Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Oct;40(5):424-442.
doi: 10.1177/14550725231157503. Epub 2023 Jun 22.

Drug treatment service procurement: A systematic review of models, goals, and outcomes

Taina Schneider  1 , Kristiina Kuussaari  2 , Petri Virtanen  3
Affiliations
Review

Drug treatment service procurement: A systematic review of models, goals, and outcomes

Taina Schneider et al. Nordisk Alkohol Nark. 2023 Oct.

Abstract

Aim: To explore the goals and outcomes of public procurement of drug treatment services in OECD countries. The study explores how these complex services are procured and delivered. Methods and data: A systematic review of the literature (1990-2020) identified four partly overlapping models of drug treatment service procurement that are here labelled traditional, value-based, outcome-based, and innovative. Results: Even though different forms of drug treatment services procurement are common, only 12 empirical studies that focused on procurement were found. The four models differ in their approaches to design and performance specifications and the role of competition and collaboration in the co-creation of value. Conclusions: Competition and incentives improve neither the efficiency nor the quality or the outcomes of complex drug treatment services. Whereas many studies focus on payment mechanisms, there are important research gaps that relate to the co-creation of value with and for the service-users and other stakeholders.

Keywords: co-creation; complexity; drug treatment services; public procurement; public value; systematic literature review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The expanded systems framework (Martin, 2005).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The search strategy of the systematic review based on the PRISMA statement flow diagram.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
The content analysis process.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
The pointers to guide the drug treatment service procurement.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Agger A., Lund D. (2017). Collaborative innovation in the public sector – new perspectives on the role of citizens? Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 21(3), 17–37.
    1. Alho H., Dematteis M., Lembo D., Maremmani I., Roncero C., Somaini L. (2020). Opioid related deaths in Europe: Strategies for a comprehensive approach to address a major public health concern. International Journal of Drug Policy, 76, 102616–102616. 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.102616 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Babor T., Rush B., Tremblay J. (2019). Needs-based planning for substance use treatment systems: Progress, prospects, and the search for a new perspective. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, Supplement, (s18), 154–160. 10.15288/jsads.2019.s18.154 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barraket J., Keast R., Furneaux C. (2016). Social procurement and new public governance. Routledge.
    1. Crowley K., Head B. W. (2017). The enduring challenge of ‘wicked problems’: Revisiting rittel and webber. The enduring challenge of ‘wicked problems’: Revisiting Rittel and Webber. Policy Sciences, 50, 539–547. 10.1007/s11077-017-9302-4 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources