Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42095700›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2026

Cost-Effectiveness of the START Hospital Addiction Consultation Service for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment.

Adeyemi Okunogbe, Alexandra Peltz, Itai Danovitch, Allison J Ober, Teryl K Nuckols

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Error in Figure 2A.JAMA network open · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Adeyemi OkunogbeRAND, Arlington, Virginia.
Alexandra PeltzRAND, Santa Monica, California.
Itai DanovitchCedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Allison J OberRAND, Santa Monica, California.
Teryl K NuckolsCedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are often hospitalized for emergent medical problems, but opioid use is seldom addressed during the inpatient stay. In a recent trial, patients randomized to Substance Use Treatment and Recovery Team (START), a hospital-based addiction consultation service, were more likely to initiate medication for opioid use disorder and be linked to OUD-focused follow-up care compared with patients receiving usual OUD care, which was at the discretion of the primary team. Objective: To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of START from the health sector and limited societal perspectives relative to usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation was an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis based on the START trial, which was conducted at 3 major academic medical centers. START participants were adults with a probable OUD diagnosis documented during an inpatient hospitalization from November 2021 to September 2023. This economic evaluation used trial participant-level cost and health outcomes data, supplemented with published data. Exposures: Two strategies were compared: (1) START and (2) usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs, quality-adjusted life year (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). ICERs were estimated using a Markov model over a 12-month horizon, with deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. ICERs were expressed as cost per QALY gained, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of USD $150 000/QALY. Results: A total of 325 participants were randomized to the START (164 [50.5%]) or usual care (161 [49.5%]); 213 were male (66%) and the median (IQR) age was 41 (32-50) years. START implementation costs were $640 per patient (personnel, $602; training and onboarding, $38). Compared with usual care, START was associated with an incremental cost of $162 (95% UI, -$93 to $179) and a gain in QALYs of 0.0103 (95% UI, 0.0102 to 0.0106) per person from a health sector perspective, leading to an ICER of $15 750 (95% UI, $8742 to $17 034) per QALY gained. The ICER was $20 921 (95% UI, $13 747 to $22 190) per QALY gained from a limited societal perspective. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that health care expenditures and intervention effectiveness were the strongest drivers of cost-effectiveness. Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial-based economic evaluation, START was a cost-effective approach for addressing opioid use disorder in the inpatient setting by increasing the initiation of medication for OUD and linkage to OUD-focused care after discharge.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisOpioid-Related DisordersReferral and ConsultationAdultCost-Effectiveness AnalysisFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life Years

Identifiers

PMID42095700
PMCPMC13153993

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.