ongoing discussions and feedback from the medical community.

The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) recently released for public comment a list of proposed new hospital performance measures for screening, brief intervention, referral and treatment (SBIRT) of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use. JCAHO accredited nearly 16,000 U.S. healthcare facilities, accounting for 95 percent of the country's hospital beds.

"These would be standardized measures, so every hospital would be expected to do it the same way," said Nancy Lawler, assistant project director and clinical lead for SBIRT at JCAHO. The SBIRT measures could become part of the JCAHO accreditation manual in late 2011 or 2012, assuming they survive review by the organization's advisory board, pilot testing and analysis procedures and are endorsed by the National Quality Forum, which helps set national healthcare performance standards and measures.

If the JCAHO decides that all hospitals should be required to report their outcomes on SBIRT as part of the accreditation process, it could "do more to medicalize substance-abuse problems than all the urging and pleading we've undertaken for the past 25 to 30 years," said SBIRT pioneer and trauma surgeon Larry Gentilello, M.D., a professor at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.

That's because such a requirement would essentially compel all U.S. hospitals to implement programs to screen their patients for addiction problems, potentially providing a huge boost in the numbers of individuals referred to treatment and, advocates say, saving money for the healthcare system in the process. Currently, just 4 percent of hospital patients receive evidence-based interventions for alcohol, tobacco or other drug use, according to researchers. Since 2006, the American College of Surgeons has required the 100-plus Level 1 trauma centers in the U.S., to conduct SBIRT, but the programs are rarely implemented in other hospitals.

"If it goes as we hope, it will require every patient admitted to the hospital to be screened for alcohol, tobacco and other drug abuse," said Eric Goplerud, Ph.D., co-chair of the Joint Commission's technical advisory group and director of Ensuring Solutions to Alcohol Problems, a project of the George Washington University Medical Center.

Feedback is Crucial

However, feedback from hospital administrators, treatment advocates and others will help determine the scope of the changes, and the final outcome could be something far less dramatic.

"The present thinking regarding the draft measure set on the topic of assessing and treating tobacco, alcohol and other drug use is that it will be offered to Joint Commission accredited hospitals as a set of core measures available for hospitals to choose in order to meet their performance measure accreditation requirement (most hospitals are required to collect data and report data on 4 core measure sets)," said Ann Watt, associate director of the Center for Performance Measurement at JCAHO's Division of Quality Measurement and Research. "There has been some discussion as to whether reporting should be required on this set (should it move forward) by all hospitals, but it is certainly much too early to speculate as to whether that will be the case."

Why you should submit comments
(letter from David Rosenbloom)

In other words, SBIRT performance measures -- if implemented at all -- could just become one choice on a menu of indicators that hospitals can choose from (known as JCAHO's Oryx measures) in order to meet their accreditation requirements. That would be a significant step towards acceptance of SBIRT by the mainstream medical community: "Even if this is among the performance measures that hospitals can choose, it is a big deal," said David Rosenbloom, president and CEO of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. "They constitute a remarkable and complete validation that tobacco, alcohol and drug addiction are chronic diseases that must be identified, treated, and followed after discharge in virtually all hospital patients. I think even the publication of the standards is a huge advance."

Such a limited implementation would not be likely to prompt widescale adoption of screening and brief intervention by U.S. hospitals, however. "The measures could become global and mandatory, but that decision has not been made and will be influenced by the strength of responses from the field to the initial descriptions of the measures," said Goplerud.

Comments on the proposed performance measures are being accepted by JCAHO through Sept. 30.

Cost, Outcomes Data Favor Broad Adoption, Advocates Say

JCAHO is seeking feedback on eight proposed process and outcome measures: Tobacco Use Assessment; Tobacco Use Treatment; Tobacco Use Treatment at Discharge; Tobacco Use Follow-up; Alcohol and Other Drug Use Screening; Alcohol and Other Drug Use and Dependence - Brief Intervention or Treatment; Alcohol and Other Drug Use and Dependence – Treatment Management at Discharge; and Alcohol and Other Drug Use and Dependence – Follow-up for Unhealthy Use and/or Disorders.

Advocates said that the measures, if adopted, could address some of the greatest unmet healthcare needs in U.S. hospitals. An estimated one in four hospital admissions is related to alcohol, tobacco, or other drug use.

If broadly construed, the JCAHO measures could require that all admitted patients be screened for excessive alcohol use, use of illicit drugs, misuse of prescription drugs, or tobacco use; that those who screen positive receive a brief intervention; that those found to have a dependence problem get treated in the hospital or referred to treatment at discharge; and that followups be conducted within two weeks of discharge, according to Goplerud.

The jury is still out on how the medical community will view the SBIRT proposal, but advocates say that providers can expect to yield $4 in reduced healthcare costs for every $1 invested in SBIRT. Goplerud noted that Medicaid and Medicaid now allows providers to seek reimbursement of SBIRT expenses. Also, recent research from the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment found that SBIRT "was feasible to implement and the self-reported patient status at 6 months indicated significant improvements over baseline, for illicit drug use and heavy alcohol use, with functional domains improved, across a range of healthcare settings and a range of patients."

"Hospital administrators may balk at this, but they haven't seen the data," said Gentilello. "There was no disruption of hospital routines, and SBIRT was well accepted by patients. There was a 34 percent reduction in alcohol use and a 64 percent reduction in drug use."

The pairing of alcohol and other drug screening with tobacco screening in the proposed JCAHO measures also could help win over skeptics, advocates said. "Tobacco-cessation interventions are so inexpensive that even if only the occasional patient stops smoking it will more than pay for itself," said Gentilello, who said that the cost of 1,000 tobacco screenings is easily outweighed by the cost of treating one cancer patient.

SHARE   

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by matthew gissen on 14 Sep 09 11:37 AM EDT
Since substance abuse has been identified high in the list of medical problems and is very costly to society it makes sense to implement SBIRT in hospitals. Early identification and intervention will serve the patient and our communities greatly. The benefits far outweigh the costs.

Posted by Sandra S on 14 Sep 09 12:31 PM EDT
SBIRT, if research based, would be less valuable if not mandatory for accreditation, but if a few hospitals made the screening and start/referral of treatment an universal practice, the nurses, respiratory therapists, anaesthesiologists, and all the other professionals who have separate responsibility to assess the patient for substsnce use and health issues will be standardized, and patients will be given health care information when they are at a more "teachable moment"

Posted by Dave Kerr on 14 Sep 09 12:32 PM EDT
Not knowing the red tape and financial issues that the implementation of SBIRT might cause a hospital, I can only give my opinion from a treatment provider perspective. From that point of view, I strongly agree with Mat Gissen that this is a good idea. Just helping those in need quickly and in a cost effective way makes sense ... $18,000/year to treat an addict at Integrity House in Newark vs $500 to $1,000/day to remain in a hospital.

Posted by Lisa Frederiksen on 14 Sep 09 03:38 PM EDT
Hospitals - especially ERs - have a tremendous opportunity to use brief interventions to help patients at least look at their drinking patterns. Another group to target -- via informational brochures in the ER waiting room, for example -- are the family members. Family members are often overcome with denial, which then contributes to the continuation of excuses for drinking behaviors.

Posted by Pamela Sachs, LCADC on 14 Sep 09 04:51 PM EDT
I whole heartedly agree with all of the above, however, how would you ever convince the BC/BS companies to reimburse same hospital for SBIRT. Most of them do not acknowledge that addiction is a medical disease. Bottom line is all that is ever looked at, now not in the future. Indigents still can't access care unless one is committed to a County or State facility. I'd be ecstatic to see the come to fruition. Managed care, the middleperson, will plotz. SACHS

Posted by Concerned Mom on 14 Sep 09 05:03 PM EDT
My daughter was hospitalized with pneumonia at Barnes Jewish Hospital in St. Louis when she had just begun using heroin. Her addiction was not discovered during her hospitalization. It was six months later before her addiction was discovered by which time she had a huge habit and had ODed and almost died. If she had been drug tested when she was hospitalized for pneumonia an intervention and treatment could have begun before she had developed a life threatening habit and contracted Hep C. Please, please, please start screening all patients! My daughter is white, upper middle class and a product of one of the best private schools in St. Louis. She did not fit the image of a heroin addict.

Posted by Joanne Crout, LISW, LCSW on 14 Sep 09 08:33 PM EDT
I have worked for 2 1/2 years in a federally funded SBIRT research project in rural New Mexico medical clinics and schools. The grant has ended and the results are impressive by any standard. Early screening, brief intervention and follow up treatment has diminished the incidence of suicide; motivated addicts of illegal substances, alcohol and tobacco to look at their lives differently and a substantial number of them have changed their lives because of this type of intervention. The support via brief treatment has made a significant difference in many of these people's lives. The medical community supported this project wholeheartedly and lament the end of the program's funding. SBIRT makes a difference; financially, in the lives it can save and to the medical industry in general. Look at our results and do the financial math...it's a win/win proposition. Support it.

Posted by M. Woycitzky HS/CDC Intern on 15 Sep 09 03:31 PM EDT
As a student earning a degree in Human Services to work as a CD counselor, I see this as a way to prevent some people from abusing ER visits,a way to help get more people into treatment that otherwise would not seek it out, and a way to promote better self care. As someone earlier had said, "The benefits far outweigh the costs." This statement could not be more true.

Posted by Ryan Hall on 30 Sep 09 09:37 PM EDT
I am an SBIRT Health Educator at a hospital in Littleton, Colorado. In 3 months I have screened more than 1,100 patients and, in many cases, been the first person to offer practical, non-judgmental education and help to those who overuse substances. Patients' response to me has been overwhelmingly positive. In fact, they often thank me for the work I do. The research is clear that SBIRT works. Patients listen and make healthy changes -- and everyone ends up better off for it.

SUBMIT A COMMENT:

Note: Comments are now held for moderator approval. More info

Name:

Comment:
(limit 250
words)

Enter this word
(help):
Change

GUIDELINES: 
Please keep comments on-topic, courteous, clean, non-commercial, and within the word limit.
Read the complete guidelines