Continuous quality improvement in substance abuse treatment facilities: How much does it cost?

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) has grown in the U.S. since the 1970s, yet little is known about the costs to implement CQI in substance abuse treatment facilities. This paper is part of a larger group randomized control trial in a large urban county evaluating the impact of Plan-Study-Do-Act (PDSA)-CQI designed for community service organizations (Hunter, Ober, Paddock, Hunt, & Levan, 2014). Operated by one umbrella organization, each of the eight facilities of the study, four residential and four outpatient substance abuse treatment facilities, selected their own CQI Actions, including administrative- and clinical care-related Actions. Using an activity-based costing approach, we collected labor and supplies and equipment costs directly attributable to CQI Actions over a 12-month trial period. Our study finds implementation of CQI and meeting costs of this trial per facility were approximately $2000 to $10,500 per year ($4500 on average), or $10 to $60 per admitted client. We provide a description of the sources of variation in these costs, including differing intensity of the CQI Actions selected, which should help decision makers plan use of PDSA-CQI.

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) in addiction treatment settings: design and intervention protocol of a group randomized pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have designed and tested the use of continuous quality improvement approaches in community based substance use treatment settings. Little is known about the feasibility, costs, efficacy, and sustainment of such approaches in these settings. METHODS/DESIGN: A group-randomized trial using a modified stepped wedge design is being used. In the first phase of the study, eight programs, stratified by modality (residential, outpatient) are being randomly assigned to the intervention or control condition. In the second phase, the initially assigned control programs are receiving the intervention to gain additional information about feasibility while sustainment is being studied among the programs initially assigned to the intervention. DISCUSSION: By using this design in a pilot study, we help inform the field about the feasibility, costs, efficacy and sustainment of the intervention. Determining information at the pilot stage about costs and sustainment provides value for designing future studies and implementation strategies with the goal to reduce the time between intervention development and translation to real world practice settings.