Search

Objective: In earlier work, client sociopathy and global psychopathology were effective variables for treatment matching: clients low on both sociopathy and severity of psychopathology were likely to benefit from interactional group therapy, whereas those scoring high on either of these dimensions benefited more from a coping skills intervention. The present study assessed whether outcomes improve further when clients are assigned to group treatments prospectively based on a matching strategy derived from the previous findings., Method: All participants (N = 250, 66% men) met criteria for alcohol dependence or abuse. About half were prospectively assigned to either cognitive-behavioral (CB) coping skills training or interactional therapy, those with higher levels of psychiatric severity or sociopathy were given CB and those who were low on both dimensions were given interactional therapy. The other half were randomly assigned to those treatments, replicating the procedure of the earlier study. Outcome data were collected at the conclusion of treatment and at 3-month intervals for 1 year following., Results: Prospective matching of clients to treatment did not produce superior drinking outcomes compared to random treatment assignment. Randomly assigned clients were more likely to be abstinent at the end of treatment, but this effect disappeared at later follow-ups. Prospectively matched clients had fewer negative consequences of drinking than did those assigned randomly (unmatched). Neither sociopathy nor psychiatric severity was particularly effective for matching., Conclusions: The matching effects from our previous study were not replicated. Nevertheless, prospective matching did reduce the negative consequences of drinking, consistent with our previous results.

The state of the art for treatment efficacy studies now requires manual guided treatments and tests of therapist adherence. This report provides findings regarding adherence assessment of therapists participating in an investigation of treatment matching in adolescent substance abusers. The Group Sessions Rating Scale (GSRS), a group-therapy process measure, was studied to determine its appropriateness for assessing group treatment of adolescents with a) substance use disorders (SUD), b) interrater reliability, c) internal consistency, and d) ability to discriminate the active ingredients of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) from interactional therapy (IT). Interrater reliabilities were moderate to high, with those for CBT generally higher than those for IT. Internal consistency of CBT items was moderate, whereas those of IT were moderately high. Discriminability between the two treatment modalities was high. The frequency of active ingredients was generally therapy-specific: high for the relevant and low for the nonrelevant therapeutic modality items. The GSRS was found to be effective in the measurement of treatment process in adolescents with SUD.

An instrument designed to measure components of two distinct alcoholism aftercare treatments was developed and evaluated for reliability and validity. Trained judges reliably rated audiotaped samples of coping skills and interactional group therapy sessions. Coping skills groups engaged in significantly more education and skill training, problem solving, and role playing. Interactional groups showed more interpersonal learning, expression/exploration of feelings, and here-and-now focus. Groups that employed more education and skill training, less expression and exploration of feelings, and less here-and-now focus were associated with fewer members reporting subsequent drinking-related problems. None of the ratings of group activities was related to abstinence.

Ninety-six subjects were recruited from an inpatient alcoholism treatment program and randomly assigned to aftercare group treatment with either coping skills training or interactional therapy. Survival analyses using 2-year outcome data provided evidence for the durability of matching interaction effects. The data supported a priori hypotheses that individuals scoring high on measures of sociopathy or global psychopathology have better outcomes in coping skills treatment, whereas patients low on these dimensions have better outcomes in interactional treatment. Contrary to the original hypothesis, patients with cognitive impairment had better outcomes in interactional treatment, and patients without cognitive impairment did better in coping skills treatment.

This study tested the hypothesis that patients could be matched to effective treatments on the basis of certain pretreatment characteristics. Specifically, it was hypothesized that those Ss who showed more sociopathy, more psychopathology, and greater neuropsychological impairment would have better outcomes when treated with coping skills training and, conversely, that those with less impairment in these areas would have better outcomes with interactional treatment. Ninety-six male and female Ss were recruited from an inpatient alcoholism treatment program and randomly assigned to 1 of these 2 types of aftercare group treatment. Linear and logistic regression analyses partially confirmed the hypotheses. Coping skills training was more effective for Ss higher in sociopathy or psychopathology, and interactional therapy was more effective for Ss lower in sociopathy. Generally, both treatments appeared equally effective for Ss lower in psychopathology. Contrary to expectations, those more neuropsychologically impaired appeared to have better outcomes after interactional therapy.