Table 2:

Telemedicine approaches for patients with AUD

Authors	Country	Study Design	Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria	Intervention and Comparison Groups	Outcomes
Videoconference and phone call
Mitchell et al., 2019 (12)	United States	Prospective cohort study (n = 77)	Inclusion: at least 21 years of age, alcohol use disorder, able to pay $99 to access telemedicine service	– Intervention: an AUD treatment program via a smartphone application that offered physician visits, support from recovery coaches, and monitoring of medication adherence and blood alcohol content levels. Visits were conducted via telephone and videoconferencing. – Videoconferencing software used: N/A. – Comparison group: none.	– Retention rate was 55% at 90 days. – Among patients who continued to be engaged with the service at 90 days, their average blood alcohol content decreased by 50%.
Ghodsian et al., 2018 (13)	United States	Case report (n = 4)	Inclusion: mild-moderate opioid/alcohol/benzodiazepine/hypnotic/anxiolytic use disorders; stable living conditions; available social supports; access to the Internet; stable mental/medical health; motivation for substance use treatment; history of withdrawal symptoms	– Intervention: 7–11 day telemedicine detoxification treatment. – Initial visit—addiction medicine physician via videoconferencing. – Physicians prescribed detoxification medications. – Physicians contacted patients by telephone 1–4 times per day to monitor withdrawal symptoms, vitals, and medical and psychiatric issues and adjust detoxification medications. – Videoconferencing software used: compliant with Ryan Haight Act that prevents illegal distribution of controlled substances via the Internet. – Comparison group: none.	– Patients were satisfied with the convenience of the virtual service. – Patients only experienced mild withdrawal symptoms and did not have any complications.
Satellite site
Leibowitz et al., 2020 (14)	United States	Pilot feasibility prospective study (n = 566) Patients with a video consult with an addiction medicine specialist (n = 32)	Inclusion: AUD; issues with alcohol use; barriers to starting treatment through existing services	– Intervention: Patients were seen via videoconferencing by an addiction medicine physician at their primary care provider's (PCP) clinic.	– 52 virtual visit requests were made. 32 virtual visits were completed. 20 visits requested were not completed because the addiction medicine specialist was unavailable, the PCP did not follow the workflow, or there was poor internet connection. – 3 virtual visits were completed via telephone because of technical problems. For 57% of virtual visits completed, the quality was affected by technological issues. – 34.4% of patients who received a virtual visit were prescribed AUD medications compared with 6.4% of patients without a virtual visit.
		Patients without a video consult with an addiction medicine specialist (n = 534)		– Physicians performed clinical assessments, provided motivational enhancement and psychoeducation about treatment options, and scheduled follow-up appointments as needed – Provided guidance to primary care providers about pharmacotherapy, prescribed medications, and ordered lab work – Kaiser Permanente Northern California HIPAA-compliant video visit web and mobile apps were used – Comparison group: patients who did not receive a virtual visit with an addiction medicine physician