Skip to main content

Advertising Disclaimer »

Main menu

  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Open Access
    • Editorial Policies
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Blogs
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • AAP Meeting Abstracts
  • Pediatric Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health
    • More Collections...
  • AAP Policy
  • Supplements
  • Multimedia
    • Video Abstracts
    • Pediatrics On Call Podcast
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers
  • Other Publications
    • American Academy of Pediatrics

User menu

  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Academy of Pediatrics

AAP Gateway

Advanced Search

AAP Logo

  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Open Access
    • Editorial Policies
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Blogs
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • AAP Meeting Abstracts
  • Pediatric Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health
    • More Collections...
  • AAP Policy
  • Supplements
  • Multimedia
    • Video Abstracts
    • Pediatrics On Call Podcast
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers

Discover Pediatric Collections on COVID-19 and Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health

American Academy of Pediatrics
Article

Health Care Use Over 3 Years After Adolescent SBIRT

Stacy Sterling, Andrea H. Kline-Simon, Ashley Jones, Lauren Hartman, Katrina Saba, Constance Weisner and Sujaya Parthasarathy
Pediatrics May 2019, 143 (5) e20182803; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-2803
Stacy Sterling
aDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrea H. Kline-Simon
aDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ashley Jones
aDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lauren Hartman
bThe Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Katrina Saba
bThe Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Constance Weisner
aDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sujaya Parthasarathy
aDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Comments
Loading
Download PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most studies on adolescent screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) have examined substance use outcomes. However, it may also impact service use and comorbidity—an understudied topic. We address this gap by examining effects of SBIRT on health care use and comorbidities.

METHODS: In a randomized trial sample, we assessed 3 SBIRT care modalities: (1) pediatrician-delivered, (2) behavioral clinician–delivered, and (3) usual. Medical comorbidity and health care use were compared between a brief-intervention group with access to SBIRT for behavioral health (combined pediatrician and behavioral clinician arms) and a group without (usual care) over 1 and 3 years.

RESULTS: Among a sample of eligible adolescents (n = 1871), the SBIRT group had fewer psychiatry visits at 1 year (incidence rate ratio [iRR] = 0.76; P = .05) and 3 years (iRR = 0.65; P < .05). Total outpatient visits did not differ in year 1. The SBIRT group was less likely to have mental health diagnoses (odds ratio [OR] = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48–1.01) or chronic conditions (OR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.45–0.98) at 1 year compared with those in usual care. At 3 years, the SBIRT group had fewer total outpatient visits (iRR = 0.85; P < .05) and was less likely to have substance use diagnoses (OR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.45–0.91) and more likely to have substance use treatment visits (iRR = 2.04; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS: Providing SBIRT in pediatric primary care may improve health care use and health, mental health, and substance use outcomes. We recommend further exploring the effects of SBIRT on these outcomes.

  • Abbreviations:
    CI —
    confidence interval
    ED —
    emergency department
    EHR —
    electronic health record
    ICD-9 —
    International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision
    ICD-10 —
    International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision
    iRR —
    incidence rate ratio
    KPNC —
    Kaiser Permanente Northern California
    OR —
    odds ratio
    SBIRT —
    screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment
  • What’s Known on This Subject:

    Research suggests that screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) in pediatric primary care may improve patient outcomes, but few studies have examined its effects on health care use or the development of medical or mental health comorbidities over time.

    What This Study Adds:

    Patients with access to SBIRT had fewer comorbidities, psychiatry visits at 1 year, and substance use diagnoses and lower outpatient use over 3 years. Providing SBIRT in primary care may reduce health care use and improve adolescent health.

    Adolescent substance use is a significant public health problem and poses serious health risks. It is closely associated with the top 3 causes of mortality and morbidity among adolescents (injuries, suicide, and homicide1–3), and emerging evidence points to the serious and potentially irreversible effects of exposure to alcohol and drugs on the developing adolescent brain.4,5 Adolescent substance use problems frequently co-occur with medical conditions6 and mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety,7 which in turn are associated with increased health care use,8 particularly costly and potentially avoidable emergency department (ED)9,10 and inpatient care.11 Interventions designed to prevent or reduce substance use and related problems among adolescents could reduce avoidable health care use.

    Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is a public health approach to substance use prevention and early intervention and may reduce mental health symptoms as well.12,13 Although most adolescent SBIRT studies have examined substance use and related consequences,13–21 few have examined its effects on health care use. There is evidence that SBIRT may impact service use, but those studies have largely focused on adults.22 In a study of a cohort of adolescents who had participated in a randomized clinical trial of an ED-delivered brief intervention for substance use, Tait et al23 examined the effects of receiving an intervention on 10-year health care use outcomes. They found reduced substance-related ED use and costs but did not find significant differences in overall health care use and costs, and their analyses were limited because of a small sample size and limited follow-up data.

    This study used electronic health record (EHR) data to examine subsequent health care use among adolescents from a randomized clinical trial,13,24,25 comparing usual care to 2 modalities of delivering SBIRT in pediatric primary care: by a pediatrician or an embedded behavioral clinician. In this study, we focus on access to brief intervention for substance use and mental health symptoms, regardless of the type of provider delivering it, and its association with health service use. In the main trial, we found no differences between the 2 SBIRT arms in subsequent self-reported substance use, but did find lower rates of depression symptoms13 and higher rates of specialty behavioral health treatment initiation25 and screening and brief intervention24 in the embedded behavioral clinician arm compared with the pediatrician arm. Pediatric primary care practices increasingly employ hybrid models of SBIRT involving both SBIRT-trained pediatricians and behavioral clinicians, such as social workers, integrated into primary care teams.26 To reflect real-world clinical staffing and workflows, in which components of SBIRT may be delivered by both pediatricians and behavioral clinicians, we combined patients in both trial arms providing access to brief interventions into a single brief-intervention group (the SBIRT group) and compared rates of health care service use (overall, ED, inpatient, primary care, and specialty substance use and psychiatry) to those in the usual-care group. We hypothesized that patients in the SBIRT group would have lower rates of ED and inpatient use compared with those in usual care.

    Although research provides evidence that substance use problems are correlated with health care use,27 it is important to understand the concomitant changes in substance use, mental health, and medical comorbidities in adolescents (some entering young adulthood) experiencing significant developmental transitions. Therefore, in addition to health care use, we examined the 1- and 3-year prevalence of substance use and mental health conditions, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, bipolar disorder, depression, and substance use disorders. Because substance use and mental health problems are frequently comorbid with medical conditions6,28 and preventing the development of the former could potentially forestall or prevent development of the latter, we also examined the prevalence of pediatric medical conditions such as asthma, arthritis, diabetes, irritable bowel syndrome, migraine, rhinitis, and sinusitis. We hypothesized that patients in the SBIRT group would have lower rates of substance use, mental health, and medical conditions compared with those in usual care.

    Methods

    Setting and Design

    The study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), an integrated health care–delivery system serving a diverse population of >4 million members. The sample was drawn from a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial at KPNC’s Oakland Pediatrics Department of implementation and patient outcomes of 3 different modalities of delivering SBIRT for adolescents ages 12 to 18 years, including 2 brief-intervention arms: (1) a pediatrician-only arm consisting of pediatricians who were trained to screen and (when indicated) deliver brief interventions and refer to specialty substance use or mental health treatment; (2) an embedded behavioral clinician arm in which pediatricians administer the initial assessment and (if needed) refer patients to an embedded behavioral clinician for further assessment, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; and (3) a usual-care arm in which pediatricians had access to the EHR screening tools but no formal SBIRT training. SBIRT training of the pediatricians and behavioral clinicians in the original trial was similar and has been described previously in detail elsewhere.13

    Study Sample

    The sample consists of a subset of adolescents aged 12 to 18 years who endorsed either the substance use or mental health symptoms on the Teen Well Check Questionnaire between November 1, 2011, and October 31, 2013, or were deemed eligible for further assessment, brief intervention, and/or referral to treatment by their pediatricians (n = 1871). The index date was defined as the date on which the adolescent screened positive during this period. Additional details of the study protocol and the Teen Well Check Questionnaire are given elsewhere.13,24,25

    Measures

    Treatment Groups

    To examine associations between comorbidity and health care use between patients who had access to brief interventions for problems (if needed) and those who did not, we created a dichotomous indicator (SBIRT group = 1; usual care = 0).

    Patient Characteristics

    We obtained sex, age at index date, race and/or ethnicity (coded as white, African American, Hispanic, Asian American, and other), and length of enrollment in the health plan in the 3 years after the index date from the EHR.

    Health Care Use

    The EHR was used to obtain all outpatient and inpatient (medical and psychiatric) service use for 1-year before and up to 3 years after the index date. Counts of visits made to the ED, primary care, substance use treatment, and psychiatric services and inpatient uses as well as a count of all outpatient visits were created for baseline and 1- and 3-year follow-up periods.

    Comorbidity

    We examined 2 sets of comorbidities recorded in the EHR during each patient’s visits at baseline and over the 1- and 3-year postindex visits. These comorbidities included the prevalence of any behavioral health conditions (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision [ICD-9] codes 290, 293–302, and 306–319; International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision [ICD-10] codes F01–F09, and F20–F99) and any of the 7 most common or chronic medical conditions found in this age group, including asthma (ICD-9: 493; ICD-10: J45), arthritis (ICD-9: 710–719; ICD-10: M01, M02, M05–M08, and M11–M25), diabetes (ICD-9: 250; ICD-10: E08–E13), irritable bowel syndrome (ICD-9: 555, 560.89, and 5641; ICD-10: K50, K58, and K566), migraine (ICD-9: 346; ICD-10: G43), rhinitis (ICD-9: 477; ICD-10: J30 and J31), and sinusitis (ICD-9: 461 and 473; ICD-10: J01 and J32).28 Two dichotomous indicators, 1 to denote the presence of any behavioral health condition and 1 for the presence of any of the medical conditions (any of the conditions was recorded = 1; otherwise = 0), were created for each time period. We also created indicators for the most common behavioral health conditions from the subset of behavioral health conditions noted above: depression (ICD-9: 296.2, 296.3, 296.82, 298.0, 300.4, 301.12, 309.0, 309.1, 309.28, and 311; ICD-10: F32, F33, F34.1, F43.21, and F43.23), anxiety (ICD-9: 300.00, 300.02, 300.09, 309.21, 309.24, 309.81, F41.1, F41.3, F41.8, F41.9, F43.22, and F43.1), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ICD-9: 314; ICD-10: F90), bipolar disorder (ICD-9: 296 [except 296.1 and 296.3], 301.13, and 301.11; ICD-10: F30, F31, F34.0, F34.8, F34.9, and F39), and substance use disorders (ICD-9: 291, 292, and 303–305; ICD-10: F10–F19).

    Statistical Analysis

    We used χ2 and Student’s t tests to examine differences in demographic characteristics (age, sex, and race and/or ethnicity) and medical and behavioral health comorbidities between the SBIRT and usual-care groups. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to examine the dichotomous outcomes (any mental health or substance use comorbidities and any common or chronic medical comorbidities), and negative binomial regression models were used to examine visit counts (number of ED, primary care, substance use treatment, psychiatry, and all outpatient visits). In these models, the exponent of the coefficient for the treatment variable represents the odds ratio (OR) and the incidence rate ratio (iRR) for logistic and negative binomial regressions, respectively, for the SBIRT group relative to the usual-care group. Multivariate use models adjusted for age, sex, race and/or ethnicity, and previous use of similar services (eg, ED visits in the 12-month preindex period were included in the model for postindex ED visits). Similarly, we adjusted for corresponding preexisting diagnoses in the models for postindex comorbidity (eg, previous-12-month mental health diagnoses in the model for mental health comorbidity). Length of membership was accounted for by creating a variable whose coefficient is constant. All analyses were performed by using SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC).

    Results

    Demographics

    The SBIRT group had significantly more girls (59.5% vs 48.1%; P ≤ .05) and multiracial adolescents and adolescents of color (77.9% vs 68.3%; P ≤ .05) than the usual-care group (Table 1); there was no difference in the mean age at index date (15.8 years [SD = 1.5] vs 15.9 years [SD = 1.5]; P > .10). More than 93% of the sample had continuous membership for the 1-year postindex period, and >80% were continuous members up to 3 years postindex. At 1 year postindex, the usual-care group had more continuous members than the brief-intervention group (95.6% vs 92.3%; P ≤ .05); there were no differences in membership length at 3 years (data not shown).

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Demographic Characteristics by SBIRT Group

    Use Rates

    Although this was a randomized trial, we examined differences in service use and comorbidities between the SBIRT and usual-care groups in the year before the index date (Fig 1). We found no baseline or postindex differences in any of the health service measures (Table 2).

    FIGURE 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1

    Analytical sample. BC, behavioral clinician; BI, brief intervention.

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Baseline Through 3 Years Use and Comorbidity Rates

    Comorbidity

    The prevalence of mental health and substance use diagnoses was similar between the groups at baseline through 1 year postindex (Table 2). Among those with a behavioral health diagnosis 1 year postindex (6.8% of adolescents), depression (43.7%) and anxiety (36.7%) were the most common; there were no differences between the treatment groups. The prevalence of any behavioral health conditions in the 3 years postindex was 28.7%; fewer adolescents in the SBIRT group had a depression diagnosis than those in usual care (45% vs 54%; P < .05). All other diagnoses did not differ significantly. There was no difference in substance use rates at baseline through 1 year postindex between the 2 groups; by 3 years postindex, the SBIRT group was less likely to have a substance use diagnosis (2.1% vs 3.7%; P < .05). Eighteen percent of all adolescents had at least 1 of the 7 common or chronic medical conditions at baseline; there was no difference between the treatment groups. At 1 year postindex, the SBIRT group was less likely to have any chronic medical condition (5.4% vs 7.8%; P < .05); this trend was also observed at 3 years postindex, although the difference was narrower (31.6% vs 32.6%; P < .10).

    Multivariate Analyses of Use

    In the 1-year postindex period, there were only 6 inpatient stays and 6 adolescents with a substance use treatment visit, 5 of whom were in the SBIRT group; therefore, these outcomes could not be modeled. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of ED visits, but there was a declining trend in the number of ED visits in the postindex period (iRR = 0.87; P > .05). Adolescents in the SBIRT group were also likely to have 24% fewer psychiatry department visits (iRR = 0.76; P = .05). There were no differences in primary care or total outpatient visits (Table 3).

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    Multivariate Analyses of Health Service Use by SBIRT Group: 1 Year Postintake

    Three years postindex, adolescents in the SBIRT group were likely to have had more substance use treatment visits (iRR = 2.04; P < .01) and fewer psychiatry department visits (iRR = 0.65; P < .05) and total outpatient visits (iRR = 0.85; P < .05) over the 3 years compared with those in usual care (Table 4).

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 4

    Multivariate Analyses of Health Service Use by SBIRT Group: 3 Years Postintake

    Multivariate Analyses of Comorbidities

    Less than 1% of all adolescents had a substance use diagnosis during the 1-year postindex period; therefore, this outcome could not be modeled. In multivariable models adjusted for patient characteristics and the presence of previous diagnoses, adolescents in the SBIRT group were less likely to have a mental health diagnosis (OR = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48–1.01; P = .05) or a common or chronic medical condition (OR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.45–0.98) in the 1 year postindex compared with patients in the usual-care group (Table 5).

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 5

    Mental Health, Substance Use, and Medical Comorbidities by SBIRT Group: 1 Year Postintake

    In multivariate models adjusted for patient characteristics and previous diagnoses, we found that adolescents in the SBIRT group were less likely to have a substance use diagnosis (OR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.45–0.91) than those in usual care over the 3-year postindex period. There were no statistically significant differences in the prevalence of mental health diagnoses or common or chronic medical conditions between groups over the 3 years (Table 6).

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 6

    Mental Health, Substance Use, and Medical Comorbidities by SBIRT Group: 3 Years Postintake

    Discussion

    This study examined the association between access to SBIRT and health care use and comorbidities for adolescents at risk for substance use and other behavioral health problems. As in adult studies,29 we observed that adolescents with access to brief interventions for behavioral health risks had fewer ED visits in the subsequent 12 months compared with those in usual care. This finding echoes those of Tait et al,23 who also found lower ED use associated with the receipt of a brief intervention for substance use. In that study, however, the adolescents presented in the ED for substance-related problems and represented a more severe population than this primary care sample. That we found a trend toward lower ED use even in this lower-severity population underscores the potential of offering SBIRT in primary care to reduce ED use among adolescents.

    The SBIRT group also had lower psychiatric service use in both the 1- and 3-year follow-up periods. There were no differences in use or comorbidities between the SBIRT and usual-care groups in the year before participants’ index screening. Therefore, it appears that the lower ED- and psychiatric service–visit rates we found could be attributable to having access to SBIRT in primary care. This premise is supported by our finding that the SBIRT group had lower likelihood of medical and mental health comorbidity during the 1-year follow-up period relative to the usual-care group.

    Over the longer 3-year period, the SBIRT group had lower use of psychiatric services and total outpatient services, a lower likelihood of a substance use diagnosis, and a slightly lower likelihood of a mental health diagnosis. The SBIRT group was more likely to use substance use treatment services than the usual-care group. This suggests that although fewer patients in this group over time develop substance use problems that are serious enough to warrant specialty substance use treatment, the referral-to-treatment component of SBIRT available to them might be operative in getting those who do to treatment.

    We also observed that the prevalence of mental health, substance use, and medical conditions increased over time among the adolescents in both groups; almost one-third of all adolescents had a common or chronic medical condition in the 3 years postindex. Together with the findings on service use, this underscores the importance of screening for substance use problems and brief intervention or referral to treatment as necessary, occurring at every visit as for other health conditions, particularly in light of the developmental changes and environmental exposures experienced by adolescents. This also suggests the need for patients to be given brief interventions in a timely manner and, if needed, more than once so that their substance use and other psychiatric problems do not escalate, resulting in worsening morbidity and critical life events that lead to costly ED visits or hospital stays. Access to SBIRT, by helping to reduce substance use and initiation and/or emotional distress, may also bolster physical health through the encouragement of healthier behavior choices (eg, not smoking, not drinking, and stress reduction), reducing the prevalence of medical comorbidities and ultimately contributing to lower health care use.

    Consistent with the adolescent mental health literature,28 we found that depression and anxiety were the most common mental health diagnoses recorded in the EHR, emphasizing the need for early screening and timely intervention. Although we acknowledge that comorbidities impact service use, we did not control for these in our analyses of use because the prevalence of comorbidities over time are in and of themselves important outcomes of interest. Instead, we included corresponding health care use, which serves as both a proxy for comorbidity as well as accounting for regression to the mean.

    This study has several limitations. It was conducted in an integrated health care system with an insured population and may not be generalizable to uninsured populations. This was a pragmatic trial that did not recruit patients but relied on EHR-based clinical information collected during regular care. This strengthened the study by allowing us to examine the population base of adolescents with pediatric visits in the clinic, increasing its generalizability to pediatric primary care populations. This was an intent-to-treat analysis in which outcomes were examined among all eligible patients in both groups, regardless of whether they received a brief intervention. However, post hoc analyses showed that the receipt of brief intervention was associated with significantly lower rates of ED services at 1 year, which speaks to the potential value of SBIRT in helping to avert problems necessitating emergency medical care.

    Conclusions

    This study is among the first to examine associations between access to brief intervention and health care service use. Among those in the SBIRT group, we found lower use of psychiatry services at both 1 and 3 years and lower overall outpatient use at 3 years. These lower use rates are particularly notable because they serve as important proxy indicators of health and well-being. Importantly, we also found that the adolescents in the SBIRT group were less likely to have a mental health or a medical diagnosis at 1 year and less likely to have a substance use or depression diagnosis at 3 years, suggesting that offering SBIRT in pediatric primary care may have an enduring impact on both health and health care use during this critical developmental period. Future research is needed on the effects of SBIRT for adolescents on these important outcomes.

    Acknowledgments

    We thank the KPNC Adolescent Chemical Dependency Coordinating Committee, the KPNC Adolescent Medicine Specialists Committee, and Thekla Brumder Ross, PsyD, Derek Satre, PhD, and Jennifer Mertens, PhD, for their guidance. We also thank David Bacchus, MD, and all the physicians, medical assistants, nurses, receptionists, managers, and especially the patients and parents of KPNC’s Oakland Pediatrics clinic for their participation in the activities related to this study. All contributing authors have been included above.

    Footnotes

      • Accepted February 1, 2019.
    • Address correspondence to Stacy Sterling, DrPH, MSW, Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, 2000 Broadway, 3rd Floor, Oakland, CA 94612-2403. E-mail: stacy.a.sterling{at}kp.org
    • FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.

    • FUNDING: Supported by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (grant R01 AA016204). Funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    • POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Ranney ML,
      2. Mello MJ
      . A comparison of female and male adolescent victims of violence seen in the emergency department. J Emerg Med. 2011;41(6):701–706pmid:21536402
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Hohl BC,
      2. Wiley S,
      3. Wiebe DJ,
      4. Culyba AJ,
      5. Drake R,
      6. Branas CC
      . Association of drug and alcohol use with adolescent firearm homicide at individual, family, and neighborhood levels. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(3):317–324pmid:28055064
      OpenUrlPubMed
    2. ↵
      1. Hallfors DD,
      2. Waller MW,
      3. Ford CA,
      4. Halpern CT,
      5. Brodish PH,
      6. Iritani B
      . Adolescent depression and suicide risk: association with sex and drug behavior. Am J Prev Med. 2004;27(3):224–231pmid:15450635
      OpenUrlPubMed
    3. ↵
      1. Meier MH,
      2. Caspi A,
      3. Ambler A, et al
      . Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(40):E2657–E2664pmid:22927402
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    4. ↵
      1. Volkow ND,
      2. Swanson JM,
      3. Evins AE, et al
      . Effects of cannabis use on human behavior, including cognition, motivation, and psychosis: a review. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73(3):292–297pmid:26842658
      OpenUrlPubMed
    5. ↵
      1. Mertens JR,
      2. Flisher AJ,
      3. Fleming MF,
      4. Weisner CM
      . Medical conditions of adolescents in alcohol and drug treatment: comparison with matched controls. J Adolesc Health. 2007;40(2):173–179pmid:17259058
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    6. ↵
      1. Sterling S,
      2. Kohn C,
      3. Lu Y,
      4. Weisner C
      . Pathways to chemical dependency treatment for adolescents in an HMO. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2004;36(4):439–453pmid:15751482
      OpenUrlPubMed
    7. ↵
      1. Torio CM,
      2. Encinosa W,
      3. Berdahl T,
      4. McCormick MC,
      5. Simpson LA
      . Annual report on health care for children and youth in the United States: national estimates of cost, utilization and expenditures for children with mental health conditions. Acad Pediatr. 2015;15(1):19–35pmid:25444653
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    8. ↵
      1. Fahimi J,
      2. Aurrecoechea A,
      3. Anderson E,
      4. Herring A,
      5. Alter H
      . Substance abuse and mental health visits among adolescents presenting to US emergency departments. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2015;31(5):331–338pmid:25875990
      OpenUrlPubMed
    9. ↵
      1. Wang GS,
      2. Davies SD,
      3. Halmo LS,
      4. Sass A,
      5. Mistry RD
      . Impact of marijuana legalization in Colorado on adolescent emergency and urgent care visits. J Adolesc Health. 2018;63(2):239–241pmid:29609916
      OpenUrlPubMed
    10. ↵
      1. Parthasarathy S,
      2. Weisner C
      . Study of adolescents entering substance abuse treatment in an HMO: pathways to treatment, health care utilization and costs. In: NIDA Economic Evaluation Methods Meeting; November 11, 2005; Miami, FL
    11. ↵
      1. Dwinnells R
      . SBIRT as a vital sign for behavioral health identification, diagnosis, and referral in community health care. Ann Fam Med. 2015;13(3):261–263pmid:25964405
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    12. ↵
      1. Sterling S,
      2. Kline-Simon AH,
      3. Weisner C,
      4. Jones A,
      5. Satre DD
      . Pediatrician and behavioral clinician-delivered screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment: substance use and depression outcomes. J Adolesc Health. 2018;62(4):390–396pmid:29396080
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Hennessy EA,
      2. Tanner-Smith EE
      . Effectiveness of brief school-based interventions for adolescents: a meta-analysis of alcohol use prevention programs. Prev Sci. 2015;16(3):463–474
      OpenUrl
      1. Tanner-Smith EE,
      2. Lipsey MW
      . Brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2015;51:1–18pmid:25300577
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Spirito A,
      2. Monti PM,
      3. Barnett NP, et al
      . A randomized clinical trial of a brief motivational intervention for alcohol-positive adolescents treated in an emergency department. J Pediatr. 2004;145(3):396–402pmid:15343198
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Maio RF,
      2. Shope JT,
      3. Blow FC, et al
      . A randomized controlled trial of an emergency department-based interactive computer program to prevent alcohol misuse among injured adolescents. Ann Emerg Med. 2005;45(4):420–429pmid:15795723
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Bernstein J,
      2. Heeren T,
      3. Edward E, et al
      . A brief motivational interview in a pediatric emergency department, plus 10-day telephone follow-up, increases attempts to quit drinking among youth and young adults who screen positive for problematic drinking. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(8):890–902pmid:20670329
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Cunningham RM,
      2. Chermack ST,
      3. Zimmerman MA, et al
      . Brief motivational interviewing intervention for peer violence and alcohol use in teens: one-year follow-up. Pediatrics. 2012;129(6):1083–1090pmid:22614776
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Walton MA,
      2. Chermack ST,
      3. Shope JT, et al
      . Effects of a brief intervention for reducing violence and alcohol misuse among adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2010;304(5):527–535pmid:20682932
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    13. ↵
      1. Monti PM,
      2. Colby SM,
      3. Barnett NP, et al
      . Brief intervention for harm reduction with alcohol-positive older adolescents in a hospital emergency department. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1999;67(6):989–994pmid:10596521
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    14. ↵
      1. Barbosa C,
      2. Cowell A,
      3. Bray J,
      4. Aldridge A
      . The cost-effectiveness of alcohol Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) in emergency and outpatient medical settings. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2015;53:1–8pmid:25648375
      OpenUrlPubMed
    15. ↵
      1. Tait RJ,
      2. Teoh L,
      3. Kelty E,
      4. Geelhoed E,
      5. Mountain D,
      6. Hulse GK
      . Emergency department based intervention with adolescent substance users: 10 year economic and health outcomes. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2016;165:168–174pmid:27317044
      OpenUrlPubMed
    16. ↵
      1. Sterling S,
      2. Kline-Simon AH,
      3. Satre DD, et al
      . Implementation of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for adolescents in pediatric primary care: a cluster randomized trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169(11):e153145pmid:26523821
      OpenUrlPubMed
    17. ↵
      1. Sterling S,
      2. Kline-Simon AH,
      3. Jones A,
      4. Satre DD,
      5. Parthasarathy S,
      6. Weisner C
      . Specialty addiction and psychiatry treatment initiation and engagement: results from an SBIRT randomized trial in pediatrics. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2017;82:48–54pmid:29021115
      OpenUrlPubMed
    18. ↵
      1. Levy SJ,
      2. Williams JF; Committee on Substance Use and Prevention
      . Substance use screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment. Pediatrics. 2016;138(1):e20161211pmid:27325634
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    19. ↵
      1. Parthasarathy S,
      2. Weisner C
      . Health care services use by adolescents with intakes into an outpatient alcohol and drug treatment program. Am J Addict. 2006;15(suppl 1):113–121
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    20. ↵
      1. Kline-Simon AH,
      2. Weisner C,
      3. Sterling S
      . Point prevalence of co-occurring behavioral health conditions and associated chronic disease burden among adolescents. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016;55(5):408–414pmid:27126855
      OpenUrlPubMed
    21. ↵
      1. Pringle JL,
      2. Kelley DK,
      3. Kearney SM, et al
      . Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment in the emergency department: an examination of health care utilization and costs. Med Care. 2018;56(2):146–152pmid:29256973
      OpenUrlPubMed
    • Copyright © 2019 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
    PreviousNext
    Back to top

    Advertising Disclaimer »

    In this issue

    Pediatrics
    Vol. 143, Issue 5
    1 May 2019
    • Table of Contents
    • Index by author
    View this article with LENS
    PreviousNext
    Email Article

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Academy of Pediatrics.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Health Care Use Over 3 Years After Adolescent SBIRT
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from American Academy of Pediatrics
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Academy of Pediatrics web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Request Permissions
    Article Alerts
    Log in
    You will be redirected to aap.org to login or to create your account.
    Or Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
    Citation Tools
    Health Care Use Over 3 Years After Adolescent SBIRT
    Stacy Sterling, Andrea H. Kline-Simon, Ashley Jones, Lauren Hartman, Katrina Saba, Constance Weisner, Sujaya Parthasarathy
    Pediatrics May 2019, 143 (5) e20182803; DOI: 10.1542/peds.2018-2803

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Share
    Health Care Use Over 3 Years After Adolescent SBIRT
    Stacy Sterling, Andrea H. Kline-Simon, Ashley Jones, Lauren Hartman, Katrina Saba, Constance Weisner, Sujaya Parthasarathy
    Pediatrics May 2019, 143 (5) e20182803; DOI: 10.1542/peds.2018-2803
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    Print
    Download PDF
    Insight Alerts
    • Table of Contents

    Jump to section

    • Article
      • Abstract
      • Methods
      • Results
      • Discussion
      • Conclusions
      • Acknowledgments
      • Footnotes
      • References
    • Figures & Data
    • Info & Metrics
    • Comments

    Related Articles

    • No related articles found.
    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar

    Cited By...

    • Three-Year Outcomes After Brief Treatment of Substance Use and Mood Symptoms
    • Google Scholar

    More in this TOC Section

    • Verbal Autopsies for Out-of-Hospital Infant Deaths in Zambia
    • Uncertainty at the Limits of Viability: A Qualitative Study of Antenatal Consultations
    • Evaluation of an Emergency Department High-risk Bruising Screening Protocol
    Show more Articles

    Similar Articles

    Subjects

    • Substance Use
      • Substance Use
    • Adolescent Health/Medicine
      • Adolescent Health/Medicine
    • Journal Info
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Policies
    • Overview
    • Licensing Information
    • Authors/Reviewers
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit My Manuscript
    • Open Access
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Librarians
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Usage Stats
    • Support
    • Contact Us
    • Subscribe
    • Resources
    • Media Kit
    • About
    • International Access
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Statement
    • FAQ
    • AAP.org
    • shopAAP
    • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Instagram
    • Visit American Academy of Pediatrics on Facebook
    • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Twitter
    • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Youtube
    • RSS
    American Academy of Pediatrics

    © 2021 American Academy of Pediatrics