Cited by 28Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesMental Health Treatment and AccessOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

Evaluating the substance use disorder treatment gap in the United States, 2016−2019: A population health observational study

Open access
Sahker, Ethan, Pro, George, Poudyal, Hemant, Furukawa, Toshi A.·2024·The American Journal on Addictions

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Only 10% of Americans with substance use disorders (SUDs) receive treatment with insufficient treatment access and screening practices proposed and potential contributing factors. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) data to assess individuals with SUDs receiving treatment between 2016 and 2019 (survey n = 12,111; weighted n = 12,394,214). Demographic, access, and screening characteristics were investigated as predictors of treatment receipt using time-series logistic regression analyses to test trends and assessed treatment receipt odds, controlling for demographic and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: For those with past-year SUDs, 13.0% reported receiving past-year SUD treatment (survey n = 1605; weighted n = 1,612,154). The SUD treatment receipt rate remained statistically stable from 2016 to 2019, with a nonsignificant treatment receipt trend declining from 14% to 12%. Treatment changes were notable among Native Americans (+53.80%), Pacific Islanders (+94.10%), multiracial (-59.96%), ages 65+ (-70.18%), and ages 12-17 (-50.70%). In the regression model, race, sex, age, insurance status, and receiving mental health treatment were associated with SUD treatment receipt. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The treatment gap remains substantial and stable. Annually, about 87% of Americans with SUDs are not receiving the treatment they need. Asian Americans were less likely and those attending general mental health services were more likely to receive treatment. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: We present an updated SUD treatment gap evaluation, and identify access and screening characteristics associated with SUD treatment receipt. Policymakers, clinicians, and researchers must continue improving access and identification of those in need of care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajad.13465

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sahker, E., Pro, G., Poudyal, H., & Furukawa, T. A.
Affiliations
  • Kyoto University (JP)
  • University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (US)
Corresponding author
Sahker, Ethan
Venue
The American Journal on Addictions
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-08-15
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
36-47
ISSN
  • 1055-0496 (ISSN-L)
  • 1521-0391
OpenAlex
W4385850921
Cited by
28
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9
FWCI
5.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • American Journal on Addictions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
  • Kyoto University Research Information Repository (Kyoto University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
substance use disorders, treatment gap, treatment access, substance use disorder screening, treatment receipt, racial and ethnic disparities, insurance status, psychotherapy, adolescents, older adults, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, Asian Americans, United States
MeSH terms
Cross-Sectional Studies, Health Surveys, Humans, Mental Health Services, Retrospective Studies, United States, 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