Search

Aim To review randomized controlled trials to assess efficacy of a prize-based contingency management procedure in reducing substance use (where a drug-free breath or urine sample provides a chance of winning a prize). Methods A meta-analysis was conducted on papers published from January 2000 to February 2013 to determine the effect size of studies comparing prize-based contingency management to a treatment-as-usual control condition (k = 19 studies). Parallel analyses evaluated the efficacy of both short- (k = nine studies) and long-term outcomes (k = six studies) of prize-based contingency management. Results The average end-of-treatment effect size (Cohen’s d) was 0.46 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.37, 0.54]. This effect size decreased at the short-term (≤3-month) post-intervention follow-up to 0.33 (95% CI = 0.12, 0.54) and at the 6-month follow-up time-point there was no detectable effect [d = −0.09 (95% CI = −0.28, 0.10)]. Conclusion Adding prize-based contingency management to behavioral support for substance use disorders can increase short-term abstinence, but the effect does not appear to persist to 6 months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims It has been proposed that more use should be made of Bayes factors in hypothesis testing in addiction research. Bayes factors are the ratios of the likelihood of a specified hypothesis (e.g. an intervention effect within a given range) to another hypothesis (e.g. no effect). They are particularly important for differentiating lack of strong evidence for an effect and evidence for lack of an effect. This paper reviewed randomized trials reported in Addiction between January and June 2013 to assess how far Bayes factors might improve the interpretation of the data. Methods Seventy-five effect sizes and their standard errors were extracted from 12 trials. Seventy-three per cent ( n = 55) of these were non-significant (i.e. P > 0.05). For each non-significant finding a Bayes factor was calculated using a population effect derived from previous research. In sensitivity analyses, a further two Bayes factors were calculated assuming clinically meaningful and plausible ranges around this population effect. Results Twenty per cent ( n = 11) of the non-significant Bayes factors were < ⅓ and 3.6% ( n = 2) were > 3. The other 76.4% ( n = 42) of Bayes factors were between ⅓ and 3. Of these, 26 were in the direction of there being an effect (Bayes factor > 1 and < 3); 12 tended to favour the hypothesis of no effect (Bayes factor < 1 and > ⅓); and for four there was no evidence either way (Bayes factor = 1). In sensitivity analyses, 13.3% of Bayes Factors were < ⅓ ( n = 20), 62.7% ( n = 94) were between ⅓ and 3 and 24.0% ( n = 36) were > 3, showing good concordance with the main results. Conclusions Use of Bayes factors when analysing data from randomized trials of interventions in addiction research can provide important information that would lead to more precise conclusions than are obtained typically using currently prevailing methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To test the effectiveness of a digital intervention to reduce cannabis use (ICan) with adherence‐focused guidance compared with educational cannabis information. Design: This was a single‐blind randomized controlled trial. Follow‐up clinical outcome measurements took place 3 and 6 months after randomization. Setting: The trial was conducted in the Netherlands. The intervention and guidance took place on‐line, with recruitment via Facebook/Instagram advertisement campaigns. Participants: Inclusion criteria were ≥ 18 years, cannabis use on ≥ 3 days/week, the desire to reduce/quit cannabis and using a smartphone. Participants were allocated to either ICan (n = 188) or control (n = 190) (69% male, mean age = 27.5 years). Intervention and comparator: ICan is a mobile (web‐)application based on motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy and includes three main components: screening, brief intervention (six modules) and referral to treatment. The control condition consisted of non‐interactive educational cannabis information. Measurements Primary outcome was the number of cannabis use days in the 7 days prior to the 6‐month follow‐up measurement. Secondary outcome measures at 3‐ and 6‐month follow‐up were the number of grams of cannabis used and attitudes towards seeking professional help for cannabis use related problems. Findings Intention‐to‐treat analysis showed that 6 months after randomization the mean number of cannabis use days in the past 7 days was reduced in both conditions (time P < 0.001), with no significant group × time interaction effect [ICan = 4.17 days, control = 4.31 days, Cohen's dbetween = 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.15, 0.26, P = 0.93]. Three months after randomization the mean number of grams used in the past 7 days was reduced in both conditions, with a significantly larger reduction in the ICan condition (P = 0.009, Cohen's dbetween = 0.15). At 6‐month follow‐up the significant group × time interaction effect was no longer present (P = 0.30). In both conditions, attitudes towards seeking professional help remained virtually unchanged over time. Conclusions: A digital intervention to reduce cannabis use (ICan) was more effective than non‐interactive educational cannabis information in reducing grams of cannabis used over 3 months, but not more effective at reducing cannabis use days at 6‐month follow‐up. Cannabis use reductions were maintained in both conditions between 3 and 6 months' follow‐up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To determine the efficacy of motivational enhancement therapy (MET) on alcohol use in patients with the hepatitis C virus ( HCV) and an alcohol use disorder ( AUD). Design Randomized, single-blind, controlled trial comparing MET to a control education condition with 6-month follow-up. Setting Patients were recruited from hepatitis clinics at the Minneapolis, Minnesota and Portland, Oregon Veterans Affairs Health Care Systems, USA. Participants and Intervention Patients with HCV, an AUD and continued alcohol use ( n = 139) were randomized to receive either MET ( n = 70) or a control education condition ( n = 69) over 3 months. Measurements Data were self-reported percentage of days abstinent from alcohol and number of standard alcohol drinks per week 6 months after randomization. Findings At baseline, subjects in MET had 34.98% days abstinent, which increased to 73.15% at 6 months compared to 34.63 and 59.49% for the control condition. Multi-level models examined changes in alcohol consumption between MET and control groups. Results showed a significant increase in percentage of days abstinent overall ( F(1120.4) = 28.04, P < 0.001) and a significant group × time effect ( F(1119.9) = 5.23, P = 0.024) with the MET group showing a greater increase in percentage of days abstinent at 6 months compared with the education control condition. There were no significant differences between groups for drinks per week. The effect size of the MET intervention was moderate (0.45) for percentage of days abstinent. Conclusion Motivational enhancement therapy ( MET) appears to increase the percentage of days abstinent in patients with chronic hepatitis C, alcohol use disorders and ongoing alcohol use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims This study performs the first cost-effectiveness analysis ( CEA) of Recovery Management Checkups ( RMC) for adults with chronic substance use disorders. Design Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized clinical trial of RMC. Participants were assigned randomly to a control condition of outcome monitoring ( OM-only) or the experimental condition OM-plus- RMC, with quarterly follow-up for 4 years. Setting Participants were recruited from the largest central intake unit for substance abuse treatment in Chicago, Illinois, USA. Participants A total of 446 participants who were 38 years old on average, 54% male, and predominantly African American (85%). Measurements Data on the quarterly cost per participant come from a previous study of OM and RMC intervention costs. Effectiveness is measured as the number of days of abstinence and number of substance use-related problems. Findings Over the 4-year trial, OM-plus- RMC cost on average $2184 more than OM-only ( P < 0.01). Participants in OM-plus- RMC averaged 1026 days abstinent and had 89 substance use-related problems. OM-only averaged 932 days abstinent and reported 126 substance use-related problems. Mean differences for both effectiveness measures were statistically significant ( P < 0.01). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for OM-plus- RMC was $23.38 per day abstinent and $59.51 per reduced substance-related problem. When additional costs to society were factored into the analysis, OM-plus- RMC was less costly and more effective than OM-only. Conclusions Recovery Management Checkups are a cost-effective and potentially cost-saving strategy for promoting abstinence and reducing substance use-related problems among chronic substance users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Aims To determine whether collaborative behavioral management (CBM) reduces substance use, crime and re-arrest among drug-involved parolees. Design Step'n Out was a randomized behavioral trial of CBM versus standard parole (SP) during 2004-08. CBM adapted evidence-based role induction, behavioral contracting and contingent reinforcement to provide parole officer/treatment counselor dyads with positive tools in addition to sanctions to manage parolees' behavior over 12 weeks. Setting Six parole offices in five states in the USA. Participants Parolee volunteers with a mandate for addiction treatment and a minimum of 3 months of parole ( n = 476). Follow-up was 94% at 3 months and 86% at 9 months. Measurements Drug use and crime in a given month from calendar interviews 3 and 9 months after parole initiation, and re-arrests from criminal justice administrative data. Findings The CBM group had fewer months in which they used their primary drug [adjusted risk ratio (ARR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05, 0.78, P = 0.02] and alcohol (ARR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.66, P = 0.006) over follow-up. CBM had its greatest effects among parolees who reported marijuana or another 'non-hard' drug as their primary drug; parolees who preferred stimulants or opiates did not benefit. No differences were seen in total crime, re-arrests or parole revocations. Conclusions Collaborative behavioral management may reduce substance use among primary marijuana or other 'non-hard' drug-using parolees without increasing revocations. Because the majority of drug violation arrests in the United States are for marijuana, these findings have important implications for the management of a substantial proportion of the US community correctional population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Aims This study evaluated the effectiveness of a brief intervention (BI) for illicit drugs (cannabis, cocaine, amphetamine-type stimulants and opioids) linked to the World Health Organization (WHO) Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). The ASSIST screens for problem or risky use of 10 psychoactive substances, producing a score for each substance that falls into either a low-, moderate- or high-risk category. Design Prospective, randomized controlled trial in which participants were either assigned to a 3-month waiting-list control condition or received brief motivational counselling lasting an average of 13.8 minutes for the drug receiving the highest ASSIST score. Setting Primary health-care settings in four countries: Australia, Brazil, India and the United States. Participants A total of 731 males and females scoring within the moderate-risk range of the ASSIST for cannabis, cocaine, amphetamine-type stimulants or opioids. Measurements ASSIST-specific substance involvement scores for cannabis, stimulants or opioids and ASSIST total illicit substance involvement score at baseline and 3 months post-randomization. Findings Omnibus analyses indicated that those receiving the BI had significantly reduced scores for all measures, compared with control participants. Country-specific analyses showed that, with the exception of the site in the United States, BI participants had significantly lower ASSIST total illicit substance involvement scores at follow-up compared with the control participants. The sites in India and Brazil demonstrated a very strong brief intervention effect for cannabis scores ( P < 0.005 for both sites), as did the sites in Australia ( P < 0.005) and Brazil ( P < 0.01) for stimulant scores and the Indian site for opioid scores ( P < 0.01). Conclusions The Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test-linked brief intervention aimed at reducing illicit substance use and related risks is effective, at least in the short term, and the effect generalizes across countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]