Literature Collection
11K+
References
9K+
Articles
1500+
Grey Literature
4600+
Opioids & SU
The Literature Collection contains over 11,000 references for published and grey literature on the integration of behavioral health and primary care. Learn More
Use the Search feature below to find references for your terms across the entire Literature Collection, or limit your searches by Authors, Keywords, or Titles and by Year, Type, or Topic. View your search results as displayed, or use the options to: Show more references per page; Sort references by Title or Date; and Refine your search criteria. Expand an individual reference to View Details. Full-text access to the literature may be available through a link to PubMed, a DOI, or a URL. References may also be exported for use in bibliographic software (e.g., EndNote, RefWorks, Zotero).
Screening for housing instability has increased as health systems move toward value-based care, but evidence on how health care-based housing interventions affect patient outcomes comes mostly from interventions that address homelessness. In this mixed-methods evaluation of a primary care-based housing program in Boston, Massachusetts, for 1,139 patients with housing-related needs that extend beyond homelessness, we found associations between program participation and health care use. Patients enrolled in the program between October 2018 and March 2021 had 2.5 fewer primary care visits and 3.6 fewer outpatient visits per year compared with those who were not enrolled, including fewer social work, behavioral health, psychiatry, and urgent care visits. Patients in the program who obtained new housing reported mental and physical health benefits, and some expressed having stronger connections to their health care providers. Many patients attributed improvements in mental health to compassionate support provided by the program's housing advocates. Health care-based housing interventions should address the needs of patients facing imminent housing crises. Such interventions hold promise for redressing health inequities and restoring dignity to the connections between historically marginalized patient populations and health care institutions.

IMPORTANCE: In 2017, an estimated 7.9% of persons aged 12 to 17 years reported illicit drug use in the past month, and an estimated 50% of adolescents in the US had used an illicit drug by the time they graduated from high school. Young adults aged 18 to 25 years have a higher rate of current illicit drug use, with an estimated 23.2% currently using illicit drugs. Illicit drug use is associated with many negative health, social, and economic consequences and is a significant contributor to 3 of the leading causes of death among young persons (aged 10-24 years): unintentional injuries including motor vehicle crashes, suicide, and homicide. OBJECTIVE: To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the potential benefits and harms of interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults. POPULATION: This recommendation applies to children (11 years and younger), adolescents (aged 12-17 years), and young adults (aged 18-25 years), including pregnant persons. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT: Because of limited and inadequate evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of primary care-based interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults are uncertain and that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms. More research is needed. RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care-based behavioral counseling interventions to prevent illicit drug use, including nonmedical use of prescription drugs, in children, adolescents, and young adults. (I statement).



This grey literature reference is included in the Academy's Literature Collection in keeping with our mission to gather all sources of information on integration. Grey literature is comprised of materials that are not made available through traditional publishing avenues. Often, the information from unpublished resources can be limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.


