Cited by 52Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesHealth Policy Implementation ScienceSmoking Behavior and Cessation

Sustaining Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) services in health‐care settings

Singh, Manu, Gmyrek, Amanda, Hernandez, Amy, Damon, Donna, Hayashi, Susan·2017·Addiction

Abstract

Aims: To assess the sustainability of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) services after cessation of initial start‐up funding. Design: Descriptive study with quantitative and qualitative data collected from 34 staff participants from six grantees (comprising 103 sites) funded previously through a large, federally supported SBIRT program. Setting: Primary care out‐patient clinics and hospitals in the United States. Participants: Thirty‐four grantee‐related staff members, including administrators, evaluators, key stakeholders and SBIRT service providers from six grantees. Measurements: Changes to levels and types of service delivery activities after federal funding stopped, alternative sources of funding and obstacles to delivery of services. Findings: Of the 103 original sites in the six SBIRT grantee programs, 69 sites continued providing services in some capacity (same as before, reduced, modified or expanded). Most of the 69 sites (67%) adapted and redesigned the delivery of SBIRT services post‐initial grant funding. In addition, new sites were added after grant funding ended, bringing the total number of sites to 88. Analysis of participant responses identified four primary factors that influenced SBIRT sustainability: presence of champions, funding availability, systemic change and SBIRT practitioner characteristics. Conclusions: Almost 70% of the Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) services in the United States funded initially through a federal program were able to sustain operations after federal funding ceased and some expanded SBIRT services beyond the original sites. The key factors related to sustainability were securing new funding, having champions, adapting and making system changes and managing program staffing challenges.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/add.13654

Cites

15 of 15 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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Singh, M., Gmyrek, A., Hernandez, A., Damon, D., & Hayashi, S.
Affiliations
  • JBS International (United States) (US)
  • RTI International (US)
  • UConn Health (US)
Corresponding author
Singh, Manu
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01-10
Volume
112
Issue
S2
Pages
92-100
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W2579597442
Cited by
52
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 10
FWCI
5.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
SBIRT, program sustainability, substance use disorder screening, primary care, hospital services, funding sources, champions, systemic change, program adaptation, program staffing
MeSH terms
Emergency Service, Hospital, Humans, Mass Screening, Outpatient Clinics, Hospital, Primary Health Care, Referral and Consultation, United States, Program Evaluation, Substance-Related Disorders, Motivational Interviewing

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