Cited by 73Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of the long-term treatment and support of substance use disorders

Beaulieu, Myriam, Tremblay, Joël, Baudry, Claire, Pearson, Jessica, Bertrand, Karine·2021·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

Rationale The reconceptualization of substance use disorders (SUD) as a chronic phenomenon calls for a paradigm shift in service provision, particularly by way of long-term treatment and support. Studies that have evaluated the efficacy of long-term treatment models seem to indicate that they are an improvement on more standard short-term treatments, even though these studies do not take the durations into consideration. Objective Measure the efficacy of SUD treatments and support lasting 18 months or more regarding their ability to decrease substance use as compared to shorter treatments. Methods A meta-analysis based on a systematic literature review was conducted. Eight databases were consulted for peer-reviewed studies. Certain variables were coded as moderators: intervention length, participant characteristics, and treatment characteristics. Results The main results suggest that the people who received a planned long-term treatment or support had a 23.9 % greater chance of abstaining or consuming moderately than did people who received a shorter standard treatment (OR = 1.347 [CI 95 % = 1.087-1.668], p Conclusions The reconceptualization of the SUD as a chronic disorder among people with this problem leads us to reconsider both the length of the services provided and the paradigms underlying their organization.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114289

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beaulieu, M., Tremblay, J., Baudry, C., Pearson, J., & Bertrand, K.
Affiliations
  • Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (CA)
  • Université de Sherbrooke (CA)
Corresponding author
Beaulieu, Myriam
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-09
Volume
285
Pages
114289
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3190160464
Cited by
73
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7
FWCI
1.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-18-GEND-0003)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
substance use disorders, long-term treatment, treatment duration, chronic disease model, substance use abstinence, treatment efficacy, addiction services
MeSH terms
Chronic Disease, Humans, Substance-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review