Back to Annual Meeting

Back to Annual Meeting

APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing

Danyelle Mannix¹, Namratha Swamy, PhD², Brian T. Yates, PhD¹, Arlene Stanton, PhD³, Gayl M. Anglin, PhD⁴, and Eric Gelman, MBA, MA⁵. (1) Department of Psychology, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave. NW, 321 As321 Asbury Building (South Wing), Washington, DC 20016-8062, 301-379-3733, dmannix@comcast.net, (2) Danya International, Inc., 8737 Colesville Road, Suite 1100, Silver Spring, MD 20910, (3) Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857, (4) Health Solutions, Northrop Grumman IT, 2101 Gaither Road, Suite 600, Rockville, MD 20850, (5) Health Systems Research, Inc., 1200 18th Street, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036

In May 2001, SAMHSA/CSAT established a new system of opioid treatment program (OTP) oversight involving accreditation by independent organizations. To assess the processes and costs associated with achieving and maintaining accreditation, SAMHSA funded the OTP Accreditation Evaluation. It also examines OTPs' ability to maintain program changes in clinical and administrative practices made in response to undergoing accreditation, and assesses the effects of these changes on patients and staff.

The study involves a survey of all (approximately 1,100) OTPs covering the resources used by programs to prepare and undergo accreditation, the services provided by OTPs and the costs of providing these services, OTPs' clinical practices, and staff perceptions of the accreditation process. Survey data is supplemented by more detailed information obtained from a sample of 20 OTPs, including budgets and ongoing staff activity logs. Data collected from this sample: (1) provides qualitative data to assist in the interpretation of quantitative findings; (2) contributes patients' and community members' perspectives; and (3) enables the validation of critical self-report data from the OTP Questionnaires completed by all OTPs. Utilizing multi-level data analysis, this presentation will include final results and address the differences in public and private OTPs.

In particular, the presentation will (1) discuss the representativeness of OTP respondents, (2) describe differences in public and private OTPs in terms of staffing, patients, services offered, patient outcomes, and program reports of costs, and (3) identify areas that appear to present challenges as well as benefits to OTPs maintaining accreditation.

Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of the session, participants will be able to

(
• describe the key features of the OTP Accreditation Evaluation design, (
• describe differences in public and private OTPs in terms of staffing, patients, services offered, patient outcomes, and program reports of costs, and (
• identify areas that appear to present challenges as well as benefits to OTPs maintaining accreditation.

Keywords: Evaluation, Methadone Maintenance

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Not Answered