Comparison of Health Realization and 12-Step treatment in women's residential substance abuse treatment programs.

The purpose of this study was to compare a relatively new therapeutic option for substance abuse treatment, Health Realization, and 12-Step approaches offered in women's residential programs. The study was sponsored by a large California county's Department of Alcohol and Drug Services, which had offered Health Realization treatment for a number of years. This study constitutes the first systematic evaluation of Health Realization as a substance abuse treatment program for adult women in a residential treatment setting. This was a randomized study with two observations-admission and 9 months post-admission. The results showed that clients in both Health Realization and 12-Step treatment exhibited comparable outcomes on domains such as substance use, criminal justice involvement, employment, housing, adverse effects of substance use and psychological well being. Substance use declined significantly between admission and follow-up in both treatment groups, irrespective of duration of treatment. Similarly, adverse effects of substance use declined between admission and 9-month follow-up. Health Realization and 12-Step treatment offered comparable benefits for women in residential substance abuse treatment programs.

Relationship and institutional pressure to enter treatment: differences by demographics, problem severity, and motivation.

OBJECTIVE: Studies have shown that individuals with substance-use problems frequently receive pressure to enter treatment. Pressure can come from institutions (e.g., criminal justice or welfare) or relationships (e.g., family or friends). Research has also shown that pressure can facilitate treatment entry. However, few studies have assessed how pressure from different sources varies. METHOD: Six hundred ninety-eight individuals entering residential or outpatient treatment for alcohol or drug problems completed face-to-face interviews soon after admission. Pressure was assessed by asking participants if others had suggested they enter treatment, including family, friends, and professionals within institutions. Additional assessments included the Addiction Severity Index and readiness to change. RESULTS: Most of the participants (73%) reported some type of pressure: 29% from personal relationships, 30% from institutions, and 14% from both. The remaining 27% reported no pressure to enter treatment. Multinomial logistic regression of baseline data showed being on parole or probation, not being employed full time, and having more severe legal problems predicted pressure from institutions. In contrast, relationship pressure at baseline was predicted by severity of alcohol problems. Compared with participants receiving only relationship pressure, those receiving only institutional pressure had lower alcohol, drug, family, psychiatric, and medical severity. In addition, institutional pressure was associated with lower motivation at baseline, whereas relationship pressure was not related to motivation at all. When controlling for problem severity, baseline pressure was not associated with 12-month outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Correlates of pressure from institutions for individuals to enter treatment differ from those associated with pressure from personal relationships to enter treatment. Implications of these findings for public policy, treatment, and further research are discussed.

Public sector managed care: a comparative evaluation of substance abuse treatment in three counties.

AIMS: A study of publicly funded substance abuse treatment systems compared MidState, a county that reorganized its treatment system using managed care principles, to two other California counties that took different approaches, NorthState and SouthState. It was hypothesized that MidState would have better outcomes due to its emphasis on quality of care. DESIGN: This natural experiment compared the 'experimental' county, MidState, to two 'control' counties, assessing client outcomes following treatment. Administrative and historical exigencies that may affect system differences were explored in interviews with treatment program managers and staff. SETTINGS: Comparison counties were selected using treatment system and county census data, maximizing similarities to enhance internal validity. PARTICIPANTS: Adult clients (n = 681) were interviewed when beginning treatment and 12 months later (81% response rate). In addition, 50 treatment program managers and staff members across the three counties were interviewed during the year of client recruitment. MEASUREMENTS: Client interviews assessed functioning in the seven Addiction Severity Index domains-alcohol, drug, psychiatric, legal, employment, medical and family/social. FINDINGS: Outcomes (differences between baseline and 12 month composite scores) did not differ between counties in six of seven domains; in the seventh, psychiatric functioning, SouthState had better outcomes than MidState. Staff interviews indicated generally similar treatment strategies across counties, with MidState supplying greater oversight and performance standards. CONCLUSIONS: Managed care in public sector treatment generally did not result in poorer outcomes. Future attention in MidState to the barriers to successful implementation of individualized treatment, and to dual diagnosis treatment, might bring more positive results.

Cost-effectiveness of public sector substance abuse treatment: comparison of a managed care approach to a traditional public sector system.

Costs and cost-effectiveness of public sector substance abuse treatment in 2 California counties with similar substance abuse treatment system histories are compared; one county (MidState) has adopted managed care principles. As hypothesized, MidState's costs for the index treatment episode were significantly lower than SouthState's, although unexpectedly because of lower outpatient utilization. Treatment benefits in the 7 Addiction Severity Index functional areas were examined through cost-effectiveness analyses. MidState can claim greater cost-effectiveness for its treatment dollars for significant improvement in alcohol and medical functioning (compared to unsuccessful clients and those reporting no problems). When comparing both improved clients and those maintaining no problems to unsuccessful clients, MidState is more cost-effective for improving alcohol, medical, legal, and family/social functioning; and 3 outcomes important to community stakeholders and taxpayers (legal, medical, and psychiatric functioning) are more cost-effective than alcohol, drug, and employment improvement.

When you assume...the reality of implementing a legally mandated substance abuse treatment program.

In 2000, the voters of California approved the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA), mandating that substance-abusing offenders who met the eligibility criteria receive treatment and not jail time. In preparation for implementation, the Santa Clara County Department of Alcohol and Drug Services Research Institute worked to identify the number and type of clients who would be eligible to receive treatment. The purpose of this article is to analyze the differences between a profile of SACPA-eligible clients that was based on pre-SACPA implementation clients and assumptions that were made concerning eligibility for the program and the reality of post-SACPA implementation clients. This article examines causes and consequences of the discrepancies between policy and implementation in the area of substance abuse treatment.

The relationship between abstinence for one year following pretreatment assessment and alcohol use and other functioning at two years in individuals presenting for alcohol treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to replicate and extend research that shows abstinence from alcohol during the first year following treatment predicts better longer term functioning in alcohol use and other areas. METHOD: The subjects were 187 men and women who had participated in a clinical trial of the differential effectiveness of two behavioral treatments for alcohol problems as a function of subject characteristics. All subjects who participated in this phase of the study were classified as either abstinent from alcohol or not based on their drinking behavior during the first 12 months following treatment initiation. Subjects' alcohol use and other behaviors were evaluated for Months 13-24. The primary dependent variables of interest were alcohol use, self-efficacy, and psychological functioning. RESULTS: A comparison of the two abstinence groups showed that abstainers, compared to drinkers, had less alcohol use, higher self-efficacy, and better psychological functioning. CONCLUSIONS The results suggest the association is robust between abstinence during the first year following treatment initiation or cessation and later functioning, and extend this finding to include psychological functioning. Future research should focus on possible mediators of the abstinence correlations with later behavior that are of theoretical and practical importance, and on specifying gradients of duration of abstinence or other drinking patterns reflecting improvement and their relationship to longer term functioning.