By Paul Roman, Editor
Improving the quality of the treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs) is the theme of a multifaceted campaign that has touched nearly every treatment provider organization and individual treatment professional for more than two decades.
In 2011, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) formed a workgroup to consider how to best improve the scope and quality of "implementation science," a relatively new name for a specialty area of research and practice centered on behavior change among organizations and individuals. In late 2012 the workgroup produced a report with recommendations, Adoption of NIDA's Evidence-Based Treatments in Real World Settings: A National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse Workgroup Report. (Read the complete report in PDF format.) In this issue of The Bridge we present reactions to the report from six professionals working in different sectors of SUD treatment and research.
The Bridge is published to educate and especially to stimulate debate and discussion. As the reader will see, the reactions to the report offer very diverse perspectives, and in some instances controversial opinions are included. The discussion also reveals long-term dilemmas that affect the long-term effort for better quality treatment of SUDs.
The commentaries that are offered are notably diverse. Several note that the recommendations in the report do not reflect the empirical realities of treatment. The issue of cost and financing is raised in several of the commentaries. Some are supportive of the report while others are not. The ongoing dilemmas of the SUD treatment field are reflected across all of the commentaries.
We invite readers to respond to these materials, including the workgroup report itself. To the extent they are appropriate, these reactions may be included in future issues of The Bridge. Please address your comments to Paul Roman at the University of Georgia (email@example.com).
The opinions expressed herein are the views of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), SAMHSA, CSAT or the ATTC Network. No official support or endorsement of DHHS, SAMHSA, or CSAT for the opinions of authors presented in this e-publication is intended or should be inferred.