Cited by 64Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk

Evaluating comparative effectiveness of psychosocial interventions adjunctive to opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder: A systematic review with network meta-analyses

Open access
Rice, Danielle, Corace, Kimberly, Wolfe, Dianna, Esmaeilisaraji, Leila, Michaud, Alan, Grima, Alicia, Austin, Bradley, Douma, Reuben +13 more·2020·PLOS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend that individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) receive pharmacological and psychosocial interventions; however, the most appropriate psychosocial intervention is not known. In collaboration with people with lived experience, clinicians, and policy makers, we sought to assess the relative benefits of psychosocial interventions as an adjunct to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) among persons with OUD. METHODS: A review protocol was registered a priori (CRD42018090761), and a comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) was conducted from database inception to June 2020 in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Established methods for study selection and data extraction were used. Primary outcomes were treatment retention and opioid use (measured by urinalysis for opioid use and opioid abstinence outcomes). Odds ratios were estimated using network meta-analyses (NMA) as appropriate based on available evidence, and in remaining cases alternative approaches to synthesis were used. RESULTS: Seventy-two RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias evaluations commonly identified study limitations and poor reporting with regard to methods used for allocation concealment and selective outcome reporting. Due to inconsistency in reporting of outcome measures, only 48 RCTs (20 unique interventions, 5,404 participants) were included for NMA of treatment retention, where statistically significant differences were found when psychosocial interventions were used as an adjunct to OAT as compared to OAT-only. The addition of rewards-based interventions such as contingency management (alone or with community reinforcement approach) to OAT was superior to OAT-only. Few statistically significant differences between psychosocial interventions were identified among any other pairwise comparisons. Heterogeneity in reporting formats precluded an NMA for opioid use. A structured synthesis was undertaken for the remaining outcomes which included opioid use (n = 18 studies) and opioid abstinence (n = 35 studies), where the majority of studies found no significant difference between OAT plus psychosocial interventions as compared to OAT-only. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review offers a comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence and the limitations of current trials of psychosocial interventions applied as an adjunct to OAT for OUD. Clinicians and health services may wish to consider integrating contingency management in addition to OAT for OUD in their settings to improve treatment retention. Aside from treatment retention, few differences were consistently found between psychosocial interventions adjunctive to OAT and OAT-only. There is a need for high-quality RCTs to establish more definitive conclusions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration CRD42018090761.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0244401

Cites

115 of 115 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • There are no clear data of counseling interventions effective in combination with buprenorphine to inform detailed simulation of the bidirectional effect of counseling and MOUD.

    “there are no clear data of counseling interventions effective in combination with buprenorphine to inform detailed simulation of the bidirectional effect of counseling and MOUD.47”

    From Economic Evaluation of Extended-Release Buprenorphine for Persons With Opioid Use Disorder (2023) · cites this paper as [47]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says research on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions alongside opioid agonist therapy is limited, and Results > Study populations (page unavailable) shows that most included studies involved methadone rather than buprenorphine. This supports caution about the available evidence, but the paper does not specifically conclude that counseling with buprenorphine lacks clear effectiveness data or assess whether the data can inform a bidirectional simulation. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [38]Cochrane Effective Practice Organization of Care. EPOC Resources for review authors. epoc.cochrane.org/resources/epoc-resources-review-authors Published 2017. Accessed March 30, 2020.
  2. [111]Abrahms JL. A cognitive-behavioral versus nondirective group treatment program for opioid-addicted persons: An adjunct to methadone maintenance. International Journal of the Addictions. 1979; 14(4): 503– 11. 10.3109/10826087909054598 478698 · DOI
  3. [115]Chawarski MC, Zhou W, Schottenfeld RS. Behavioral drug and HIV risk reduction counseling (BDRC) in MMT programs in Wuhan, China: a pilot randomized clinical trial. Drug and alcohol dependence. 2011; 115(3): 237– 9. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.09.024 21159452 PMC3076517 · DOI
  4. [116]Day E, Copello A, Seddon JL, Christie M, Bamber D, Powell C, et al A pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial of an adjunct brief social network intervention in opiate substitution treatment services. BMC psychiatry. 2018; 18(1): 8 10.1186/s12888-018-1600-7 29334921 PMC5769270 · DOI
  5. [119]O’Neill K, Baker A, Cooke M, Collins E, Heather N, Wodak A. Evaluation of a cognitive-behavioural intervention for pregnant injecting drug users at risk of HIV infection. Addiction. 1996; 91(8): 1115– 25. 10.1046/j.1360-0443.1996.91811154.x 8828240 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rice, D., Corace, K., Wolfe, D., Esmaeilisaraji, L., Michaud, A., Grima, A., Austin, B., Douma, R., Barbeau, P., Butler, C., Willows, M., Poulin, P. A., Sproule, B. A., Porath, A., Garber, G., Taha, S., Garner, G., Skidmore, B., Moher, D., Thavorn, K., & Hutton, B.
Affiliations
  • Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (CA)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
  • Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (CA)
  • CAPSA (CA)
Corresponding author
Hutton, Brian
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2020-12-28
Volume
15
Issue
12
Pages
e0244401
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3114429589
Cited by
64
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HRB National Drugs Library (Health Research Board) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (397976)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Keywords
opioid use disorder, psychosocial interventions, opioid substitution therapy, contingency management, community reinforcement approach, treatment retention, opioid abstinence, adjunctive therapy, harm reduction, people with lived experience, harm reduction workers, harm reduction services
MeSH terms
Psychosocial Intervention, Analgesics, Opioid, Combined Modality Therapy, Humans, Opioid-Related Disorders, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Practice Guidelines as Topic

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