Barriers and Facilitators to Coordinating Care With High-Risk, High-Cost Disabled Medicaid Beneficiaries: Perspectives of Frontline Staff and Participating Clients.

This evaluation was designed to examine the perspectives of 15 frontline staff who implemented a managed care program and 154 high-risk, high-cost disabled Medicaid clients who were participants in the program. Results indicated that positive relationships between staff and clients played a key role in facilitating program implementation. Challenges included finding ways to provide a wide breadth of services including food, shelter, and transportation; handling difficulties following from staff turnover; and creating transitions of care for clients to community health clinics. Staff identified training in motivational interviewing and having both nurse care managers and social workers collaboratively deliver the intervention as among the most powerful components of the program. Staff and clients expressed high levels of satisfaction with the program, and clients believed they were experiencing positive impacts of the program. Lessons learned from this study may inform the design of services as the Affordable Care Act continues to unfold.

Are medical marijuana users different from recreational users? The view from primary care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Marijuana is currently approved for medical use in 23 states. Both clinicians and the lay public have questioned whether users of marijuana for medical purposes are different from users of marijuana for recreational purposes. This study examined similarities and differences in important clinical characteristics between users of medical marijuana and users of recreational marijuana. METHODS: The sample consisted of 868 adult primary care patients in Washington State, who reported use of medical marijuana (n = 131), recreational marijuana (n = 525), or drugs other than marijuana (n = 212). Retention was over 87% at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month assessments. RESULTS: The majority of medical, psychiatric, substance use, and service utilization characteristic comparisons were not significant. However, medical marijuana users had significantly more medical problems, a significantly larger proportion reported >15 days medical problems in the past month, and significantly smaller proportions reported no pain and no mobility limitations (p < .001). Medical marijuana users also had significantly lower drug problem severity, lower alcohol problem severity, and significantly larger proportions reported using marijuana alone and concomitant opioid use only (p < .001). There was no significant difference between medical and recreational users in the percentage using marijuana with at least two additional substances (48% vs. 58%, respectively, p = .05). CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Although our results suggest that there are few distinct differences between medical and recreational users of marijuana, the differences observed, while mostly very small in effect size (<.2), are consistent with at least some medical users employing marijuana to relieve symptoms and distress associated with medical illness.

Brief intervention for problem drug use in safety-net primary care settings: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Although brief intervention is effective for reducing problem alcohol use, few data exist on its effectiveness for reducing problem drug use, a common issue in disadvantaged populations seeking care in safety-net medical settings (hospitals and community health clinics serving low-income patients with limited or no insurance). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether brief intervention improves drug use outcomes compared with enhanced care as usual. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized clinical trial with blinded assessments at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months conducted in 7 safety-net primary care clinics in Washington State. Of 1621 eligible patients reporting any problem drug use in the past 90 days, 868 consented and were randomized between April 2009 and September 2012. Follow-up participation was more than 87% at all points. INTERVENTIONS: Participants received a single brief intervention using motivational interviewing, a handout and list of substance abuse resources, and an attempted 10-minute telephone booster within 2 weeks (n = 435) or enhanced care as usual, which included a handout and list of substance abuse resources (n = 433). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were self-reported days of problem drug use in the past 30 days and Addiction Severity Index-Lite (ASI) Drug Use composite score. Secondary outcomes were admission to substance abuse treatment; ASI composite scores for medical, psychiatric, social, and legal domains; emergency department and inpatient hospital admissions, arrests, mortality, and human immunodeficiency virus risk behavior. RESULTS: Mean days used of the most common problem drug at baseline were 14.40 (SD, 11.29) (brief intervention) and 13.25 (SD, 10.69) (enhanced care as usual); at 3 months postintervention, means were 11.87 (SD, 12.13) (brief intervention) and 9.84 (SD, 10.64) (enhanced care as usual) and not significantly different (difference in differences, ß = 0.89 [95% CI, -0.49 to 2.26]). Mean ASI Drug Use composite score at baseline was 0.11 (SD, 0.10) (brief intervention) and 0.11 (SD, 0.10) (enhanced care as usual) and at 3 months was 0.10 (SD, 0.09) (brief intervention) and 0.09 (SD, 0.09) (enhanced care as usual) and not significantly different (difference in differences, ß = 0.008 [95% CI, -0.006 to 0.021]). During the 12 months following intervention, no significant treatment differences were found for either variable. No significant differences were found for secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A one-time brief intervention with attempted telephone booster had no effect on drug use in patients seen in safety-net primary care settings. This finding suggests a need for caution in promoting widespread adoption of this intervention for drug use in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00877331.

Record linkage software in the public domain: a comparison of Link Plus, The Link King, and a 'basic' deterministic algorithm.

The study objective was to compare the accuracy of a deterministic record linkage algorithm and two public domain software applications for record linkage (The Link King and Link Plus). The three algorithms were used to unduplicate an administrative database containing personal identifiers for over 500,000 clients. Subsequently, a random sample of linked records was submitted to four research staff for blinded clerical review. Using reviewers' decisions as the 'gold standard', sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPVs) were estimated. Optimally, sensitivity and PPVs in the mid 90s could be obtained from both The Link King and Link Plus. Sensitivity and PPVs using a basic deterministic algorithm were 79 and 98 per cent respectively. Thus the full feature set of The Link King makes it an attractive option for SAS users. Link Plus is a good choice for non-SAS users as long as necessary programming resources are available for processing record pairs identified by Link Plus.

Treatment response by primary drug of abuse: does methamphetamine make a difference?

The purposes of this study were to examine the outcomes of a sample of patients receiving publicly funded substance abuse treatment in Washington State and to compare the outcomes of those using methamphetamine (MA) with patients using other drugs of abuse. All data for this study came from administrative systems in Washington State, and the outcomes included completion of and readmission to treatment, employment, and various forms of criminal justice involvement. Treatment records were linked to outcome data using both deterministic and probabilistic matching techniques. Patients were tracked for 1 year following their discharge, and analyses were performed separately on a study population of adults and a study population of youth. For both adults and youth, the results showed that across outcomes, there were few differences between MA users and users of other hard drugs, whereas there were consistent differences between MA users and users of alcohol and marijuana. Alcohol and marijuana users tended to have more positive outcomes than the other groups. Future research should focus on more detailed analyses of the type of treatment received by patients, particularly for MA users.

Does gender-specific substance abuse treatment for women promote continuity of care?

Research has stressed the value of providing specialized services to women and suggests the importance of treatment duration. This quasi-experimental retrospective study reports on the continuity of care for women with children who were admitted to long-term residential substance abuse treatment. Women were admitted to 7 agencies offering specialized, women's only treatment (SP, n = 747) or to 9 agencies that provided standard mixed-gender treatment (ST, n = 823). Client and treatment data were gathered from administrative sources. We hypothesized that women in specialized treatment would demonstrate higher continuing care rates after controlling for treatment completion and length of stay. Women in SP programs (37%) were more likely than those in ST programs (14%) to continue care. Multivariate analyses revealed that SP clients who completed treatment with longer stays were most likely to continue care. The findings show that specialized treatment for women promotes continuing care and demonstrate the importance of treatment completion.

Treatment readmissions and criminal recidivism in youth following participation in chemical dependency treatment.

The purpose of this study was to use administrative records of admissions to substance abuse treatment to construct episodes of care for publicly funded adolescent clients in Washington State, and then to analyze two important outcomes after an index episode: readmissions to treatment and criminal convictions (including felony convictions and any conviction). The study population was youth, ages 14 to 17, who began and ended an index episode in 1997 and 1998 (n=5903). The youth were followed for 18 months after the end of their episode, and survival analysis techniques were used to determine the treatment correlates of the outcomes. Clients who completed treatment, compared to those who did not, had significantly lower risks of each outcome, while those with treatment episodes longer than 90 days had lower risks of readmission and felony convictions.

Integrating Primary Care Into Community Mental Health Centers: Impact on Utilization and Costs of Health Care.

OBJECTIVE: This evaluation was designed to assess the impact of providing integrated primary and mental health care on utilization and costs for outpatient medical, inpatient hospital, and emergency department treatment among persons with serious mental illness. METHODS: Two safety-net, community mental health centers that received a Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Primary and Behavioral Health Care Integration (PBHCI) grant were the focus of this study. Clinic 1 had a ten-year history of providing integrated services whereas clinic 2 began integrated services with the PBHCI grant. Difference-in-differences (DID) analyses were used to compare individuals enrolled in the PBHCI programs (N=373, clinic 1; N=389, clinic 2) with propensity score-matched comparison groups of equal size at each site by using data obtained from medical records. RESULTS: Relative to the comparison groups, a higher proportion of PBHCI clients used outpatient medical services at both sites following program enrollment (p<.003, clinic 1; p<.001, clinic 2). At clinic 1, PBHCI was also associated with a reduction in the proportion of clients with an inpatient hospital admission (p=.04) and a trend for a reduction in inpatient hospital costs per member per month of $217.68 (p=.06). Hospital-related cost savings were not observed for PBHCI clients at clinic 2 nor were there significant differences between emergency department use or costs for PBHCI and comparison groups at either clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Investments in PBHCI can improve access to outpatient medical care for persons with severe mental illness and may also curb hospitalizations and associated costs in more established programs.

Utility of Point-of-care Urine Drug Tests in the Treatment of Primary Care Patients With Drug Use Disorders.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if urine drug tests (UDTs) can detect under-reporting of drug use (ie, negative self-report, but positive UDT) and identify patient characteristics associated with underreporting when treating substance use disorders in primary care. METHODS: Self-reported use (last 30 d) and UDTs were gathered at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months from 829 primary care patients participating in a drug use intervention study. Rates of under-reporting were calculated for all drugs, cannabis, stimulants, opioids, and sedatives. Logistic regressions were used to identify characteristics associated with under-reporting. RESULTS: Among the participants, 40% (n = 331) denied drug use in the prior 30 days despite a corresponding positive UDT during at least 1 assessment. Levels of under-reporting during 1 or more assessments were 3% (n = 22) for cannabis, 20% (n = 167) for stimulants, 27% (n = 226) for opioids, and 13% (n = 106) for sedatives. Older (odds ratio [OR] 1.04), female (OR 1.66), or disabled (OR 1.42) individuals were more likely to under-report any drug use. Under-reporting of stimulant use was also more likely in individuals with lower levels of educational attainment, previous arrests, and family and social problems. Under-reporting of opioid use was more likely in those with other drug problems, but less likely in those with better physical health, more severe alcohol and psychiatric comorbidities, and African-Americans. CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of cannabis, UDTs are important assessment tools when treating drug use disorders in primary care. UDTs might be particularly helpful when treating patients who are older, female, disabled, have legal and social problems, and have more severe drug problems.

Comparison of Homeless and Non-Homeless Problem Drug Users Recruited from Primary Care Safety-Net Clinics.

INTRODUCTION: The present study of homeless non-treatment-seeking problem drug users was designed to complement and extend previous studies which focused exclusively on treatment-seeking homeless problem drug users. METHOD: Data were available for 866 primary care patients with drug problems, 30% homeless and 70% housed. RESULTS: In the 2 years prior to baseline, homeless participants had less chronic medical co-morbidity than problem drug users who were housed yet were significantly more likely to have used emergency department services, to have used them more frequently, and at higher cost. Compared to their housed counterparts, homeless participants were also more likely to have been admitted to specialized chemical dependency treatment and/or detoxification services, to have been arrested for a felony or gross misdemeanor, and to report having psychiatric problems in the prior 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Additional support may be necessary for homeless patients presenting in primary care to benefit from substance abuse treatment given their more severe drug use problems coupled with their co-morbid health, psychiatric, and psychosocial problems.

Chronic Disease and Chemical Dependency Treatment in Primary Care Patients With Problem Drug Use.

This article examines whether chronic disease is associated with chemical dependency treatment in primary care patients with problem drug use. Chronic disease was common in 781 disadvantaged individuals who had problem drug use and were seen in primary care clinics affiliated with a public safety-net hospital. Individuals had, on average, 5.4 chronic medical conditions, and overall 57% had low severity chronic disease. In the year following enrollment, 14% had chemical dependency treatment. Severity of chronic disease was not associated with chemical dependency treatment (p = .26). In summary, chronic disease neither hindered chemical dependency treatment, nor did it facilitate such treatment.

Clinical Needs of Patients with Problem Drug Use.

INTRODUCTION: Illicit drug use is a serious public health problem associated with significant co-occurring medical disorders, mental disorders, and social problems. Yet most individuals with drug use disorders have never been treated, though they often seek medical treatment in primary care. The purpose of this study was to examine the baseline characteristics of people presenting in primary care with a range of problem drug use severity to identify their clinical needs. METHODS: We examined sociodemographic characteristics, medical and psychiatric comorbidities, drug use severity, social and legal problems, and service utilization for 868 patients with drug problems. These patients were recruited from primary care clinics in a medical safety net setting. Based on Drug Abuse Screening Test results, individuals were categorized as having low, intermediate, or substantial/severe drug use severity. RESULTS: Patients with substantial/severe drug use severity had serious drug use (opiates, stimulants, sedatives, intravenous drugs); high levels of homelessness (50%), psychiatric comorbidity (69%), and arrests for serious crimes (24%); and frequent use of expensive emergency department and inpatient hospitals. Patients with low drug use severity were primarily users of marijuana, with little reported use of other drugs, less psychiatric comorbidity, and more stable lifestyles. Patients with intermediate drug use severity fell in between the substantial/severe and low drug use severity subgroups on most variables. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with the highest drug use severity are likely to require specialized psychiatric and substance abuse care, in addition to ongoing medical care that is equipped to address the consequences of severe/substantial drug use, including intravenous drug use. Because of their milder symptoms, patients with low drug use severity may benefit from a collaborative care model that integrates psychiatric and substance abuse care in the primary care setting. Patients with intermediate drug use severity may benefit from selective application of interventions suggested for patients with the highest and lowest drug use severity. Primary care safety net clinics are in a key position to serve patients with problem drug use by developing a range of responses that are locally effective and that may also inform national efforts to establish patient-centered medical homes and to implement the Affordable Care Act.

Correlates of Opioid Use in Adults With Self-Reported Drug Use Recruited From Public Safety-Net Primary Care Clinics.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare demographic, clinical, and survival characteristics of drug-using safety-net primary care patients who used or did not use opioids, and to examine treatment implications of our findings. METHODS: The sample consisted of 868 adults who reported illicit drug use in the 90 days before study enrollment, 396 (45.6%) of whom were opioid users. RESULTS: Multiple measures indicated that, as a group, opioid users were less physically and psychiatrically healthy than drug users who did not endorse using opioids, and were heavy users of medical services (eg, emergency departments, inpatient hospitals, and outpatient medical) at considerable public expense. After adjusting for age, they were 2.61 (confidence interval, 1.48-4.61) times more likely to die in the 1 to 5 years after study enrollment and more likely to die from accidental poisoning than nonopioid users. Subgroup analyses suggested patients using any nonprescribed opioids had more serious drug problems including more intravenous drug use and greater HIV risk than patients using opioids only as prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: Use of opioids adds a dimension of severity over and above illicit drug use as it presents in the primary care setting. Opioid users may benefit from psychiatric and addiction care integrated into their primary care setting, naloxone overdose prevention kits, and prevention efforts such as clean needle exchanges. Addiction or primary care providers are in a key position to facilitate change among such patients, especially the third or more opioid users having a goal of abstinence from drugs.

A randomized controlled trial of intensive care management for disabled Medicaid beneficiaries with high health care costs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes of a registered nurse-led care management intervention for disabled Medicaid beneficiaries with high health care costs. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Washington State Department of Social and Health Services Client Outcomes Database, 2008-2011. STUDY DESIGN: In a randomized controlled trial with intent-to-treat analysis, outcomes were compared for the intervention (n = 557) and control groups (n = 563). A quasi-experimental subanalysis compared outcomes for program participants (n = 251) and propensity score-matched controls (n = 251). DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Administrative data were linked to describe costs and use of health services, criminal activity, homelessness, and death. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In the intent-to-treat analysis, the intervention group had higher odds of outpatient mental health service use and higher prescription drug costs than controls in the postperiod. In the subanalysis, participants had fewer unplanned hospital admissions and lower associated costs; higher prescription drug costs; higher odds of long-term care service use; higher drug/alcohol treatment costs; and lower odds of homelessness. CONCLUSIONS: We found no health care cost savings for disabled Medicaid beneficiaries randomized to intensive care management. Among participants, care management may have the potential to increase access to needed care, slow growth in the number and therefore cost of unplanned hospitalizations, and prevent homelessness. These findings apply to start-up care management programs targeted at high-cost, high-risk Medicaid populations.

The Partnership Access Line: evaluating a child psychiatry consult program in Washington State.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a telephone-based child mental health consult service for primary care providers (PCPs). DESIGN: Record review, provider surveys, and Medicaid database analysis. SETTING: Washington State Partnership Access Line (PAL) program. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2285 PAL consultations by 592 PCPs between April 1, 2008, and April 30, 2011. INTERVENTIONS: Primary care provider-initiated consultations with PAL service. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The PAL call characteristics, PCP feedback surveys, and Medicaid claims between April 2007 and December 2009 for fee-for-service Medicaid children before and after a PAL call. RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent of calls were about children with serious emotional disturbances, and 66% of calls were about children taking psychiatric medications. Primary care providers nearly always received new psychosocial treatment advice (87% of calls) and were more likely to receive advice to start rather than stop a medication (46% vs 24% of calls). Primary care provider feedback surveys reported uniformly positive satisfaction with the program. Among Medicaid children, there was significant increases in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and antidepressant medication use after the PAL call but no significant change in reimbursements for mental health medications (P < .05). Children with a history of foster care experienced a 132% increase in outpatient mental health visits after the PAL call (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care providers used PAL for psychosocial and medication treatment assistance for particularly high-needs children and were satisfied with the service. Furthermore, PAL was associated with increased use of outpatient mental health care for some children.

Impact of sexual orientation and co-occurring disorders on chemical dependency treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to compare client characteristics at admission to chemical dependency (CD) treatment by sexual orientation, examine sexual orientation as a predictor of co-occurring CD and mental health problems (hereafter referred to as co-occurring disorders [COD]), and to examine the effect of sexual orientation and COD on 1-year CD treatment outcomes (treatment completion, treatment reentry, and arrest) among men and women. METHOD: This retrospective cohort study used 2004-2008 data from publicly funded CD treatment programs in Washington State (n = 69,525 clients). Bivariate comparisons were made using chi-square tests; logistic and Cox regressions were to estimate risk in multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Risk factors associated with sexual minority status (lesbian/gay/bisexual) included COD, primary drug (vs. alcohol) use, and greater substance use. In multivariate analyses, sexual minority clients were more than twice as likely as their heterosexual counterparts to have COD. COD, but not sexual orientation, negatively predicted treatment completion and arrest overall in the year following treatment among male and female clients and positively predicted treatment reentry and intimate partner violence-related arrest among women. COD moderated the effect of sexual orientation on arrest; gay men with COD were less likely to be arrested, particularly for substance use and other violence-related crimes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of assessing mental health among sexual minority clients in treatment settings and addressing issues specific to both female and male sexual minorities.

Testing the effects of brief intervention in primary care for problem drug use in a randomized controlled trial: rationale, design, and methods.

BACKGROUND: A substantial body of research has established the effectiveness of brief interventions for problem alcohol use. Following these studies, national dissemination projects of screening, brief intervention (BI), and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for alcohol and drugs have been implemented on a widespread scale in multiple states despite little existing evidence for the impact of BI on drug use for non-treatment seekers. This article describes the design of a study testing the impact of SBIRT on individuals with drug problems, its contributions to the existing literature, and its potential to inform drug policy. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized controlled trial of an SBIRT intervention carried out in a primary care setting within a safety net system of care. Approximately 1,000 individuals presenting for scheduled medical care at one of seven designated primary care clinics who endorse problematic drug use when screened are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to BI versus enhanced care as usual (ECAU). Individuals in both groups are reassessed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after baseline. Self-reported drug use and other psychosocial measures collected at each data point are supplemented by urine analysis and public health-related data from administrative databases. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute to the existing literature by providing evidence for the impact of BI on problem drug use based on a broad range of measures including self-reported drug use, urine analysis, admission to drug abuse treatment, and changes in utilization and costs of health care services, arrests, and death with the intent of informing policy and program planning for problem drug use at the local, state, and national levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00877331.

Self-reported alcohol and drug use six months after brief intervention: do changes in reported use vary by mental-health status?

BACKGROUND: Although brief intervention (BI) for alcohol and other drug problems has been associated with subsequent decreased levels of self-reported substance use, there is little information in the extant literature as to whether individuals with co-occurring hazardous substance use and mental illness would benefit from BI to the same extent as those without mental illness. This is an important question, as mental illness is estimated to co-occur in 37% of individuals with an alcohol use disorder and in more than 50% of individuals with a drug use disorder. The goal of this study was to explore differences in self-reported alcohol and/or drug use in patients with and without mental illness diagnoses six months after receiving BI in a hospital emergency department (ED). METHODS: This study took advantage of a naturalistic situation where a screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) program had been implemented in nine large EDs in the US state of Washington as part of a national SBIRT initiative. A subset of patients who received BI was interviewed six months later about current alcohol and drug use. Linear regression was used to assess whether change in substance use measures differed among patients with a mental illness diagnosis compared with those without. Data were analyzed for both a statewide (n = 828) and single-hospital (n = 536) sample. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between mentally ill and non-mentally ill subgroups in either sample with regard to self-reported hazardous substance use at six-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that BI may not have a differing impact based on the presence of a mental illness diagnosis. Given the high prevalence of mental illness among individuals with alcohol and other drug problems, this finding may have important public health implications.

Effect of co-occurring disorders and intimate partner violence on substance abuse treatment outcomes.

This retrospective cohort study examined risk factors for co-occurring substance use and mental disorders (COD) and the effect of COD and intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization among women and IPV-related arrest among men on 1-year substance abuse treatment outcomes. The study sample included clients admitted to Washington State publicly funded substance abuse treatment facilities in 2004-2007. COD was associated with a high substance use and IPV risk profile at admission. Having a COD decreased the odds of completing treatment by 30% among men and women and increased the risk of treatment reentry by 9% and 12% among men and women, respectively. IPV also decreased the odds of completing treatment among women and increased the risk of treatment reentry among men. Men with COD were less likely than those without COD to be arrested for substance-related crimes but more likely to be arrested for violence-related crimes in the follow-up period. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Impact of brief interventions and brief treatment on admissions to chemical dependency treatment.

This study examined two issues. One, whether individuals with possible substance use disorders were more likely to be admitted to specialized chemical dependency (CD) treatment after receiving a brief intervention (BI) - either alone or in combination with other services - than similar individuals who did not receive a BI. Two, whether participation in brief treatment (BT) following a BI was helpful in facilitating admission to CD treatment. The study took place in the emergency department (ED) of a large urban safety-net hospital where CD professionals screened patients for alcohol/drug problems and provided BI, BT, and referral to specialized CD treatment when appropriate (SBIRT). Substance use disorders were indicated by alcohol/drug problems noted in administrative records. Hospital records were used to match patients with likely substance use disorders who received BI with similar ED patients who had not been screened. Admission to publicly funded CD treatment was determined by matching patient identifiers to state administrative records of CD treatment. Results indicated that individuals with a likely substance use disorder who received a BI (regardless of subsequent participation in BT) were significantly more likely to enter specialized CD treatment in the subsequent year than similar individuals who did not receive a BI. This result was particularly pronounced for patients with no CD treatment in the past two years. Results also indicated that participation in BT facilitated admission into CD treatment. The results suggest that SBIRT programs could serve an important role in increasing entry to specialized treatment for individuals with substance use disorders.