We canât show the full text here under this license. Use the link below to read it at the source.
Quality indicators for substance use disorder care: a scoping review protocol
Mar 29, 2025BMJ open
Key measures of quality in substance use disorder treatment: a review plan
AI simplified
Abstract
(QIs) for substance use disorder (SUD) care have been established but are not commonly applied for routine measurement.
- Substance use disorders (SUDs) significantly affect public health, leading to high morbidity and mortality rates.
- There is a notable gap in the implementation and adherence to evidence-based care for individuals with SUDs.
- Measuring the (QoC) for SUDs is critical to improving treatment and services.
- Existing QIs for SUD care vary by region and often have different definitions and criteria, complicating their application.
- A Delphi process will be used to prioritize identified QIs in the context of SUD care in Alberta, Canada.
AI simplified
INTRODUCTION: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are a major public health challenge, affecting millions of individuals globally and contributing to substantial morbidity and mortality. Individuals with SUDs face numerous barriers to accessing high-quality healthcare, leaving vulnerable populations susceptible to the undertreatment of SUDs. Despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines and effective interventions for SUD, there is a notable gap in the implementation and adherence to evidence-based care.Measuring the (QoC) is a critical initial step toward enhancing the treatment and services provided to individuals with SUDs. While (QIs) for SUD care have been established in various regions, including the USA, Canada and the UK, the application of QIs for the routine measurement of QoC for SUDs is not common. Identifying and characterising the areas of low QoC in SUD management can highlight critical targets for quality improvement initiatives. However, QoC measurement in SUD care is complex, with potentially redundant indicators derived from different sources, each with its own definitions, criteria and data requirements. This scoping review aims to explore the range of QIs that are currently available to assess the QoC for individuals with SUDs.
METHODS: The review will follow the Arksey and O'Malley framework and incorporate methods proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and Levac. Reporting will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping review guidelines (PRISMA). Stage 1: the research question will be identified, clarifying the purpose of the scoping review. Stage 2: six academic databases (Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, Medline, APA PsycINFO and Scopus) and grey literature sources will be searched for studies reporting QIs and published from 1990 until 2023. Stage 3: study screening and selection will be completed by two reviewers independently to review titles, abstracts and full texts based on study inclusion criteria. Stage 4: a pilot data charting form has been developed to capture information from each study, including study design, population details, setting, methodology for QI development and reported QIs. Stage 5: data synthesis and consultation will employ thematic analysis and frequency counts to categorise identified QIs within established domains for quality of healthcare. Any discrepancies in data extraction or thematic synthesis will be identified and resolved using a third reviewer when necessary. A consultation exercise using a modified Delphi process will engage experts to prioritise identified QIs, aligning with JBI recommendations for stakeholder involvement in scoping reviews. et al
PATIENTS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Patients and the public will not be directly involved in the design or conduct of this scoping review. However, stakeholder consultation, including individuals with lived experience of SUDs, will be incorporated during the Delphi process to prioritise identified QIs for SUD care.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not necessary for stages 1-4 of this scoping review as it will not involve primary data collection. Ethics approval will be obtained from the University of Calgary Health Research Ethics Board prior to the commencement of stakeholder consultation (Stage 5) in January 2025. This scoping review was preregistered on the Open Science Framework. The results of this scoping review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Findings will be shared with local clinicians through presentations and with the research and clinical community at relevant conferences. This study represents a necessary first step towards establishing routine QoC measurement for SUDs. Results will be used in a stakeholder consensus exercise aimed at identifying key QIs for SUD care in Alberta, Canada, that will guide the future development of continuous QoC measurement using population-based data.
Related papers
Nov '22
Folic acid supplements and malaria risk and severity in people using antifolate malaria drugs in affected areas
cited by 21 papers
systematic review
Dec '20
Quick reviews of health research problems in regional, rural, and remote Australia
top 10% journal
cited by 25 papers
journal article
Jan '25
Ethical issues in obtaining and using infant and newborn organs or tissue for transplants, research, or sale: Review plan
top 30% journal
cited by 4 papers
journal article
May '23
Recovery schools and their impact on behavior and school performance in students recovering from substance use
top 10% journal
cited by 11 papers
journal article
Jun '25
Depression screening for Spanish-speaking patients in US primary care: a review plan to guide clinical practice
top 20% journal
journal article
Apr '23
Athletes' access to and views on seeking help for mental health
top 20% journal
cited by 9 papers
journal article
Dec '25
Checking How Ready African Countries Are to Make Vaccines Locally
top 50% journal
journal article