Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Dec 13.
Published in final edited form as: Curr Addict Rep. 2023 Dec 27;11(1):149–162. doi: 10.1007/s40429-023-00523-1

Use of Digital Health and Digital Therapeutics to Treat SUD in Criminal Justice Settings: a Review

Ginnie Sawyer-Morris 1, Judith A Wilde 2,3, Todd Molfenter 4, Faye Taxman 2
PMCID: PMC11643629  NIHMSID: NIHMS2038719  PMID: 39676893

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to investigate the use of digital health technologies and/or digital therapeutics (DTx) products in the treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs) in the general population and among criminal justice–involved individuals.

Recent Findings

Despite an expanding evidence base, only three SUD DTxs have received federal regulatory approval. Across studies, DTx products have proven successful in engaging patients in SUD treatment and reducing healthcare costs and resource utilizations. Findings for emerging SUD DTx products show similar results. Still, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the use of digital health technologies and/or DTx among criminal justice populations.

Summary

DTxs have proven effective for treating multiple SUD types (e.g., nicotine and opioids) among the general population. DTx shows similar promise among justice-involved populations, but additional efficacy and implementation research is needed to address barriers such as cost, cultural resistance, and infrastructure.

Keywords: Digital therapeutics, Digital health, Software as a medical device, Substance use disorder, Opioid use disorder, Criminal justice settings

Introduction

The move toward digital healthcare nearly 30 years ago has empowered patients to participate in their own care. The digital health umbrella (see Fig. 1) encompasses a growing range of technologies including digital health products that encourage clients to maintain healthy lifestyles (e.g., mobile apps Reframe, HereNOW Connect, and social media platforms [1, 2]), digital medicine (e.g., ingestible sensors, digital pills), software as a medical device (SaMD), and digital therapeutics (DTx; digitally delivered interventions [35]).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Depiction of differences among digital health, digital medicine, and DTx products [4, 24]

DTx is a growing subfield of digital health focusing on conditions that can be treated, managed, or prevented through digital interventions (e.g., computer-based training for cognitive behavioral therapy) [57]. Both DTx and SaMD represent software used for medical purposes, with SaMD intended to diagnose, mitigate, treat, and prevent disease [8] and DTx limited to treatment based on clinical evidence of a potential disease or disorder although it “does not act in the human body through pharmacological, immunological or metabolic ways” [4]. As such, DTxs are used to treat a variety of conditions including long-term management of diabetes and prediabetes [9], improved motor outcomes in Parkinson’s disease [10], greater adherence to medications for hypertension and cardiovascular disease [11], mental health improvement with cognitive rehabilitation [12], improved obstetrical outcomes (e.g., preterm labor) [13], improved early diagnosis/intervention for children with autism [14], and increasing abstinence and treatment retention for individuals with substance use disorders [15, 16•, 17]. Evidence from clinical trials and real-world evaluations of DTx and digital health suggests that clients view these treatments as convenient, efficient, comfortable, and private, sometimes rating digital health experiences as more effective than usual care [18, 19]. There also is some evidence that adherence to DTx is greater than to traditional treatment with medication [5].

While advantageous due to their scalability, accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and cultural adaptability, DTxs require clearance from a regulatory body (e.g., Food and Drug Administration (FDA)). FDA approval can be a long, expensive, and arduous path for medications—an approval process requiring demonstrated efficacy in both clinical and real-world settings [2022] as well as identifying any risk factors [8]. The FDA regulates DTxs that meet the definition of SaMD primarily through two processes: de novo and 510(k). The former is used for low-risk medical devices and requires “reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness for the intended use”; the latter is used when developers are able to show that their new DTx is substantially similar to one or more DTxs that already are available [8]. Data for FDA approval come from both exploratory and confirmatory studies [5].

Several companies have developed, or are developing, DTx to treat substance use disorder (SUD) but the market remains small. Currently, only two SUD DTx developers have received regulatory approval from the FDA: Pear Therapeutics (reSET and reSET-O [22]) and DynamiCare (DynamiCare Health [23]). Nonetheless, it is estimated that by 2025, the global DTx field will be valued at $7 billion to nearly $11 billion [4, 24, 25].

Despite the projected growth, DTx remains underused and understudied [26, 27], and little evidence exists on the effectiveness of digital health technologies and DTx with justice-involved populations (e.g., drug courts, probation, jail/prison). This is particularly troubling given that justice involvement and SUD often go hand-in-hand [28]. At least 65% of those within the US prison system have had an SUD [29], and drug overdose is the leading cause of death in the weeks following parole or probation [2931].

What Digital Health and DTx Are Available for Criminal Justice Populations?

Individuals with SUD and justice involvement have high treatment needs yet are among the least represented populations in digital health and DTx research and treatment efforts. Recent data from the Bureau of Justice estimate that 85% of the prison population either have an active SUD or were incarcerated for a crime involving drugs or drug use [30]. Among incarcerated individuals with SUD, only 33% of state prisoners and 46% of federal prisoners receive treatment [31].

Justice-involved individuals with SUD face barriers to treatment both within and outside carceral contexts, and while digital health has been cited as a potential solution for engaging hard-to-reach populations (e.g., rural communities, justice-involved populations) in SUD treatment, justice-involved populations remain underrepresented in digital health literature [32••]. Furthermore, individuals accessing treatment while incarcerated face challenges maintaining their recovery upon reentry. These include a lack of social and family support, financial insecurity, loss of income derived from drug sales, inadequate housing [33•], and stigma [20]. In outpatient contexts, justice-involved individuals who are referred to treatment consistently report more severe SUD symptoms and greater resistance to treatment compared to individuals who self-refer [34, 35].

Digital Health Adoption in Correctional Settings

Correctional facilities were among the first settings evaluated for digital health adoption. In 1994, the US Departments of Justice and Defense established a 3-year digital health demonstration project in correctional settings to assess whether a correctional digital health network would improve access to specialty healthcare, lower security risks, and decrease healthcare costs [36]. Results demonstrate that, depending on the type and nature of the institution, digital health modalities (e.g., videoconferencing) could improve inmate access to specialty healthcare while reducing costs [37••]. Included among the project’s recommendations for facilities considering digital health adoption was a cost–benefit analysis comparing the cost of Medicare and technological requirements with the institution’s individual- and organizational-level resources (e.g., proximity to major healthcare providers, budget) [38].

By 2001, half of state correctional institutions and 39% of federal institutions employed digital health services (e.g., telemedicine) to provide healthcare to incarcerated individuals—this typically involved specialty care [39]. While criminal justice settings were early adopters of digital health, the type and extent to which digital health services were implemented varied across facilities. More than 20 years later, and despite decreases in the cost of digital health resources, the mode and application of services in correctional settings remain variable [40, 41•]. Key barriers include, but are not limited to, costs, security risks, coordination of services, organizational- and individual-level factors (e.g., attitudes of inmates and correctional officers toward technology/change), and legal and regulatory procedures [42•].

Since 2019, Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (JCOIN) researchers in Massachusetts have been studying digital health tools and platforms that provide opioid use disorder (OUD) treatments for justice-involved individuals. The purpose of the research is to “address gaps in OUD treatment and related services in a wide range of criminal justice settings, including jails, drug courts, problem-solving courts, policing and diversion, reentry, and probation and parole” [43].

The aims of this review are to (1) investigate the design and implementation of DTx for the treatment of SUD, (2) identify DTxs that have been used in justice settings, and (3) examine the implementation challenges for DTx in justice settings.

Methods

The following definitions [3, 22] distinguish DTx from other forms of digital health.

  • Digital health. Technologies, platforms, and systems that engage consumers for lifestyle, wellness, and/or health-related purposes and capture, store, or transmit health data and/or support life science and clinical operations. Digital health technologies require neither clinical evidence nor regulatory oversight. Examples include lifestyle apps and electronic medical record systems.

  • Digital Medicine. Evidence-based software/hardware products measuring/intervening in the service of health. Clinical evidence is mandatory; requirements for regulatory oversight vary. Examples include pacemakers, insulin pumps, and digital pills.

  • DTx. Evidence-based therapeutic interventions preventing, managing, or treating medical disorders or diseases. Clinical evidence and real-world outcomes are required for DTx products which must be reviewed and cleared or certified by regulatory bodies (e.g., FDA) to support claims of risk, efficacy, and intended use. Examples include medically assisted SUD treatment augmented with digital delivery of evidence-based behavioral interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).

These definitions focused the search on existing literature with evidence regarding DTx for SUD treatment within and outside criminal justice settings. The search for peer-reviewed studies, especially after 2017, involved multiple databases including PubMed, Research Gate, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Ovid. More than 100 articles were identified; those most relevant to DTx or digital health, and providing the greatest depth of information, were maintained. A small number of older articles are included because either they are seminal to the field or more recent research was not identified.

A search of clinicaltrials.gov used the terms “digital therapeutics,” “digital,” “mobile,” “phone,” “tele,” “alcohol,” “substance,” “tobacco,” “opioid,” “cocaine,” “stimulant,” and “drug.” Currently, clinicaltrials.gov does not distinguish between a DTx trial and a digital health trial. Figure 2 illustrates the manual review process that identified eight DTxs from among the original pool of 73 clinical trials. Other peer-reviewed literature was used to provide support around both the purpose and successes of both DTx and digital health.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Decision tree for selection of the DTx in this review. *These DTxs have been studied only in the general population, not with justice-involved individuals

Multiple searches were conducted using various combinations of term(s); findings are limited to research studies with comparison groups or experimental studies (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Summary of SUD digital therapeutics (DTx) by SUD type, target population, and FDA approval status

DTx SUD type Target population Device classification EBI/theory Company FDA approval status Effectiveness
reSET SUD Individuals with SUD, justice-involved Mobile app CBT, CRA Pear Therapeutics FDA-de novo Strong***
reSET-O OUD Individuals with OUD Mobile app CBT, CRA Pear Therapeutics FDA-510(k) Strong***
DynamiCare Smoking cessation Pregnant women Mobile app Contingency management DynamiCare Health FDA Breakthrough Device Moderate**
CBT4CBT AUD, cocaine use disorder, OUD Individuals with SUD, Spanish-speaking Web-based intervention CBT CBT4CBT, LLC Strong***
A-CHESS AUD, SUD Individuals with AUD and/or SUD Mobile app A-CHESS CHESS Health Moderate**
Clickotine Smoking cessation Individuals with tobacco use disorder Mobile app US clinical practice guidelines for smoking cessation Click Therapeutics Promising*
We the Village AUD Significant others of problem drinkers Web-based Intervention CRA & family training We the Village, Inc Promising*
Laddr Problematic alcohol use Spanish-speaking individuals Mobile app CRA Square2 Systems, Inc Promising*

FDA-510(k): premarket notification and class 1 and 2 medical devices are applicable; FDA-de novo: stands for Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation and is a special expedited permission system that is given when the safety of a new concept digital healthcare technology that does not have a product classification is proven to be at a certain level; FDA Breakthrough: the device provides for more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating human disease or conditions and represents Breakthrough Technology, No Approved or Cleared Alternatives Exist, Offers Significant Advantages over Existing Approved or Cleared Alternatives, OR Device Availability is in the Best Interest of Patients, qualifies for all Fast Track designation features

DTx digital therapeutics, SUD substance use disorder, EBI evidence-based intervention, FDA Food and Drug Administration, CBT cognitive behavioral therapy, CRA community reinforcement approach, OUD opioid use disorder, AUD alcohol use disorder

*

Indicates DTx has a limited evidence base with few to no studies assessing real-world applications or increased access to different populations and SUD types

**

Indicates DTx has a strong evidence base (multiple RCTs assessing efficacy and durability) and is well validated in both clinical and real-world settings but may have few studies examining application across multiple populations and/or SUD types

***

Indicates DTx has a strong evidence base (multiple RCTs assessing efficacy and durability) and is well validated in both clinical and real-world settings, across multiple populations (e.g., women, non-English speaking) and SUD types

Narrative Review

The terms “digital health,” “digital medicine,” and “DTx” have been used interchangeably in publications on digital health for SUD [3]. We provide an update on recent SUD DTx research, including digital health in criminal justice settings, and to distinguish between DTx and other digital health treatments.

What DTxs Are Available for SUD Treatment?

Studies indicate that DTx for SUD can produce beneficial treatment effects (e.g., abstinence) for individuals with a variety of SUD types including nicotine/tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, cannabis, and opioids [44]. The DTxs discussed herein have FDA approval or have demonstrated promise through randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

FDA-Approved DTx for SUD

Although DTxs were first explored nearly 30 years ago [24], only two have FDA approval to treat multiple types of SUD, and a third has approval to treat nicotine addiction.

reSET

In 2017, the FDA authorized reSET, a mobile adaptation (app) of the web-based therapeutic education system (TES) and the first prescription DTx for treating patients with cocaine, cannabis, and/or stimulant use disorders [22]. reSET delivers self-directed and interactive CBT grounded in the community reinforcement approach (CRA) to enhance behavior change [45, 46]. Studies support the efficacy of reSET for improving treatment outcomes including abstinence in clinical [22, 4549] and real-world settings [50•]. In addition, TES and standard treatment were equally effective in reducing criminality, relapse to drug use, and HIV risk behavior among substance-using offenders in prison contexts [46]. Recent studies indicate that using reSET reduces healthcare resource utilization and lowers per-patient healthcare costs by $3591 over a 6-month period [15]. Although reSET has a strong evidence base, more research is needed to explore best practices for implementing reSET across additional populations, treatment settings, and SUD types.

reSET-O

In 2018, the FDA authorized reSET-O, a mobile app with an 84-day DTx for OUD. reSET-O serves as an adjunct to outpatient treatment by providing CBT along with transmucosal buprenorphine and contingency management for patients 18 years or older who are under the supervision of a clinician. A feasibility study demonstrated that reSET-O is well accepted by both patients and clinicians [51]. A growing body of literature testing the effectiveness of reSET-O in real-world settings [5256] shows it is associated with clinically significant treatment outcomes including abstinence from illicit opioids and retention in treatment [22, 52]. Studies from one research team also demonstrate significant and durable reductions in emergency department and inpatient utilization (including readmissions) [53], reduced net costs for third-party payers [54] and healthcare organizations [55], and increased clinician services [56]. These trends were observed across 6-, 9-, and 12-month post-treatment periods [53, 56]. Another study found that doubling the dosage (24 weeks instead of 12 weeks) increased retention in treatment and reduced hospital encounters [17].

The greatest cost benefits were among patients with Medicaid [55]. In their economic modeling study of a 1-million-member healthcare plan, Wang et al. [57] observed similar cost-effectiveness and potential cost-savings.

While reSET-O is supported by peer-reviewed literature with real-world evidence, its RCT evidence base still is emerging. Two reSET-O RCTs are registered on clinicaltrials.gov; one is estimated to be completed in September 2023 [58] and the other in March 2024 [59], but the latter has yet to begin recruitment. No results have been published for either trial. Additional RCTs with longitudinal outcomes (12–24-month follow-up) evaluating the clinical efficacy of reSET-O and its impact in preventing overdose are needed.

DynamiCare Health

In 2022, DynamiCare Health received FDA Breakthrough Device Designation for the treatment of smoking during pregnancy. DynamiCare Health is an evidence-based digital care program (contingency management plus recovery coaching) delivered through a smartphone app. The program offers up to $100/month for negative drug tests and appointment attendance. Subscribers also have access to a recovery coach by weekday texts and weekly phone and video. If needed, the coach will help set achievable goals related to recovery. Additional app features include video monitoring for alcohol abstinence, a log of substance use screening results, a Bluetooth-enabled breathalyzer, saliva drug testing, a “certified guide,” and appointment monitoring and reminders [23].

Several studies have examined DynamiCare’s contingency management software. Adults with alcohol use disorder (AUD) who used DynamiCare to supplement “usual care” treatment have greater success maintaining their sobriety than those who received usual care only [60], as did those with OUD [6163]. Pregnant smokers had higher quit rates with financial incentives for actually practicing “best practices” [64]. An efficacy trial for SUD patients (NCT04162132) was completed in 2019; no results or studies have been published [65]. A 2022 clinical trial assessing contingency management apps’ effectiveness in treating multiple SUD types among older adults, including DynamiCare, has not begun participant recruitment.

Both reSET and reSET-O have demonstrated improved outcomes for SUD and OUD, and reSET-O is cost-effective, showing potential cost-savings. However, only one identified study used reSET in criminal justice settings [see 46]. Further implementation trials are underway. While the evidence base for DynamiCare Health grows, it currently is approved only for nicotine but has been studied for OUD [see 66]. More efficacy trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of all three DTx for different populations and SUD types.

Emerging DTx for SUD Treatment

We identified emerging research on DTx for SUD on clinicaltrials.gov using multiple search terms including types of digital support and SUD—alone and in various combinations. The SUD DTx interventions reported herein are limited to the five with completed trials (see Table 1), but none currently is FDA-approved.

Computer-Based Training for Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT4CBT)

CBT4CBT is a web-based seven-module DTx for SUDs based on a NIDA-published CBT intervention compendium [6]. Available in English and Spanish, CBT4CBT focuses on cognitive and behavioral skills to address substance use. Participants can complete the self-guided program on their own. CBT4CBT has a strong evidence base, including its effectiveness as an adjunct to standard outpatient treatment [67••], and is one of the most widely used digital interventions in the SUD DTx space. CBT4CBT has been validated for:

  • Multiple SUD types including AUD [68] and cocaine [69];

  • Multiple populations including women in residential treatment [70•] and Spanish speakers [71, 72••];

  • Clinical [67••] and real-world settings [73•].

Follow-up studies of clinical trial data demonstrate CBT4CBT’s durable effects 6 months post treatment and as an augmentation to multiple types of medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD) including buprenorphine [73•] and methadone [69]. Individuals with higher risk may demonstrate poorer treatment outcomes in terms of substance use and lower rates of task completion [11]. However, participants generally report positive treatment outcomes including an increase in coping skills related to substance use recovery (e.g., coping with craving) [74].

A-CHESS

A-CHESS supports the treatment and recovery process by reducing the incidence and severity of relapse and increasing adherence to SUD treatment [75]. The A-CHESS platform (smartphone apps for patients 13 years and older, providers, and families) delivers recovery-oriented motivational content, social connections, and 24/7 support. Clinical trials demonstrate that A-CHESS reduces the risk of relapse, decreases substance use, and increases social support [76]. The app’s adaptive and extensive menu of services provides immediate support across multiple populations (e.g., Latinx [76], impoverished rural women [77]) and SUD types (e.g., AUD [78] and OUD [79]).

A secondary analysis of the A-CHESS RCT found that the effect of A-CHESS on risky drinking days was mediated by outpatient treatment [80]. Another study examined the feasibility of implementing the A-CHESS Connections app, offering CBT4CBT, peer support services, and one-on-one meetings with a social worker, among populations with both SUD and justice involvement. For clients with and without justice involvement, protective factors increased with app engagement; justice-involved clients preferred time spent with the social worker over other app services. In addition, those who seek assistance on their own, rather than being referred by a justice-related agency, are more likely to benefit [34].

Clickotine

Clickotine is a smartphone app designed and engineered to deliver components of an empirically supported smoking cessation intervention and essential features of the US Clinical Practice Guideline (USCPG; e.g., advise and encourage to quit, enhance motivation). As USCPG recommends, Clickotine uses an adaptive, proprietary technology platform, Clickometrics, to enhance engagement by personalizing the intervention to the client [81]. An initial trial reported that access and adherence to smoking cessation medications increased during an 8-week, single-arm clinical trial [82]. A second trial was registered in 2022 but was withdrawn citing a change in Click Therapeutics’ priorities and belief that the original trial (NCT04857515) was sufficient [83].

We The Village

We The Village is an online community forum and web-based course integrating Community Reinforcement and Family Training (CRAFT), an evidence-based intervention for concerned significant others (CSOs) of alcohol-dependent individuals (ADI). The program engages treatment-refusing patients and improves CSO functioning [84].

To date, there have been four RCTs of CRAFT-based treatment for CSOs of ADI (three in the USA, one international). The most recent RCT developed and refined digital delivery of two modified CRAFT interventions, CRAFT-A (group protocol) and CRAFT-C (protocol with live coaching), to assess their effectiveness compared to the business-as-usual model of a peer support forum (PEER). The goal was to deliver an innovative, scalable, and effective evidence-based behavioral intervention with consumer technology to an existing and growing online audience. The trial was completed in June 2022 but has not yet published findings. While previous CRAFT trials have demonstrated the intervention’s efficacy in engaging ADIs in treatment, research on digital delivery is still emerging.

Laddr®

Laddr® is an evidence-based mobile platform integrating therapeutic processes to address a wide range of behavioral challenges [85]. Laddr® is effective with multiple populations including Spanish speakers in Colombia with problematic alcohol use [86, 87]. To date, four clinical trials have been conducted: three used single-group assignment and one used non-randomized parallel assignment. The trials focused on self-regulation with applications to binge-eating, overweight, and smoking.

While research is ongoing, the current evidence base on the efficacy and effectiveness of Laddr® for SUD treatment is limited; more research is needed. A randomized clinical trial (NCT05648786) to evaluate the effectiveness of Laddr® among individuals with different SUD types is currently in the recruitment stages; its expected completion is the end of 2023 [87].

Across these five emerging DTxs, findings demonstrate that DTx technologies result in increased abstinence across multiple substances including opioids, cocaine, alcohol, and nicotine, as well as increased retention in treatment. All five support clients, while two support families and loved ones. All use some type of mobile or web-based platform, and four provide as-needed professional support. The evidence for Clickotine, We The Village, and Laddr® is somewhat weak, and clinical trials for the two have not yet been reported.

Overall, these eight reviewed DTxs involve multiple populations, including women, pregnant women, Spanish speakers, Latinx, and older adults. Only A-CHESS has been studied with individuals with justice involvement [see 34]; none have been used within carceral settings. Given the large number of justice-involved individuals in the USA, it is essential that this lack of research be remedied.

Challenges to Implementing DTx for SUD in Criminal Justice Settings

Healthcare services delivered in correctional settings vary from healthcare provided by correctional employees to services delivered through community-based systems or by contracted health professionals [42•]. While DTxs represent a potential cost-cutting solution, research on the use and implementation of DTx for SUD in correctional settings is limited. Most available research focuses on psychological outcomes and mental health, and only a small number of digital health interventions for SUD treatment exist (see [32••, 35] for reviews of this literature). Of these, three meet the qualifications for DTx designation: MAPIT [88, 89••, 90, 91], TES for offenders with SUD [92••, 93••], and A-CHESS for drug court participants [94].

Promising partnerships and projects are being funded at the intersection of criminal justice and DTx. In 2022, Pear Therapeutics partnered with the South Carolina Department of Corrections to provide reSET and reSET-O to incarcerated women [95]. This program was successfully rolled out prior to Pear Therapeutics’ filing for chapter 11 in April 2023, an outcome that experts and competitors alike are attributing to a lack of market acceptance and too high an initial valuation without enough runway to drive revenue [96, 97]. Prior to the filing, Pear Therapeutics was working with eight additional states to provide similar services to incarcerated individuals [98]. Also in 2023, Florida approved Medicaid payments for reSet and reSet-O [99]. Despite Pear Therapeutics’ filing, this Medicaid approval of DTx in a large US state marks important progress for the field as it moves toward reimbursement where no such option previously existed [100].

While DTx partnerships are only beginning in criminal justice settings, the digital health (e.g., telemedicine) footprint is much more established. For example, New York City Health and Hospitals has been collaborating with Cisco since 2017 to provide access to specialty healthcare in 12 municipal jails. Cisco’s digital health technology (i.e., telemedicine) allows administrators to coordinate virtual visits with healthcare practitioners for the jail system’s residents. This partnership has saved transportation costs while providing incarcerated individuals with access to specialty care (e.g., SUD, behavioral health). This has the added benefits of being quicker, more personalized, and flexible as providers are able to deliver care on their own schedules [101].

Texas, which has the nation’s largest incarcerated population (more than 150,000), also utilizes digital health technology. Through a partnership with the University of Texas Medical Branch, Texas correctional facilities provide telemedicine to treat 80% of the incarcerated population [98]. Given the precedents set by the broader digital health field, justice-involved contexts represent a promising arena for the implementation of DTx at scale. However, the DTx field is young and more research (e.g., population-specific effectiveness research) is needed to evaluate the implementation and effect of emerging programs in criminal justice settings.

Intersection of Privacy and Distrust

DTx and digital health interventions require sensitive data collection, yet often researchers cannot fully guarantee data anonymity or privacy. Thus individuals may have data-related concerns about legal, social, and economic harms that can contribute to the challenge of participant acceptance of digital health, particularly in SUD interventions with justice-involved populations [102•]. Issues related to data privacy and the potential for healthcare distrust among incarcerated individuals exacerbate existing barriers to SUD treatment both within and outside carceral contexts. Researchers working in this domain should apply intersectional, ethical frameworks to the design and adaptation of digital interventions. Engaging communities and representative organizations in ongoing and meaningful consultations will mitigate potential harms and address concerns of this population [103].

Cultural Representation

While not a DTx study with justice-involved populations, Campbell et al. [104] did conduct an acceptability and feasibility study of TES among American Indian and Alaskan Native (AI/AN) populations. Results provide helpful insights on tailoring interventions to specific populations in a culturally appropriate fashion. Based on participants’ feedback, they recommend moderate adaptations related to delivery and presentation (e.g., casting an AI/AN actor to record audio and video components in a Native voice, use of stories rather than “academic” presentations). These adaptations demonstrate how DTx interventions can be tailored to different cultures while maintaining fidelity.

In sum, individuals with justice involvement, when compared to the general population, present with unique treatment needs that must be considered when preparing DTx and digital health interventions. These needs are differentiated and shaped by life course experiences and social identity characteristics, such as cultural/racial/ethnic identity, gender identity, adverse childhood experiences, SUD type and severity, and negative experiences with the healthcare and/or justice system(s), which can engender feelings of distrust and/or stigma. Although the criminal justice system was an early adopter of digital health initiatives, it has not remained at the forefront of innovation for those with SUD.

It is critical that technological advancements be available to justice-involved populations if the digital healthcare gap in correctional settings is to be closed. State and federal prisons need to have the infrastructure necessary to support digital health services, including DTx, while assuring that security and privacy issues are addressed and maintained.

Conclusions

We investigated DTx as a treatment for SUD, reviewing the use and implementation of digital health and DTx for SUD treatment in criminal justice settings and exploring the implementation of DTx for SUD treatment both generally and within criminal justice settings.

DTx for SUD

Much research indicates that digital health and DTx assist individuals with SUD, treating those with nicotine/tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, cannabis, and opioids [44]. However, when looking at FDA-approved DTx interventions for SUD, only three options exist: reSET, reSET-O, and DynamiCare Health. Only one, TES, has been studied in criminal justice settings where it was found to be equally effective compared to standard treatment in reducing criminality, relapse, and HIV risk behavior [46]. Despite Pear Therapeutics’ recent bankruptcy filing, the evidence base for reSET and reSET-O is strong. DynamiCare Health is approved for smoking cessation during pregnancy, but evidence related to other SUD types is emerging [61, 62]. Five additional DTx interventions were identified; each has been studied and found to be at least somewhat successful. The evidence for CBT4CBT dates back to 2008 [67••]; it has been used with multiple populations [71, 72••] and SUD types [68, 69], and it has been studied in both clinical [67••] and real-world settings [73•]. The evidence for A-CHESS is moderate, with studies demonstrating success in treatment for SUD [75] and less risk of relapse [76]. It has been studied in multiple populations [76, 77] including justice-involved individuals [34]. The other three emerging DTxs, Clickotine, We The Village, and Laddr, are promising but need additional research with other populations and SUDs in order to demonstrate their effectiveness.

Questions regarding DTx

We also must consider questions raised about digital health and DTx. The most often mentioned are below.

  1. Do digital health/DTxs engage clients long enough for their condition(s) to improve [105]? Studies involving reSet, reSet-O, and CBT4CBT have demonstrated increased adherence to SUD treatment (e.g., 17, 22, 64, 68, 73•).

  2. Are staff and administrators trained appropriately to use the technology [106]? This question is site-specific. In some cases, there may be issues with the cost and time to train staff and administrators. However, at least one study identified indicated that staff had been trained and were able to assist study participants with issues related to the technology [34].

  3. Can the time to complete the regulatory requirements for new DTx be lessened [107, 108]? This issue is unknown. The FDA can change the regulatory requirements but has not yet done so regarding digital health/DTx.

  4. Will insurance and/or Medicare approve the use of digital health modalities [104, 105]? This gradually is becoming less of an issue. Specific to the question, Florida has approved Medicaid payments for DTx [99]. Another study found that the use of reSET among individuals with SUD was associated with significant reductions in healthcare resource utilization and costs and concluded that reSET provided an “economic benefit” [15]. A final study found that some insurance companies do cover reSET-O and A-CHESS [66].

DTx in Criminal Justice Settings

In spite of the number of studies focusing on treatments for SUD, few have been completed in criminal justice settings. Challenges to DTx in such settings can be the perceived expense of the products, lack of staffing within the carceral setting dampening interest in novel approaches, data collection difficulties, privacy fears and distrust of the system on the part of potential participants, and concern about continuing treatment upon reentry with family and friends. However, concerns can be overcome, and some (e.g., cost of DTxs [24, 25, 5357]) have been shown to be false.

The most basic conclusion is that the justice-involved population, those in carceral settings and on probation or parole, are among the least likely to receive DTx for SUD. Given the proportion of these individuals who are estimated to enter a carceral setting with an SUD, the lack of research in the area and the concomitant lack of DTx must be corrected. This is especially important given that DTx, because they can be delivered both within and outside the carceral setting, may reduce the stigma associated with going to clinics known to treat stigmatized disorders (e.g., 66).

To make such improvements, researchers, leaders, and carceral staff must access evidence-based treatments (e.g., DTx) and remove existing barriers to treatment. Specifically, we recommend

  • Addressing gaps in the digital and technological infrastructure of jails and prisons that inhibit access to digital healthcare and therapeutics;

  • Decreasing regulatory requirements for DTx that utilize evidence-based treatments (e.g., CBT, TES);

  • Defining a Medicare/Medicaid coverage pathway and reimbursement framework for DTx;

  • Increasing funding for longitudinal research to evaluate the effectiveness of DTx; and

  • Establishing partnerships between DTx companies and Departments of Corrections to streamline access to DTx treatments for individuals with SUD in carceral settings.

Funding

This study was funded under the JCOIN cooperative agreement (MPI Taxman and Rudes) by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaborative contributions of NIDA and support from the U2CDA050097 award. The contents of this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIDA or NIH.

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest Authors Sawyer-Morris, Wilde, and Taxman declare that they have no conflicts of interest. Author Todd Molfenter has < 1% stock ownership in CHESS Mobile Health that markets the Connections App. Dr. Molfenter played no role in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of the studies reviewed for this article. Dr. Molfenter has worked extensively with his institution to manage any conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent All reported studies/experiments with human or animal subjects performed by the authors have been previously published (or currently are under review for publication) and complied with all applicable ethical standards (including the Helsinki Declaration and its amendments, institutional/national research committee standards, and international/national/institutional guidelines).

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as:

• Of importance

•• Of major importance

  • 1.Glucobit Inc. Reframe: quit or cut back on drinking, build healthier drinking habits. 2022. Reframe App; website: https://www.reframeapp.com. Accessed 18 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.HereNOW Help, Inc. HereNOW Connect. 2021. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.herenowhelp.rehab.client&hl=en_US&gl=US. Accessed 18 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Hong JS, Wasden C, Han DH. Introduction of digital therapeutics. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2021. 10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Wright W. Digital therapeutics and FDA regulations. Pearl Pathways, 2022. https://www.pearlpathways.com/digital-therapeutics-and-fda-regulations/. Accessed 15 Aug 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Wang C, Lee C, Shin H. Digital therapeutics from bench to bedside. NPJ Digit Med. 2023;6:38. 10.1038/s41746-023-00777-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Carroll K. Therapy Manuals for Drug Addiction. Manual 1. A cognitive-behavioral approach: treating cocaine addiction. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Vassev N. How digital therapeutics platforms are revolutionizing healthcare delivery. In Forbes. 2022. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2022/02/17/how-digital-therapeutics-platforms-are-revolutionizing-healthcare-delivery/?sh=6d16fe8b5a28. Accessed 18 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Torous J, Stern AD, Bourgeois FT. Regulatory considerations to keep place with innovation in digital health products. Npj Digit Med. 2022;5:121. 10.1038/s41746-022-00668-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Sepah SC, Jiang L, Peters AL. Long-term outcomes of a web-based diabetes prevention program: 2-year results of a single-arm longitudinal study 2015. J Med Internet Res 2015;17(4):e92. 10.2196/jmir.4052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ellis TD, Earhart GM. Digital therapeutics in Parkinson’s disease: practical applications and future potential. J Parkinsons Dis. 2021. 10.3233/JPD-202407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kario K, Harada N, Okura A. Digital therapeutics in hypertension: evidence and perspectives. Hypertension. 2022. 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.122.19414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Lawes-Wickwar S, McBain H, Mulligan K. Application and effectiveness of telehealth to support severe mental illness management: systematic review. JMIR Ment Health. 2018;5(4):e62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.DeNicola N, Grossman D, Marko K, Sonalkar S, Tobah YSB, Ganju N, Witkop CT, Henderson JT, Butler JL, Lowery C. Telehealth interventions to improve obstetric and gynecologic health outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2020. 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Cognoa. Cognoa receives FDA breakthrough designation for autism diagnostic and digital therapeutic devices. 2019. Cognoa; website: https://cognoa.com/cognoa-receives-fda-breakthrough-designations-for-autism-diagnostic-and-digital-therapeutic-devices/. Accessed 18 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Shah N, Velez FF, Colman S, Kauffman L, Ruetsch C, Anastassopoulos K, Maricich Y. Real-world reductions in healthcare resource utilization over 6 months in patients with substance use disorders treated with a prescription digital therapeutic. Adv Ther. 2022. 10.1007/s12325-022-02215-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.•.Maricich YA, Bickel WK, Marsch LA, Gatchalian K, Botbyl J, Luderer HF. Safety and efficacy of a prescription digital therapeutic as an adjunct to buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder. Curr Med Res Opin 2021;37(2):167–73. 10.1080/03007995.2020.1846022 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This study is important because it demonstrated the safety and efficacy of a DTx that incorporates multiple evidence-based approaches to SUD treatment (i.e., community reinforcement approach, contingency management, CBT) as an adjunct to buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder.)
  • 17.Maricich YA, Gerwien R, Kuo A, Malone DC, Velez FF. Real-world use and clinical outcomes after 24 weeks of treatment with a prescription digital therapeutic for opioid use disorder. Hosp Pract 2021;49(5):348–55. 10.1080/21548331.2021.1974243 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Powell RE, Henstenburg JM, Cooper G, Hollander JE, Rising KL. Patient perceptions of telehealth primary care video visits. Ann Fam Med. 2017. 10.1370/afm.2095. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rush KL, Hatt L, Janke R, Burton L, Ferrier M, Tetrault M. The efficacy of telehealth delivered educational approaches for patients with chronic diseases a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2018;101(8):1310–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Jacobson NC, Quist RE, Lee CM, Marsch LA. Using digital therapeutics to target gaps and failures in traditional mental health and addiction treatments. In Digital therapeutics for mental health and addiction: the state of the science and vision for the future. Cambridge, MA: Academic; 2023;5–18. 10.1016/B978-0-323-90045-4.00005-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Crisafulli S, Santoro E, Recchia G, Trifirò G. Digital therapeutics in perspective: from regulatory challenges to post-marketing surveillance. Front Drug Saf Regul 2022;2:900946. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdsfr.2022.900946 [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Stanciu CN. Digital therapeutics for substance use disorders: from research to practice. Psychiatric Times 2021. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/digital-therapeutics-for-substance-use-disorders-from-research-to-practice. Accessed 31 Jan 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.DynamiCare Health. DynamiCare Health | technology for substance use recovery. DynamiCare Health website; 2017. https://www.dynamicarehealth.com. Accessed 10 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Dang A, Arora D, Rane P. (2020) Role of digital therapeutics and the changing future of healthcare. J Family Med Prim Care 2020;9(5):2207–13. 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_105_20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Farese C. Can digital therapeutics revolutionize medicine? IDEO The Journal. 2019. https://www.ideo.com/journal/can-digital-therapeutics-revolutionize-medicine. Accessed 21 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Meyer B, Utter G-L, Hillman C. A personalized, interactive, cognitive behavioral therapy–based digital therapeutic (MODIA) for adjunctive treatment of opioid use disorder: development study. JMIR Mental Health. 2021. 10.2196/31173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Barenie RE, Cernasev A, Jasmin H, Knight P, Chisholm-Burns M. A qualitative systematic review of access to substance use disorder care in the United States criminal justice system. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. 10.3390/ijerph191912647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Hulsey J, Zawislak K. Patient journey map: substance use disorder treatment and recovery. Bethesda, MD: Addiction Policy Forum; 2022. Technical Report. 10.13140/RG.2.2.10020.96648 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.National Institute on Drug Abuse. Drug facts: criminal justice. 2020. https://nida.nih.gov/sites/default/files/drugfacts-criminal-justice.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Waddell EN, Baker R, Hartung DM, Hildebran CJ, Nguyen T, Collins DM, Larsen JE, Stack E. ROAR Protocol Development Team. Reducing overdose after release from incarceration (ROAR): study protocol for an intervention to reduce risk of fatal and non-fatal opioid overdose among women after release from prison. Health Justice 2020;8:18. 10.1186/s40352-020-00113-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Maruschak LM, Bronson J, Alper M. Alcohol and drug use and treatment reported by prisoners (NCJ 252641; Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016) Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs. UK: U.S. Department of Justice; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.••.Leach R, Carreiro S, Shaffer PM, Gaba A, Smelson D Digital health interventions for mental health, substance use, and co-occurring disorders in the criminal justice population: a scoping review. Front Psychiatry 2022;794785. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.794785 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This review is very important because articles were screened to include (1) juvenile and adult populations with involvement in the criminal justice system (on probation or parole, in prison, or who have re-entered the community after being released from prison), (2) with SUD and/or mental health issues, and (3) studying some form of digital health.)
  • 33.•.Langdon KJ, Jiménez Muñoz P, Block A, Scherzer C, Ramsey S. Feasibility and acceptability of a digital health intervention to promote continued engagement in medication for opioid use disorder following release from jail/prison. Subst Abuse. 2022. 10.1177/11782218221127111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This study is important because, although the sample size is small, the study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of a combined in-person and text message–delivered intervention to support community reentry and continuation of MOUD.)
  • 34.Wilde JA, Zawislak K, Sawyer-Morris G, Hulsey J, Molfenter T, Taxman FS. The adoption and sustainability of digital therapeutics in justice systems: a pilot feasibility study. Int J Drug Policy. 2023. 10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Batastini AB, King CM, Morgan RD, McDaniel B. Telepsychological services with criminal justice and substance abuse clients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Serv. 2016. 10.1037/SER0000042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Nacci PL, Turner CA, Waldron RJ, Broyles E. (2002). Implementing telemedicine in correctional facilities. U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Defense. 2002. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/190310.pdf. Accessed 12 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 37••.McDonald DC, Hassol A, Carlson K, McCullough J, Fournier E, Yap J. Telemedicine can reduce correctional health care costs: an evaluation of a prison telemedicine network (research report) (NCJ 175040). Prepared by Abt Associates, Inc. for the Joint Program Steering Group, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice; 1999 [Google Scholar]; (Although 24 years old, this seminal evaluation is very important because it demonstrated the feasibility of digital health implementation in carceral settings. Specifically, results demonstrated that digital health modalities could improve inmate access to specialty health-care while reducing costs.)
  • 38.Waldron RJ. National Institute of Justice helps facilities implement telemedicine program (NCJ 211597). National Institute of Justice. 2002. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/04_02.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Larsen D, HudnallStamm B, Davis K, Magaletta PR. Prison telemedicine and telehealth utilization in the United States: state and federal perceptions of benefits and barriers. Telemed J E Health. 2004. 10.1089/tmj.2004.10.S-81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Haque SN. Uses of telehealth to support identification and treatment of health disorders in the criminal justice system. Tele-health and Medicine Today 2020;5(4). 10.30953/tmt.v5.205 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.•.Tian EJ, Venugopalan S, Kumar S, Beard M. The impacts of and outcomes from telehealth delivered in prisons: a systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2021. 10.1371/journal.pone.0251840. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This review is important because it looked specifically at quantitative studies of telehealth in prisons. The review shows that telehealth is at least as effective as conventional care while also pointing to the importance of the local context (e.g., cost of services).)
  • 42.•.Salazar D. The American correctional healthcare system is ailing: Technology innovation as a prescription for penal system healthcare delivery [Thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA]. 2022. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1184599.pdf [Google Scholar]; (This study is important as it looks at the overall state of healthcare, both physical and mental, of incarcerated individuals. The author concludes that technology infrastructure is key to supporting emerging DTx that could address suicide, mental illness, and other medical health maladies.)
  • 43.Wicklund E. Can telehealth, mHealth improve oud treatment in America’s prisons? MHealthIntelligence. 2019. https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/can-telehealth-mhealth-improve-oud-treatment-in-americas-prisons. Accessed 12 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Marsch LA. Overview of the state of the science of applying digital therapeutics to substance use disorder (SUD) care. CSAT/CTN Webinar: Digital Therapeutics for Substance Use Disorders, Virtual 2017. http://ctndisseminationlibrary.org/PDF/1285Marsch.pdf. Accessed 8 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Budney AJ, Higgins ST. A community reinforcement plus vouchers approach: treating cocaine addiction. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Chaple M, Sacks S, McKendrick K, Marsch LA, Belenko S, Leukefeld C, Prendergast M, French M. (2016). A comparative study of the therapeutic education system for incarcerated substance-abusing offenders. Prison J 2016;96(3):485–508. 10.1177/0032885516636858. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Christensen DR, Landes RD, Jackson L, Marsch LA, Mancino M, Chopra MP, Bickel WK. Adding an internet-delivered treatment to an efficacious treatment package for opioid dependence. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2014. 10.1037/a0037496. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Luderer HF, Campbell ANC, Nunes EV, Enman NM, Xiong X, Gerwien R, Maricich YA. Engagement patterns with a digital therapeutic for substance use disorders: correlations with abstinence outcomes. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2022. 10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108585. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Marsch LA, Carroll KM, Kiluk BD. Technology-based interventions for the treatment and recovery management of substance use disorders a JSAT special issue. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2014;46:4. 10.1080/03007995.2020.1846023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.•.Xiong X, Braun S, Stitzer M, Luderer H, Shafai G, Hare B, Stevenson M, Maricich Y. Evaluation of real-world outcomes associated with use of a prescription digital therapeutic to treat substance use disorders. Am J Addict. 2023. 10.1111/ajad.13346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This large study (N = 602) is important as it demonstrated high rates of retention and substantial rates of abstinence at the end of treatment for SUD with a DTx. Authors concluded that DTxs “hold promise as a new way to access effective SUD treatment.”)
  • 51.Kawasaki S, Mills-Huffnagle S, Aydinoglo N, Maxin H, Nunes E. Patient- and provider-reported experiences of a mobile novel digital therapeutic in people with opioid use disorder (reset-o): feasibility and acceptability study. JMIR Form Res. 2022. 10.2196/33073. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Maricich YA, Xiong X, Gerwien R, Kuo A, Velez F, Imbert B, Boyer K, Luderer HF, Brau S, Williams K. Real-world evidence for a prescription digital therapeutic to treat opioid use disorder. Cur Med Res Opin. 2021;37(2):175–83. 10.1080/03007995.2020.1846023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Velez FF, Anastassopoulos KP, Colman S, Shah N, Kauffman L, Murphy SM, Ruetsch C, Maricich YA. Reduced healthcare resource utilization in patients with opioid use disorder in the 12 months after initiation of a prescription digital therapeutic. Adv Ther. 2022. 10.1007/s12325-022-02217-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Velez FF, Colman S, Kauffman L, Anastassopoulos K, Murphy S, Maricich Y. Real-world changes in US health system hospital-based services following treatment with a prescription digital therapeutic for opioid use disorder. Hosp Pract. 2021;49:347. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Velez FF, Colman S, Kauffman L, Ruetsch C, Anastassopoulos K. Real-world reduction in healthcare resource utilization following treatment of opioid use disorder with reSET-O, a novel prescription digital therapeutic. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2021;21:76. 10.1080/14737167.2021.1840357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Velez FF, Colman S, Kauffman L, Ruetsch C, Anastassopoulos K, Maricich YA. Comparison of healthcare resource utilization between patients who engaged or did not engage with a prescription digital therapeutic for opioid use disorder. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2021. 10.2147/CEOR.S334274. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Wang W, Gellings Lowe N, Jalali A, Murphy SM. Economic modeling of reSET-O a prescription digital therapeutic for patients with opioid use disorder. J Med Econ. 2021;24:68. 10.1080/13696998.2020.1858581. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Kawasaki S. A randomized clinical trial of comprehensive cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) via reSET-O for a hub and spoke medication assisted treatment (MAT) system of care (Clinical Trial Registration NCT04129580). National Library of Medicine; 2023. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04129580. [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Johns Hopkins University. Pilot study of reSET-O to treatment-as-usual in acute care settings (Clinical Trial Registration NCT04817267). National Library of Medicine, 2023. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04817267 [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Hammond AS, Sweeney MM, Chikosi TU, Stitzer ML. Digital delivery of a contingency management intervention for substance use disorder: a feasibility study with DynamiCare Health. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2021. 10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108425. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.DeFulio A, Fergeson J, Brown HD, Ryan S. A smartphone-smartcard platform for implementing contingency management in buprenorphine maintenance patients with concurrent stimulant use disorder. Fron Psychiatry 2021. 10.1016/j.jsat.2020.108188. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.DeFulio A, Rzeszutek MJ, Furgeson J, Ryan S, Rezania S. A smartphone-smartcard platform for contingency management in an inner-city substance use disorder outpatient program. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2021. 10.1016/j.jsat.2020.108188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Bickel WK, Marsch LA, Buchhalter AR, Badger GJ. Computerized behavior therapy for opioid-dependent outpatients: a randomized controlled trial. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008. 10.1037/1064-1297.16.2.132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Kurti AN, Tang K, Bolivar HA, Evemy C, Medina N, Skelly J, Nighbor T, Higgins ST. Smartphone-based financial incentives to promote smoking cessation during pregnancy: a pilot study. Prev Med. 2020. 10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Ryan S. A prospective cohort study of contingency management using a smartphone application in patients with substance use disorder (Clinical Trial Registration No. NCT04162132). National Library of Medicine, 2019;https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04162132. [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Tice JA, Whittington MD, Fleutsch N, Zapata LV, Mendola N, Chapman R, Campbell J, Pearson SD, Bradt P. Digital health technologies as an adjunct to medication assisted therapy for opioid use disorder; Evidence Report. Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, 2020. https://icer.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/ICER_Digital_Therapeutics_for_OUD_Evidence_Report.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 67.••.Carroll KM, Ball SA, Martino S, Nich C, Babuscio TA, Nuro KF, Gordon MA, Portnoy GA, Rounsaville BJ. Computer-assisted delivery of cognitive-behavioral therapy for addiction: a randomized trial of CBT4CBT. Am J Psychiatry. 2008;165(7):881–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (While published in 2008, this seminal study is very important because it demonstrated the efficacy of CBT4CBT, one of the most widely used digital behavioral interventions in the SUD DTx field.)
  • 68.Kiluk BD, Devore KA, Buck MB, Nich C, Frankforter TL, LaPaglia DM, Yates BT, Gordon MA, Carroll KM. Randomized trial of computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for alcohol use disorders: efficacy as a virtual stand-alone and treatment add-on compared with standard outpatient treatment. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2016;40(9):1991–2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Carroll KM, Kiluk BD, Nich C, Gordon MA, Portnoy GA, Marino BA, Ball SA. Computer-assisted delivery of cognitive-behavioral therapy: efficacy and durability of CBT4CBT among cocaine-dependent individuals maintained on methadone. Am J Psychiatry. 2014. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.•.Kelpin SS, Parlier-Ahmad AB, Jallo N, Carroll K, Svikis DS. A pilot randomized trial of CBT4CBT for women in residential treatment for substance use disorders. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2022. 10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (While not a clinical trial, this feasibility study is important because it expanded the evidence base supporting the use of CBT4CBT in outpatient settings and with underrepresented groups (i.e., women in residential treatment).)
  • 71.Paris M, Silva M, Añez-Nava L, Jaramillo Y, Kiluk D, Gordon A, Nich C, Frankforter T, Devore K, Ball SA, Carroll KM. (2018). Culturally adapted, web-based cognitive behavioral therapy for Spanish-speaking individuals with substance use disorders: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Public Health 2018;108(11):1535–42. 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.••.Silva MA, Añez LM, Carroll KM, Jaramillo Y, Kiluk BD, Frankforter T, Ball SA, Gordon MA, Paris M. Computer-based training for cognitive behavioral therapy for Spanish-speaking substance users: adaptation and satisfaction. J Ethn Subst Abuse 2022;17:1–21. 10.1080/15332640.2022.2086194 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This study is very important because it describes how computer-based training for cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT4CBT) was culturally and linguistically adapted for Spanish-speakers. Participants indicated high levels of satisfaction with the program and felt it was relevant to their lives.)
  • 73.•.Shi JM, Henry SP, Dwy SL, Orazietti SA, & Carroll KM. Randomized pilot trial of web-based cognitive-behavioral therapy adapted for use in office-based buprenorphine maintenance. Substance Abuse 2019;40(2):132–5. 10.1080/08897077.2019.1569192 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This study is important because it contributed preliminary evidence that web-based interventions such as CBT4CBT as an augment to medically assisted treatment (i.e., buprenorphine) are viable and effective in clinical settings.)
  • 74.Kiluk BD, Nich C, Babuscio T, Carroll KM. Quality vs. quantity: acquisition of coping skills following computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for substance use disorders. Addiction (Abingdon, England) 2010;05(12):2120–7. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03076.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.CHESS Health. A-CHESS - digital health products for complex populations. Center for Health Care Strategies. 2018. https://www.chcs.org/digital-health-products/a-chess/. Accessed 9 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Muroff J, Robinson W, Chassler D, López LM, Lundgren L, Guauque C, Dargon-Hart S, Stewart E, Dejesus D, Johnson K, Pe-Romashko K, Gustafson DH. An outcome study of the CASA-CHESS smartphone relapse prevention tool for Latinx Spanish-speakers with substance use disorders. Subst Use Misuse. 2019;54:1449. 10.1080/10826084.2019.1585457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Johnston DC, Mathews WD, Maus A, Gustafson DH. Using smartphones to improve retention among impoverished substance-using Appalachian women: a naturalistic study. Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment. 2019. 10.1177/1178221819861377. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Gustafson DH, McTavish FM, Chih M-Y, Atwood AK, Johnson RA, Boyle MG, Levy MS, Driscoll H, Chisholm SM, Dillenburg L, Isham A, Shah D. A smartphone application to support recovery from alcoholism: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiat. 2014. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.4642. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Gustafson DH, Landucci G, McTavish F, Kornfield R, Johnson RA, Mares M-L, Westergaard RP, Quanbeck A, Alagoz E, Pe-Romashko K, Thomas C, Shah D. The effect of bundling medication-assisted treatment for opioid addiction with mHealth: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial. Trials. 2016. 10.1186/s13063-016-1726-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Glass JE, McKay JR, Gustafson DH, Kornfield R, Rathouz PJ, McTavish FM, Atwood A, Isham A, Quanbeck A, Shah D. Treatment seeking as a mechanism of change in a randomized controlled trial of a mobile health intervention to support recovery from alcohol use disorders. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2017. 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.03.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Iacoviello BM, Steinerman JR, Klein DB, Silver TL, Berger AG, Luo SX, Schork NJ. Clickotine, a personalized smartphone app for smoking cessation: initial evaluation. JMIR MHealth UHealth. 2017. 10.2196/mhealth.7226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Iacoviello B, Shin D, Kruse G, Steinerman J, Schork N. Adherence to smoking cessation medications among Clickotine® users. Iproc. 2017. 10.2196/iproc.8359. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Lakhan S. Clinical trial of an innovative digital therapeutic for smoking cessation with biochemical verification (Clinical Trial Registration No. NCT05440721). National Library of Medicine. 2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05440721. Accessed 8 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Kirby KC, Marlowe B, Festinger DS, Garvey KA, La Monaca V. Community reinforcement training for family and significant others of drug abusers: a unilateral intervention to increase treatment entry of drug users. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1999. 10.1016/s0376-8716(99)00022-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Scherer EA, Metcalf SA, Whicker CL, Bartels SM, Grabinski M, Kim SJ, Sweeney MA, Lemley SM, Lavoie H, Haiyi X, Bissett PG, Dallery J, Kiernan M, Lowe MR, Onken L, Prochaska JJ, Stoeckel LE, Poldrack RA, MacKinnon DP, Marsch LA. Momentary influences on self-regulation with two populations with health risk behaviors: adults who smoke and adults who are overweight and have a binge-eating disorder. Front Digit Health. 2022. 10.3389/fdgth.2022.78895. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Shannon CL, Bartels SM, Cepeda M, Castro S, Cubillos L, Suárez-Obando F, Williams MJ, Gómez Restrepo C, Uribe M, Marsch L, Torrey WC. Perspectives on the implementation of screening and treatment for depression and alcohol. Community Ment Health J. 2021. 10.1007/s10597-021-00781-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Grabinski & Square2 Systems, Inc. Socializing a science-based digital therapeutic for substance use disorders (Clinical Trial Registration No. NCT05648786). National Library of Medicine. 2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05648786. Accessed 9 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Cowell AJ, Zarkin GA, Wedehase BJ, Lerch J, Walters ST, Taxman FS. Cost and cost-effectiveness of computerized vs. in-person motivational interventions in the criminal justice system. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2018;84:42. 10.1016/jjsat.2018.01.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.••.Lerch J, Walters ST, Tang L, Taxman FS. Effectiveness of a computerized motivational intervention on treatment initiation and substance use: results from a randomized trial. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2017. 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.07.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This study is important because it tested the efficacy of MAPIT, the first digital therapeutic designed specifically for the treatment of SUD among parolees. Findings suggest that an integrated health-justice computerized intervention as part of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) can be used to address public safety and health issues.)
  • 90.Taxman FS, Walters ST, Sloas LB, Lerch J, Rodriguez M. Motivational tools to improve probationer treatment outcomes. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015. 10.1016/j.cct.2015.05.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Walters ST, Ondersma SJ, Ingersoll KS, Rodriguez M, Lerch J, Rossheim ME, Taxman FS. (2014). MAPIT: development of a web-based intervention targeting substance abuse treatment in the criminal justice system. J Subst Abuse Treat 2014;46(1):60–5. 10.1016/j.jsat.2013.07.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.••.Campbell ANC, Nunes EV, Matthews AG, Stitzer M, Miele GM, Polsky D, Turrigiano E, Walters S, McClure EA, Kyle TL, Wahle A, Van Veldhuisen P, Goldman B, Babcock D, Stabile PQ, Winhusen T, Ghitza UE. Internet-delivered treatment for substance abuse: a multisite randomized controlled trial. Am J Psychiatry. 2014. 10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.13081055. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This study is important as this pivotal trial established the efficacy of reSET, the first FDA-approved prescription digital therapeutic for the treatment of SUD. Findings suggest that engagement with reSET led to abstinence and increased treatment adherence compared to controls.)
  • 93.••.Chaple M, Sacks S, McKendrick K, Marsch LA, Belenko S, Leukefeld C, Prendergast M, French M. Feasibility of a computerized intervention for offenders with substance use disorders: a research note. J Exp Criminol. 2014. 10.1007/s11292-013-9187-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (While published in 2014, this feasibility study is important because it demonstrated that DTx, such as TES, can be implemented successfully in prison—a critical contribution given the barriers to access and delivery of treatment in carceral settings.)
  • 94.Johnson K, Richards S, Chih M-Y, Moon TJ, Curtis H, Gustafson DH. A pilot test of a mobile app for drug court participants. Subst Abuse 2016;10. 10.4137/SART.S33390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Kaltwasser J. Pear inks deal to provide SUD, OUD products to incarcerated people in South Carolina. Healthc Exec 2022. https://www.managedhealthcareexecutive.com/view/pear-inks-deal-to-provide-sud-oud-products-to-incarcerated-people-in-south-carolina. Accessed 12 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 96.O’Donovan M. (2023). Pear Therapeutics: what happened and what does this mean for DTx? HealthXL; https://www.healthxl.com/blog/pear-therapeutics-what-happened-and-what-does-this-mean-for-dtx. Accessed 8 Jun 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Gastfriend E. (2023). Pear Therapeutics bankruptcy: a competitor’s perspective. DynamiCare Health; https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/pear-therapeutics-bankruptcy-competitors-perspective-eric-gastfriend. Accessed 14 Oct 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Ollove M. State prisons turn to telemedicine to improve health and save money. 2016. http://pew.org/1PidmnA. Accessed 12 Feb 2023.
  • 99.Pear Therapeutics. Therapeutics announces inclusion of reSET® and reSET-OP® on January 2023 Florida Medicaid preferred drug list. 2023. https://peartherapeutics.com/pear-therapeutics-announces-inclusion-of-reset-and-reset-o-on-the-january-2023-florida-medicaid-preferred-drug-list/. Accessed 12 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Murphy M. (2023, April 7). Pear Therapeutics files for chapter 11 and will seek to sell assets through sales process. Pear Therapeutics; (US: ); https://peartherapeutics.com/pear-therapeutics-files-for-chapter-11-and-will-seek-to-sell-assets-through-sales-process/. Accessed 8 Jun 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 101.mHealthIntelligence. Telemedicine helps NYC jails cut costs and complexity in prisoner care. HealthIntelligence. 2017. https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/telemedicine-helps-nyc-jails-cut-costs-and-complexity-in-prisoner-care. Accessed 12 Feb 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 102•.Vandergrift LA, Christopher PP. Do prisoners trust the health-care system? Health Justice 2021;9(15). 10.1186/s40352-021-00141-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; (This study is important because it looks at healthcare system distrust among incarcerated individuals. Institutional conditions may create a mindset of distrust such that those incarcerated may be reluctant to seek care. Distrust was related to age and race/ethnicity.)
  • 103.Smith AKJ, Davis MDM, MacGibbon J, Broady TR, Ellard J, Rule J, Cook T, Duck-Chong E, Holt M, Newman CE. Engaging stigmatised communities in Australia with digital health systems: towards data justice in public health. Sex Res Social Policy. 2023. 10.1007/s13178-023-00791-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Campbell ANC, Turrigiano E, Moore M, Miele GM, Rieckmann T, Hu M-C, Kropp F, Ringor-Carty R, Nunes EV. Acceptability of a web-based community reinforcement approach for substance use disorders with treatment-seeking American Indians/Alaska Natives. Community Ment Health J. 2015. 10.1007/s10597-014-9764-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Nahum-Shani I, Shaw SD, Carpenter SM, Murphy SA, Yoon C. (2022). Engagement in digital interventions. Am Psychol 2022;77(7):836–52. 10.1037/amp0000983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Williams MG, Stott R, Bromwich N, Oblak S, Espie CA, Rose JB. (2020). Determinants of and barriers to adoption of digital therapeutics for mental health at scale in NHS. BMJ Innov 2020; 10.1136/bmjinnov-2019-000384 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Lin L, Fernandez AC, Bonar EE. Telehealth for substance-using populations in the age of coronavirus disease 2019. JAMA Psychiat. 2020. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.1698. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernández J-L, Beecham J, Cartwright M, Beynon M, Bower P, Fitzpatrick R, Bardsley M, Newman SP. Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study); nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2013. 10.1136/bmj.f1035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES