Transitioning Virtual-Only Group Therapy for Substance Use Disorder Patients to a Hybrid Model

Tyler S Oesterle,1,* Nicholas L Bormann,1,* Domenic A Ochal,2 Stephan Arndt,3,4 Scott A Breitinger1 1Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 2Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA; 3Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA; 4Department of Biostatistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Nicholas L Bormann, Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA, Tel +1 507 284 2088, Fax +1 507 284 4158, Email bormann.nicholas@mayo.eduPurpose: Telehealth is associated with a myriad of benefits; however, little is known regarding substance use disorder (SUD) treatment outcomes when participants join group therapy sessions in a combination in-person and virtual setting (hybrid model). We sought to determine if treatment completion rates differed.Patients and Methods: Policy changes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic created a naturalistic, observational cohort study at seven intensive outpatient (IOP) programs in rural Minnesota. Virtual-only delivery occurred 6/1/2020-6/30/2021, while hybrid groups occurred 7/1/2021-7/31/2022. Data was evaluated retrospectively for participants who initiated and discharged treatment during the study period. Participants were IOP group members 18 years and older who had a SUD diagnosis that both entered and discharged treatment during the 26-month period. A consecutive sample of 1502 participants (181– 255 per site) was available, with 644 removed: 576 discharged after the study conclusion, 49 were missing either enrollment or discharge data, 14 transferred sites during treatment, and 5 initiated treatment before the study initiation. Helmert contrasts evaluated the impact of hybrid group exposure.Results: A total of 858 individuals were included. Data was not from the medical chart and was deidentified preventing specific demographics; however, the overall IOP sample for 2020– 2022, from which the sample was derived, was 29.8% female, and 64.1% were 18– 40 years of age. For completed treatment, hybrid group exposure relative to virtual-only had a univariate odds ratio of 1.88 (95% CI: 1.50– 2.41, p < 0.001). No significant difference was seen across IOP sites.Conclusion: These results describe a novel hybrid group approach to virtual care for SUDs with outcome data not previously documented in the literature. While virtual treatment delivery can increase access, these results suggest a benefit is derived from including an in-person option. Further research is needed to identify how an in-person component may change dynamics and if it can be replicated in virtual-only models.Keywords: substance-related disorders, telemedicine, group psychotherapy, comparative study, outcome assessment, health care