Systematic Literature Review – Substance Use Disorder (SUD) 

Systematic Literature Review – Substance Use Disorder (SUD) 

Systematic Literature Review Proposal

Problem

Description of the Problem

Substance use disorder (SUD) remains a formidable challenge today, being a critical public health issue that impacts people of different statuses, stages in life, and cultures. SUD is a condition in which a person compulsively consumes drugs with a negative impact on their health, social relations, work, and other aspects of daily functioning.

Problem Significance

According to Castaldelli-Maia and Bhugra (2022), 2.2 percent of the global population experience drug use disorders from across the world. Moreover, more than 100,000 drug overdose deaths were recorded within one year in the United States of America (Kornfield, 2022). These statistics show an increase in the prevalence, and as such, there is a need for increased effort to address the situation. The absence of a supportive environment exposes SUD patients to the risk of relapse, mental health disorders, homelessness, imprisonment, and premature death.

Consequences of the Problem

SUD has economic and social implications since it creates burdens and expenses on the healthcare system, the judicial system, and social services. People recovering from SUD suffer from prejudice, stigma, social withdrawal, and lack of culturally competent treatment that complicates their path to recovery (Earnshaw, 2020). For social workers, the management of SUD aligns not only as a medical necessity but as a social justice issue. It is, therefore, crucial to understand and develop supportive interventions, especially those based on the client’s experiences of addiction.

Intervention

Peer support programs are a unique and person-centered model of substance use disorder intervention. They consist of people who have managed to come out of the numerous struggles affecting society. This mostly involves the provision of mutual support by people having gone through the same problem (Fortuna et al., 2022). In this way, mutual understanding and a non-emotional approach create a feeling of inclusion and support in a group. This connection makes it easier for people to feel understood in a way that clinical relationships may lack. The personal stories of peer supporters bring hope and strength of evidence to support recovery. Interpersonal aspects can build trust and strengthen the recovery process, and whenever they relate to people, they become more motivated to embrace the recovery process. Peer support is effective for people with substance use disorders.

Peer support programs may be structured in several ways; however, the most common aspects involve both individual and group mentoring. It intends to provide the participants with space for discussion, strengthen their self-esteem, and increase personal responsibility. The peer supporters exemplify recovery because they show other clients that it is possible to recover from substance abuse and become productive members of society again (Ibrahim et al., 2022). This keeps participants interested and ensures they continue with treatment, and also discourages them from using unhealthy ways of handling stress. These interpersonal dynamics are of utmost importance in any recovery process. Over time, regular interactions with peers can help in managing mental health, reduce substance dependence, and enhance social relationships.

Besides emotional support, peer programs also offer more functional support when it comes to the participant’s need to identify and address issues or seek resources such as health care treatment, housing, or legal aid. Some of the tasks carried out by peer workers include attending appointments with the client, helping them with paperwork, and advocating in cases when they need help. As such, peer programs enable clients to overcome various barriers that might hamper their recovery process. As a result, trust in the system is established, and there will also be increased engagement in services. It is not only the process of rehabilitation, but people are helped and encouraged to gain back control of their lives.

Peer support is currently provided in a diverse range of services, which provides evidence of its flexibility and availability in different contexts. Such settings include hospitals, clinics, schools, correctional institutions, and other community structures. The availability of peer support in different settings guarantees that assistance is provided in the different stages of recovery. This makes it easier for clients to access these services since they can be introduced at early stages and maintained throughout. In conclusion, peer support programs increase not only the clinical success of treatment but also the well-being of the community.

Research Question

Therefore, due to the increasing interest in employing peer support programs and the need for personalized recovery-oriented approaches, this review aims to answer the question: How effective are peer support programs in improving outcomes for individuals with substance use disorder across various service settings? This question will guide the systematic literature review by identifying program outcomes, the ways in which the programs operate to make the desired impacts, and the contextual conditions that surround program efficiency.

Systematic Literature Review Draft for Peer Review

Methods

Keywords and Databases Used

The present systematic literature review aims at identifying the effectiveness of peer support programs for persons with substance use disorders (SUD). Databases such as APA PsycInfo Academic Search Ultimate, Pubmed, and CINAHL were employed because the research involved a structured search. Search terms such as “peer support,” “substance use disorder,” “recovery,” and “intervention” were connected using Boolean operators to increase the relevancy of the search.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The inclusion criteria included only peer-reviewed articles published between 2020 and 2025 on the implementation and effects of peer-support interventions for people with substance use disorders. Included studies had to provide empirical findings, whether qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods and had to focus on participants’ outcomes or perceptions. The review only included research on the feasibility of self-tracking if it was conducted on various population types and service delivery contexts such as clinical, community, and online or digital contexts. On the other hand, studies were excluded if they were review studies, meta-analysis studies, theoretical, or editorials. Lastly, papers that addressed the issue of mental health on the individual or other addictions not linked with peer support for SUD were excluded in order to stay relevant to the research question.

From this search, 12 articles were selected according to relevance, methodological rigor, and the inclusion criteria used. The included studies focused on a variety of patient populations and contexts, such as emergency departments, postnatal wards, adolescent peer support interventions, and digital media. Study characteristics were defined as follows: type of study design, participants’ characteristics, the context in which the study was conducted, methods and tools used, and study limitations.

Results

The search of the database provided 248 articles, of which only peer-reviewed articles were selected. Out of 248 articles, 34 were duplicates, so upon their elimination, 214 titles and abstracts were reviewed. Out of these, 156 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. A review of the 58 articles indicated that 46 studies could not report outcomes or had inadequate methods. The final review comprised twelve articles that met all criteria for analysis. The 12 studies focused on peer support for individuals with SUD that employed qualitative (n = 9), quantitative (n = 1), and mixed-methods (n = 2) approaches.

They ranged across clinical practices such as emergency departments and social and digital spaces. Participants included both male and female participants who were of different ages and from rural and urban areas, and the studies included pregnant women, indigenous Americans, young people, and the homeless population. The majority of the identified studies stated that peer support has beneficial effects on attendance, treatment compliance, and psychological well-being among individuals (Parkes et al., 2022). However, some of the limitations of the identified articles were small sample sizes, socially desirable bias, and short-term data.

Several themes arose from the reviewed studies concerning peer support interventions, which include diverse advantages attributed to peer support (Avalone et al., 2024). One of them was that it ensures that patients receive proper treatment and follow-up, especially among those who are from less privileged backgrounds. By sharing their own experiences, peer supporters were thus good at providing navigation through systems, promoting timely attendance of appointments, and implementing recovery plans (Bingham & Kelley, 2022). Some research highlighted that the introduction of a peer supporter has a positive effect on trust and willingness to use the services in the emergency departments, outpatient clinics, and also in transitional homes, which is crucial in the recovery process.

Another important domain of interest was the emotional aspect and social integration of the patients. In essence, peer supporters promote trust, understanding, and inclusion by listening and not passing judgment on their fellow peers (Brady et al., 2022). These connections helped alleviate stigmatization, promote social inclusion, and offer hope for individuals who had encountered social withdrawal or rejection. Furthermore, newer forms of digital peer support, like mobile applications and online mentoring, also appeared to be able to get through to those who may not attend face-to-face meetings (Birrell et al., 2023). However, these interventions raised some concerns regarding digital literacy development, accessibility, information distribution, and issues in retaining the natural flow of relationships in the cyberspace environment.

Discussion and Conclusion

According to the studies, peer support programs are considered effective interventions that may benefit the recovery process of people with SUD. According to Gruß et al. (2021), peer relationships build working alliances that arise out of like-minded relationships, which are not easily achieved in clinical relations. Such relations also provide support from an emotional perspective with successful outcomes such as referral for accommodation or health care services, among others (Joo et al., 2022). Shame and guilt reduction in mutual understanding between both the therapist and the patient or among patients creates a strong interpersonal relationship, and recovery stories help maintain behavioral change in the long run.

However, some limitations could be noted in the literature, which deserves attention. Most of them used self-answered questions, which are likely to contain bias. Furthermore, most of the investigations involved the use of small samples, and many of them originated from a localized population, which questions their generality (Ibrahim et al., 2022). Also, not much research has been done on the durability of peer support going beyond the initial stage and extending to other sectors of the service, such as the criminal justice and youth service fields. Equally important, most did not assess the cost-effectiveness beyond the first phases of the program. This highlights that more comprehensive, long-term, and heterogeneous studies should be conducted in order to overcome such limitations.

These findings thus have several implications for practice and policy. From the perspective of practitioners, it is well-recognized that utilizing peer support as part of the recovery process is an effective way of delivering additional, accessible, and efficient support in addition to the existing services (Liebling et al., 2020). This means these programs should ensure that peer workers receive proper training and support when it comes to handling emotional issues related to the job (Turuba et al., 2023). Policymakers should develop and support the institutionalization of peer roles within the areas of healthcare and community services with sustainable funding. Increasing access to digital peer support may also aid more clients who may not traditionally engage in such care. However, there is a need for digital programs to address and work toward the digital divide in access and literacy to prevent the widening of health disparities.

Future research should investigate peer support in other populations and settings, such as prisoners and samples that include ethnic minorities, as this population was underrepresented in the studies. Further, research should evaluate whether it is better to have individual or group-based peer models. Randomized controlled trials, however, are necessary to prove the effectiveness of these programs and to establish their benefits over conventional means of therapy. Another promising development is the study of peer support for youths, especially for early identification and intervention models.

Therefore, one can conclude that peer-support programs can be useful for increasing the level of engagement, reducing perceived stigma, and helping individuals with SUD in their recovery. Peer support is, therefore, client-centric and relationship-based, which is wholly compatible with the journey of recovery for SUD patients (Quilty et al., 2022). However, there is a need for enhanced research to give the best results on these programs, but the current evidence shows that their expansion should continue. Including peers in the overall treatment strategies makes them more effective, flexible, personalized, and culturally sensitive (Scannell, 2021). Hence, peer support should not be positioned as an addition but as an integral part of the SUD recovery models.

Peer Feedback Note

I would like to receive your feedback on these two specific areas:

• Clarity of the identified results in the Results section. Are the results clearly stated and connected to the analysis of the studies reviewed?
• Overall organization of the Discussion Section and Conclusion part. Please check whether the discussion and conclusion section and the recommendations on future research are logical, given the outcomes of the studies. Thank you.

References

Avalone, L., Lalane, M., King, C., Pfeiffer, K., Linn-Walton, R., & Barron, C. (2024). Integrating substance use peer support and screening brief intervention and referral to treatment services in the emergency department: A descriptive study of the ED leads program. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-024-00445-x

Bingham, D., & Kelley, A. (2022). Rethinking recovery: A qualitative study of American Indian perspectives on peer recovery support. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332640.2022.2082620

Birrell, L., Debenham, J., Furneaux-Bate, A., Prior, K., Spallek, S., Thornton, L., Chapman, C., & Newton, N. (2023). Evaluating a peer-support mobile app for mental health and substance use among adolescents over 12 months during the COVID-19 pandemic: Randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e45216. https://doi.org/10.2196/45216

Brady, L. A., Wozniak, M. L., Brimmer, M. J., Terranova, E., Moore, C., Kahn, L., Vest, B. M., & Thomas, M. (2022). Coping strategies and workplace supports for peers with substance use disorders. Substance Use & Misuse, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2022.2112228

Castaldelli-Maia, J. M., & Bhugra, D. (2022). Analysis of global prevalence of mental and substance use disorders within countries: Focus on sociodemographic characteristics and income levels. International Review of Psychiatry, 34(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2022.2040450

Earnshaw, V. A. (2020). Stigma and substance use disorders: A clinical, research, and advocacy agenda. American Psychologist, 75(9), 1300–1311. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000744

Fortuna, K. L., Solomon, P., & Rivera, J. (2022). An update of peer support/peer provided services underlying processes, benefits, and critical ingredients. Psychiatric Quarterly, 93(2), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-022-09971-w

Gruß, I., Firemark, A., & Davidson, A. (2021). Motherhood, substance use, and peer support: Benefits of an integrated group program for pregnant and postpartum women. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 131, 108450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108450

Ibrahim, N., Selim, A., Ng, F., Kasaby, M., Ali, A. M., Eweida, R., Almakki, D., Elaagib, A., & Slade, M. (2022). Experiences of peer support workers supporting individuals with substance use disorders in Egypt: Phenomenological analysis. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08393-5

Joo, J. H., Bone, L., Forte, J., Kirley, E., Lynch, T., & Aboumatar, H. (2022). The benefits and challenges of established peer support programs for patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare providers. Family Practice, 39(5), 903–912. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmac004

Kornfield, M. (2022, May 11). U.S. surpasses record 100,000 overdose deaths in 2021. NCBI. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/16178

Liebling, E. J., Perez, J. J. S., Litterer, M. M., & Greene, C. (2020). Implementing hospital-based peer recovery support services for substance use disorder. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00952990.2020.1841218

Parkes, T., Matheson, C., Carver, H., Foster, R., Budd, J., Liddell, D., Wallace, J., Pauly, B., Fotopoulou, M., Burley, A., Anderson, I., & MacLennan, G. (2022). A peer-delivered intervention to reduce harm and improve the well-being of homeless people with problem substance use: The SHARPS feasibility mixed-methods study. Health Technology Assessment, 26(14), 1–128. https://doi.org/10.3310/wvvl4786

Quilty, L. C., Wardell, J. D., Garner, G., Elison-Davies, S., Davies, G., Klekovkina, E., Corman, M., Alfonsi, J., Crawford, A., de Oliveira, C., & Weekes, J. (2022). Peer support and online cognitive behavioral therapy for substance use concerns: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMJ Open, 12(12), e064360. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064360

Scannell, C. (2021). Voices of hope: Substance use peer support in a system of care. Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment, 15. https://doi.org/10.1177/11782218211050360

Turuba, R., Toddington, C., Tymoschuk, M., Amarasekera, A., Howard, A. M., Brockmann, V., Tallon, C., Irving, S., Mathias, S., Henderson, J. L., & Barbic, S. (2023). “A peer support worker can really be there supporting the youth throughout the whole process”: A qualitative study exploring the role of peer support in providing substance use services to youth. Harm Reduction Journal, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-023-00853-3

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Systematic Literature Review – Substance Use Disorder (SUD) 

In this assignment, you will use your knowledge (practice + research) to search for effective practices within your area of interest. The purpose of this assignment is to write a paper that a provider, organization, agency, or community could review to inform their practices or policies.

You will be provided a copy of the article listed below. Please study the article before beginning to work on your assignment. This article provides an example of a systematic literature review. Studying a published article is different than reading it. When you study this article focus on how the authors conceptualized the problem, posed the research questions, described the method for reviewing the literature, organized the results section, and finally conclude their study.

Bazerghi, C., McKay, F. H., & Dunn, M. (2016). The role of food banks in addressing food insecurity: a systematic review. Journal of Community Health, 41(4), 732–740.

Student Example SLR Paper

Peer Review Instructions

The instructor will randomly assign you a partner for peer review.
You will upload a copy of your draft on Moodle AND email your partner.
Once you have completed the peer review, you will upload your SLR: Peer Review Feedback and email your feedback to your partner
First Draft (Click here for instructional video)

This is the first draft of your SLR: Final Paper The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate how you are thinking about and approaching the assignment. You will give and receive feedback from a peer. Your first draft should have the following:

Peer Feedback Process

Include a note at the beginning or the end of your draft to let your partner know what you would like specific feedback on (2-3 specific areas)
Methods (5 points)

The methods section should outline the steps you followed. It should say what keywords you used, the databases you used, and the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Remember, that the process should be transparent and replicable by others. (Study how Bazerghi et al. (2016) describe their methods.)

For the first draft, you should have the methods section completed. For the final draft, the methods section will be approximately 1-2 pages, double-spaced.

Describe your method for systematically searching the literature.

Do not include literature reviews, meta-analysis, and other systematic literature reviews. You can use these studies as part of your introduction or your conclusion section but not as the articles you review.
Use research databases such as Academic Search Premier, PsychInfo, PubMed which are available through Lindell Library.
Usually, researchers doing a systematic review read all the articles that fit their criteria. Since this is for a course, please review the 12 latest articles that fit all your inclusion criteria.
Results (3 points)

The result section should only describe the results and should not include your opinion or any conclusive statements. Once again review the SLR articles carefully. There are four main parts to the results section, each with a different function (see the final draft instructions for details).

For the first draft, you should begin to describe how many articles you found and provide an overview of the articles. Provide some preliminary themes. For the final draft, the results section will be approximately 2-3 pages, double-spaced.

Describe the following in your draft:

The results include the number of articles you found so start with that. The reader should understand how you went from initially finding XX articles to 12 articles that you included in your review. Consider creating a flowchart to show how you selected your articles similar to figure 1 in Bazerghi et al. (2016).
Provide an overview of the articles so that a reader can understand the variety of study designs, sampling techniques, measurement tools etc
In the final draft, you will include your SLR: Table of Articles; this table should be included as Appendix A. You should refer to this table in the text (Example: A summary of the reviewed articles is presented as a table in Appendix A for review).
Provide some preliminary themes based on the 12 articles.
Discussion/Conclusion (1 point)

The last section is a combination of discussion and conclusion. The goal of this section is to wrap up your paper (see the final draft instructions for details).

For the first draft, you should begin to outline/describe implications of your themes you’ve identified in your results section. For the final draft, the discussion/conclusion section will be approximately 2-3 pages, double-spaced.

Outline/Describe the following in your draft:

Highlights of what you found, discuss a few limitations, and discuss the implications of your findings
References (.5 point)

12 articles that you reviewed for the SLR
Strong grasp of APA formatting for References page
Writing (.5 point)

Show strong grasp of APA formatting
Carefully attends to sentence structure and punctuation with only minimal errors; uses strong topic sentences, transition settings, and subheadings
First draft shows progress toward the final draft and sufficient content for peer reviewer to provide feedback.