Search

Treatment retention and engagement of emerging adults with opioid use disorders can be particularly challenging. This study compares treatment outcomes of young adults with primary opioid use (OU) to those with primary marijuana or alcohol use (MAU), who received the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA), an evidence-based therapy for the treatment of substance use. The MAU and OU groups were comprised of an outcome sample of 419 young adults ages 18-25. Groups were compared on intake demographics, clinical characteristics, and measures of treatment retention and other associated factors, including treatment initiation and engagement. Outcome measures were administered at A-CRA intake and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-intake. Both groups were similar in treatment retention, initiation, and engagement. Both groups showed a similar decrease in alcohol (p < .001) and marijuana use (p < .001). The OU group had significantly less opioid use at 3 months (p < .001) and maintained this decrease, but did not improve to the level observed in the MAU group at the 12-month follow-up. The Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach merits further study as a behavioral treatment for young adults with opioid use.

Given the importance of the therapeutic alliance in achieving positive treatment outcomes, research is needed to illuminate the factors that contribute to the development of this important relationship. The aim of the current study was to expand upon the existing literature by examining predictors of the early therapeutic alliance among adolescents treated in two outpatient programs. Use of multilevel modeling techniques revealed that the majority of the variance in adolescents' ratings of the therapeutic alliance was due to adolescent factors (91%), while the variance in therapist ratings of alliance were nearly equally divided between adolescent and therapist factors (52% vs. 48%). Participant age was found to be the only significant predictor of therapist-rated alliance, with therapists reporting higher alliances with older adolescents. Adolescents reporting higher levels of social support, greater problem recognition, and more reasons for quitting also reported higher therapeutic alliance ratings. Future research is needed to examine if early identification of adolescents with low social support and problem recognition combined with brief treatment readiness interventions can be a promising approach to help improve therapeutic engagement and post-treatment substance use outcomes.

The American Society on Addiction Medicine's Patient Placement criteria are commonly used in adolescent treatment. However, the use of these criteria and how they affect the course of treatment and interact with adolescent change has not been examined. Twelve-month treatment patterns were examined for 176 adolescents who entered their first ever episode in a treatment system using these criteria. Forty-one percent of the adolescents received additional treatment after their initial outpatient episode with over 30 unique treatment sequences (i.e., various combinations of outpatient, intensive outpatient, and residential treatment). Significant differences in treatment patterns were found between the change trajectory groups. For example, adolescents who participated in only one outpatient treatment episode were more likely to be in the low alcohol and drug use (AOD) group and less likely to have high rates of time in a controlled environment or to report moderate AOD use. Over one-third of the adolescents participated in additional treatment and almost one-quarter of those who only participated in outpatient treatment had problematic use. These findings suggest the need for clinical monitoring protocols that can be used to identify adolescents needing additional treatment or recovery services.

Comparisons of well-developed practice-based interventions with research-based interventions are rare. This quasi-experimental study compares the outcomes of 274 adolescents (75% male; 63% weekly+ users; 54% dependent; 27% prior treatment; 73% with co-occurring problems) who received Chestnut Health System's best-practice Outpatient Treatment (CHS) or Cannabis Youth Treatment (CYT) research-based interventions. Ninety-five percent of participants completed follow-up interviews at three, six, nine, and 12 months after their intake GAIN interview. Initially, the CYT cohort scores indicated greater severity on several substance-related measures, while the CHS cohort scored higher on prior mental health treatment, victimization, and illegal activities measures. Adolescents in the CHS cohort were more likely to have longer lengths of stay and receive over three times as many hours of treatment. Mixed effects models revealed that CHS participants were significantly more likely to report a decrease in recovery environment risk, an increase in self-help attendance after treatment, and greater decreases in emotional problems, while CYT participants were significantly more likely to report decreases in their substance use. The results suggest that neither the best-practice nor the research-based interventions were clearly superior and call for a more rigorous randomized field experiment to better understand the differences in effectiveness between interventions.