A comparison of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia to standard of care in an outpatient substance use disorder clinic embedded within a therapeutic community: a RE-AIM framework evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Rates of substance use disorders (SUDs) continue to rise in the USA with parallel rises in admissions to outpatient SUD treatment programs. Insomnia symptoms reduce treatment adherence, trigger relapse, and generally undermine SUD recovery efforts. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is the first-line treatment recommended for chronic insomnia. No study has examined the effectiveness of CBT-I for individuals who recently entered an outpatient SUD treatment program embedded within a therapeutic community (i.e., long-term drug-free residential setting). METHODS: A randomized controlled trial conducted at a SUD program embedded in a therapeutic community aimed to compare group-based CBT-I (gCBT-I) (N = 10) with the standard of care (SOC) (N = 11) among individuals who have SUDs and comorbid insomnia. We present a RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework evaluation to provide empirical data on gCBT-I feasibility and facilitators and barriers of conducting an insomnia-focused clinical effectiveness study within a therapeutic community. RESULTS: Participants in both study arms reported moderately severe insomnia symptoms at admission and reductions in insomnia symptoms over time. Among participants who completed the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) beyond admission, ISI decreased to ≤ 8 (the clinical cutoff for mild insomnia) in 80% of individuals in the gCBT-I group compared with 25% of individuals in the SOC group. A RE-AIM framework evaluation showed initial success with Reach and Adoption while Implementation, and Maintenance were limited. Effectiveness was inconclusive because of challenges with recruitment, intervention integrity, and missing data that precluded meeting the planned recruitment and study aims and led to study termination. Coordination and communication with staff and leadership facilitated gCBT-I implementation, yet well-known CBT-I barriers including time- and resource-intensive sleep medicine training for interventionalists and maintenance of treatment integrity during an 8-week intervention limited gCBT-I sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports the feasibility of conducting behavioral sleep medicine research in outpatient SUD treatment programs embedded within therapeutic communities. Implementation of an insomnia-focused intervention was widely accepted by patients and providers and has potential to address insomnia symptoms in early SUD recovery. Addressing patient- and organizational-level implementation barriers may enhance the sustainability and scalability of sleep interventions and provide new hope to effectively treat insomnia among people living with SUDs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT03208855. Registered July 6, 2017https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03208855?term=NCT03208855&draw=2&rank=1.

Clinician-delivered contingency management increases engagement and attendance in drug and alcohol treatment.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the impact of a low-cost contingency management (CM) delivered by program clinicians on treatment attendance and utilization for patients enrolled in outpatient psychosocial substance abuse treatment. METHODS: The study used a pre-posttest design to compare substance abuse patients who received Reinforcement-Based Treatment (RBT) plus low cost CM (n=130; RBT+CM) to patients who received RBT only (n=132, RBT). RBT+CM participants received a $10 incentive for returning to treatment the day following intake assessment (day one), and a $15 incentive for attending treatment on day five following admission. RBT clients received standard care intervention without the addition of the CM procedures. Groups were compared on proportion of participants who returned to treatment on day one, mean days of treatment attendance, individual sessions attended, and treatment utilization during the first week and the first month following treatment admission. RESULTS: Both the RBT+CM and RBT group participants returned to the clinic on day one at high rates (95% versus 89%, respectively). However, the RBT group participants were more likely to attend the intake assessment only (i.e., never return to treatment) compared to the RBT+CM participants. Additionally, the RBT+CM participants attended significantly more treatment days, attended more individual counseling sessions, and had higher rates of overall treatment utilization compared to the RBT participants during the one week and one month following treatment admission. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the feasibility and effectiveness of a CM intervention delivered by clinicians for increasing treatment attendance and utilization in a community substance abuse program.