Longitudinal effects of integrated treatment on alcohol use for persons with serious mental illness and substance use disorders

Dropout Rates in Psychosocial Interventions for People With Both Severe Mental Illness and Substance Misuse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Over the years, many psychosocial interventions for individual having both a psychotic spectrum disorder and a substance use disorder diagnoses have been developed and studied. However, there is a high dropout rate among this clinical population.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aims to replicate a previous meta-analysis on the effects of psychosocial treatment for dual disorders, while including and determining the dropout rates in those type of interventions.

METHOD

Based on a Cochrane systematic review conducted in 2019, we conducted a meta-analysis including 40 randomized clinical trials on psychosocial treatment among persons suffering from schizophrenia spectrum disorder and substance use disorder.

RESULTS

A dropout rate of 27,2% was obtained. Stimulants use significantly affected dropout rates. Age, gender, diagnosis, alcohol and cannabis abuse, and duration of treatment did not affect dropout rates.

CONCLUSION

The 27,2% rate of dropout from psychosocial treatment highlights the need to engage participants having a dual diagnosis from the start by focusing on therapeutic alliance and motivation for treatment.

Alcoholics Anonymous and 12-Step Facilitation Treatments for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Distillation of a 2020 Cochrane Review for Clinicians and Policy Makers

AIMS

A recently completed Cochrane review assessed the effectiveness and cost-benefits of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and clinically delivered 12-Step Facilitation (TSF) interventions for alcohol use disorder (AUD). This paper summarizes key findings and discusses implications for practice and policy.

METHODS

Cochrane review methods were followed. Searches were conducted across all major databases (e.g. Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialized Register, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and ClinicalTrials.gov) from inception to 2 August 2019 and included non-English language studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experiments that compared AA/TSF with other interventions, such as motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), TSF treatment variants or no treatment, were included. Healthcare cost offset studies were also included. Studies were categorized by design (RCT/quasi-experimental; nonrandomized; economic), degree of manualization (all interventions manualized versus some/none) and comparison intervention type (i.e. whether AA/TSF was compared to an intervention with a different theoretical orientation or an AA/TSF intervention that varied in style or intensity). Random-effects meta-analyses were used to pool effects where possible using standard mean differences (SMD) for continuous outcomes (e.g. percent days abstinent (PDA)) and the relative risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies (21 RCTs/quasi-experiments, 5 nonrandomized and 1 purely economic study) containing 10,565 participants were included. AA/TSF interventions performed at least as well as established active comparison treatments (e.g. CBT) on all outcomes except for abstinence where it often outperformed other treatments. AA/TSF also demonstrated higher health care cost savings than other AUD treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

AA/TSF interventions produce similar benefits to other treatments on all drinking-related outcomes except for continuous abstinence and remission, where AA/TSF is superior. AA/TSF also reduces healthcare costs. Clinically implementing one of these proven manualized AA/TSF interventions is likely to enhance outcomes for individuals with AUD while producing health economic benefits.

Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programs for alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence, incarceration, and increased healthcare utilization. For over 80 years, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has been a widespread AUD recovery organization, with millions of members and treatment free at the point of access, but it is only recently that rigorous research on its effectiveness has been conducted.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether peer-led AA and professionally-delivered treatments that facilitate AA involvement (Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) interventions) achieve important outcomes, specifically: abstinence, reduced drinking intensity, reduced alcohol-related consequences, alcohol addiction severity, and healthcare cost offsets.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to 2 August 2019. We searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 15 November 2018. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and bibliographies of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-randomized studies that compared AA or TSF (AA/TSF) with other interventions, such as motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), TSF treatment variants, or no treatment. We also included healthcare cost offset studies. Participants were non-coerced adults with AUD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We categorized studies by: study design (RCT/quasi-RCT; non-randomized; economic); degree of standardized manualization (all interventions manualized versus some/none); and comparison intervention type (i.e. whether AA/TSF was compared to an intervention with a different theoretical orientation or an AA/TSF intervention that varied in style or intensity). For analyses, we followed Cochrane methodology calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables (e.g. percent days abstinent (PDA)) or the relative risk (risk ratios (RRs)) for dichotomous variables. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool effects wherever possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 studies containing 10,565 participants (21 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 5 non-randomized, and 1 purely economic study). The average age of participants within studies ranged from 34.2 to 51.0 years. AA/TSF was compared with psychological clinical interventions, such as MET and CBT, and other 12-step program variants. We rated selection bias as being at high risk in 11 of the 27 included studies, unclear in three, and as low risk in 13. We rated risk of attrition bias as high risk in nine studies, unclear in 14, and low in four, due to moderate (> 20%) attrition rates in the study overall (8 studies), or in study treatment group (1 study). Risk of bias due to inadequate researcher blinding was high in one study, unclear in 22, and low in four. Risks of bias arising from the remaining domains were predominantly low or unclear. AA/TSF (manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) RCTs comparing manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions (e.g. CBT), showed AA/TSF improves rates of continuous abstinence at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.42; 2 studies, 1936 participants; high-certainty evidence). This effect remained consistent at both 24 and 36 months. For percentage days abstinent (PDA), AA/TSF appears to perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 3.03, 95% CI -4.36 to 10.43; 4 studies, 1999 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and better at 24 months (MD 12.91, 95% CI 7.55 to 18.29; 2 studies, 302 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 36 months (MD 6.64, 95% CI 1.54 to 11.75; 1 study, 806 participants; low-certainty evidence). For longest period of abstinence (LPA), AA/TSF may perform as well as comparison interventions at six months (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.50; 2 studies, 136 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months, as measured by drinks per drinking day (DDD) (MD -0.17, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.77; 1 study, 1516 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and percentage days heavy drinking (PDHD) (MD -5.51, 95% CI -14.15 to 3.13; 1 study, 91 participants; low-certainty evidence). For alcohol-related consequences, AA/TSF probably performs as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (MD -2.88, 95% CI -6.81 to 1.04; 3 studies, 1762 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For alcohol addiction severity, one study found evidence of a difference in favor of AA/TSF at 12 months (P < 0.05; low-certainty evidence). AA/TSF (non-manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) For the proportion of participants completely abstinent, non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at three to nine months follow-up (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.18; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-manualized AA/TSF may also perform slightly better than other clinical interventions for PDA (MD 3.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.69; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at nine months, as measured by DDD (MD -1.76, 95% CI -2.23 to -1.29; 1 study, 93 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PDHD (MD 2.09, 95% CI -1.24 to 5.42; 1 study, 286 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the RCTs comparing non-manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions assessed LPA, alcohol-related consequences, or alcohol addiction severity. Cost-effectiveness studies In three studies, AA/TSF had higher healthcare cost savings than outpatient treatment, CBT, and no AA/TSF treatment. The fourth study found that total medical care costs decreased for participants attending CBT, MET, and AA/TSF treatment, but that among participants with worse prognostic characteristics AA/TSF had higher potential cost savings than MET (moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high quality evidence that manualized AA/TSF interventions are more effective than other established treatments, such as CBT, for increasing abstinence. Non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as these other established treatments. AA/TSF interventions, both manualized and non-manualized, may be at least as effective as other treatments for other alcohol-related outcomes. AA/TSF probably produces substantial healthcare cost savings among people with alcohol use disorder.

Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Even low levels of substance misuse by people with a severe mental illness can have detrimental effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for reduction in substance use in people with a serious mental illness compared with standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

The Information Specialist of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group (CSG) searched the CSG Trials Register (2 May 2018), which is based on regular searches of major medical and scientific databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychosocial interventions for substance misuse with standard care in people with serious mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated standard estimates of risk ratio (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) between groups. Where meta-analyses were possible, we pooled data using a random-effects model. Using the GRADE approach, we identified seven patient-centred outcomes and assessed the quality of evidence for these within each comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

Our review now includes 41 trials with a total of 4024 participants. We have identified nine comparisons within the included trials and present a summary of our main findings for seven of these below. We were unable to summarise many findings due to skewed data or because trials did not measure the outcome of interest. In general, evidence was rated as low- or very-low quality due to high or unclear risks of bias because of poor trial methods, or inadequately reported methods, and imprecision due to small sample sizes, low event rates and wide confidence intervals. 1. Integrated models of care versus standard care (36 months) No clear differences were found between treatment groups for loss to treatment (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; participants = 603; studies = 3; low-quality evidence), death (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.57; participants = 421; studies = 2; low-quality evidence), alcohol use (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.56; participants = 143; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), substance use (drug) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.25; participants = 85; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), global assessment of functioning (GAF) scores (MD 0.40, 95% CI -2.47 to 3.27; participants = 170; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), or general life satisfaction (QOLI) scores (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.38; participants = 373; studies = 2; moderate-quality evidence). 2. Non-integrated models of care versus standard care There was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at 12 months (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.99; participants = 134; studies = 3; very low-quality evidence). 3. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) versus standard care There was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at three months (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.86; participants = 152; studies = 2; low-quality evidence), cannabis use at six months (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.15; participants = 47; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or mental state insight (IS) scores by three months (MD 0.52, 95% CI -0.78 to 1.82; participants = 105; studies = 1; low-quality evidence). 4. Contingency management versus standard care We found no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at three months (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.11; participants = 255; studies = 2; moderate-quality evidence), number of stimulant positive urine tests at six months (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.06; participants = 176; studies = 1) or hospitalisations (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.93; participants = 176; studies = 1); both low-quality evidence. 5. Motivational interviewing (MI) versus standard care We found no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at six months (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.63 to 4.64; participants = 62; studies = 1). A clear difference, favouring MI, was observed for abstaining from alcohol (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75; participants = 28; studies = 1) but not other substances (MD -0.07, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.42; participants = 89; studies = 1), and no differences were observed in mental state general severity (SCL-90-R) scores (MD -0.19, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.21; participants = 30; studies = 1). All very low-quality evidence. 6. Skills training versus standard care At 12 months, there were no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 10.10; participants = 122; studies = 3) or death (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.42; participants = 121; studies = 1). Very low-quality, and low-quality evidence, respectively. 7. CBT + MI versus standard care At 12 months, there was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59; participants = 327; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), number of deaths (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.76; participants = 603; studies = 4; low-quality evidence), relapse (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.04; participants = 36; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence), or GAF scores (MD 1.24, 95% CI -1.86 to 4.34; participants = 445; studies = 4; very low-quality evidence). There was also no clear difference in reduction of drug use by six months (MD 0.19, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.60; participants = 119; studies = 1; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included 41 RCTs but were unable to use much data for analyses. There is currently no high-quality evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over standard care for important outcomes such as remaining in treatment, reduction in substance use or improving mental or global state in people with serious mental illnesses and substance misuse. Furthermore, methodological difficulties exist which hinder pooling and interpreting results. Further high-quality trials are required which address these concerns and improve the evidence in this important area.

AA attendance and abstinence for dually diagnosed patients: a meta-analytic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is consensus that best clinical practice for dual diagnosis (DD) is integrated mental health and substance use treatment augmented with Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) attendance. This is the first quantitative review of the direction and magnitude of the association between AA attendance and alcohol abstinence for DD patients.

METHOD

A systematic literature search (1993-2017) identified 22 studies yielding 24 effect sizes that met our inclusion criteria (8075 patients). Inverse-variance weighting of correlation coefficients (r) was used to aggregate sample-level findings and study aims were addressed using random- and mixed-effect models. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses were conducted to assess the likelihood of bias in the overall estimate of AA-related benefit.

RESULTS

AA exposure and abstinence for DD patients were associated significantly and positively [r_w  = 0.249; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.203-0.293; tau = 0.097). There was also significant heterogeneity in the distribution of effect sizes and high between-sample variance (I²  = 74.6, P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses indicated that the magnitude of AA-related benefit did not differ between 6- (k = 7) and 12- (k = 12) month follow-up (Q = 0.068, P = 0.794), type of treatment received (in-patient k = 9; intensive out-patient, out-patient, community k = 15; Q = 2.057, P = 0.152), and whether a majority of patients in a sample had (k = 11) or did not have (k = 13) major depression (Q = 0.563, P = 0.453). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the overall meta-analytical estimate of AA benefit was not impacted adversely or substantively by pooling randomized controlled trial (RCT) and observational samples (Q = 0.763, P = 0.382), pooling count, binary and ordinal-based AA (Q = 0.023, P = 0.879) and outcome data (Q = 1.906, P = 0.167) and reversing direction of correlations extracted from studies (Q = 0.006, P = 0.937). No support was found for publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical referral of dual diagnosis patients to Alcoholics Anonymous is common and, in many cases, dual diagnosis patients who attend Alcoholics Anonymous will report higher rates of alcohol abstinence relative to dual diagnosis patients who do not attend Alcoholics Anonymous.

Effectiveness of Integrated Dual Diagnosis Treatment (IDDT) in severe mental illness outpatients with a co-occurring substance use disorder

Integrating substance use disorder treatment with psychiatric treatment is considered more favourable then treating these disorders parallel or sequential, but the evidence base is inconclusive. We examined the effectiveness of Integrated Dual Diagnosis Treatment (IDDT) on substance use in severe mental illness outpatients with substance use disorders. IDDT is a collaborative, multidisciplinary team approach in which motivational interviewing is a key element. In addition, we also examined the effects of IDDT implementation on skills and knowledge of mental health care professionals. A randomized controlled stepped-wedge cluster trial was performed in 6 functional assertive cummunity treatment teams. We included 37 clinicians who were given a three-day IDDT training. Our primary outcome was days of substance use at follow up, 12 months after IDDT implementation. This was assessed in 154 included patients and was measured with the Measurement in the Addiction for Triage and Evaluation. After implementation of IDDT we found a reduction in the number of days patients used alcohol or drugs, but no improvements on other secondary outcomes such as psychopathology, functioning, therapeutic alliance or motivation to change. Also, IDDT training did not seem to improve clinicians' knowledge, attitudes and motivational interviewing skills. Effects on our secondary outcomes may have been limited by the absence of a training effect in our clinicians. Our study clearly underlines the complexity of disseminating IDDT and in particular motivational interviewing.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia. Part 3: Update 2015 Management of special circumstances: Depression, Suicidality, substance use disorders and pregnancy and lactation

These updated guidelines are based on the first edition of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of schizophrenia published in the years 2005 and 2006. For this 2015 revision, all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of schizophrenia were reviewed systematically to allow for an evidence-based update. These guidelines provide evidence-based practice recommendations which are clinically and scientifically relevant. They are intended to be used by all physicians diagnosing and treating patients with schizophrenia. Based on the first version of these guidelines a systematic review, as well as a data extraction from national guidelines have been performed for this update. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and subsequently categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F) and five levels of recommendation (1-5). This third part of the updated guidelines covers the management of the following specific treatment circumstances: comorbid depression, suicidality, various comorbid substance use disorders (legal and illegal drugs), and pregnancy and lactation. These guidelines are primarily concerned with the biological treatment (including antipsychotic medication and other pharmacological treatment options) of patients with schizophrenia.

Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Even low levels of substance misuse by people with a severe mental illness can have detrimental effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for reduction in substance use in people with a serious mental illness compared with standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update (2013), the Trials Search Co-ordinator of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group (CSG) searched the CSG Trials Register (July 2012), which is based on regular searches of major medical and scientific databases. The principal authors conducted two further searches (8 October 2012 and 15 January 2013) of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. A separate search for trials of contingency management was completed as this was an additional intervention category for this update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychosocial interventions for substance misuse with standard care in people with serious mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated standard estimates of relative risk (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) between groups. For all meta-analyses we pooled data using a random-effects model. Using the GRADE approach, we identified seven patient-centred outcomes and assessed the quality of evidence for these within each comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 trials with a total of 3165 participants. Evaluation of long-term integrated care included four RCTs (n = 735). We found no significant differences on loss to treatment (n = 603, 3 RCTs, RR 1.09 CI 0.82 to 1.45, low quality of evidence), death by 3 years (n = 421, 2 RCTs, RR 1.18 CI 0.39 to 3.57, low quality of evidence), alcohol use (not in remission at 36 months) (n = 143, 1 RCT, RR 1.15 CI 0.84 to 1.56,low quality of evidence), substance use (n = 85, 1 RCT, RR 0.89 CI 0.63 to 1.25, low quality of evidence), global assessment of functioning (n = 171, 1 RCT, MD 0.7 CI 2.07 to 3.47, low quality of evidence), or general life satisfaction (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD 0.02 higher CI 0.28 to 0.32, moderate quality of evidence).For evaluation of non-integrated intensive case management with usual treatment (4 RCTs, n = 163) we found no statistically significant difference for loss to treatment at 12 months (n = 134, 3 RCTs, RR 1.21 CI 0.73 to 1.99, very low quality of evidence).Motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioural therapy compared to usual treatment (7 RCTs, total n = 878) did not reveal any advantage for retaining participants at 12 months (n = 327, 1 RCT, RR 0.99 CI 0.62 to 1.59, low quality of evidence) or for death (n = 493, 3 RCTs, RR 0.72 CI 0.22 to 2.41, low quality of evidence), and no benefit for reducing substance use (n = 119, 1 RCT, MD 0.19 CI -0.22 to 0.6, low quality of evidence), relapse (n = 36, 1 RCT, RR 0.5 CI 0.24 to 1.04, very low quality of evidence) or global functioning (n = 445, 4 RCTs, MD 1.24 CI 1.86 to 4.34, very low quality of evidence).Cognitive behavioural therapy alone compared with usual treatment (2 RCTs, n = 152) showed no significant difference for losses from treatment at 3 months (n = 152, 2 RCTs, RR 1.12 CI 0.44 to 2.86, low quality of evidence). No benefits were observed on measures of lessening cannabis use at 6 months (n = 47, 1 RCT, RR 1.30 CI 0.79 to 2.15, very low quality of evidence) or mental state (n = 105, 1 RCT, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale MD 0.52 CI -0.78 to 1.82, low quality of evidence).We found no advantage for motivational interviewing alone compared with usual treatment (8 RCTs, n = 509) in reducing losses to treatment at 6 months (n = 62, 1 RCT, RR 1.71 CI 0.63 to 4.64, very low quality of evidence), although significantly more participants in the motivational interviewing group reported for their first aftercare appointment (n = 93, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 CI 0.53 to 0.9). Some differences, favouring treatment, were observed in abstaining from alcohol (n = 28, 1 RCT, RR 0.36 CI 0.17 to 0.75, very low quality of evidence) but not other substances (n = 89, 1 RCT, RR -0.07 CI -0.56 to 0.42, very low quality of evidence), and no differences were observed in mental state (n = 30, 1 RCT, MD 0.19 CI -0.59 to 0.21, very low quality of evidence).We found no significant differences for skills training in the numbers lost to treatment by 12 months (n = 94, 2 RCTs, RR 0.70 CI 0.44 to 1.1, very low quality of evidence).We found no differences for contingency management compared with usual treatment (2 RCTs, n = 206) in numbers lost to treatment at 3 months (n = 176, 1 RCT, RR 1.65 CI 1.18 to 2.31, low quality of evidence), number of stimulant positive urine tests at 6 months (n = 176, 1 RCT, RR 0.83 CI 0.65 to 1.06, low quality of evidence) or hospitalisations (n = 176, 1 RCT, RR 0.21 CI 0.05 to 0.93, low quality of evidence).We were unable to summarise all findings due to skewed data or because trials did not measure the outcome of interest. In general, evidence was rated as low or very low due to high or unclear risks of bias because of poor trial methods, or poorly reported methods, and imprecision due to small sample sizes, low event rates and wide confidence intervals.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included 32 RCTs and found no compelling evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over another for people to remain in treatment or to reduce substance use or improve mental state in people with serious mental illnesses. Furthermore, methodological difficulties exist which hinder pooling and interpreting results. Further high quality trials are required which address these concerns and improve the evidence in this important area.

Comparing barriers to mental health treatment and substance use disorder treatment among individuals with comorbid major depression and substance use disorders

Barriers to both mental health and substance use disorder treatments have rarely been examined among individuals with comorbid mental health and substance use disorders. In a sample of 393 adults with 12-month major depressive episodes and substance use disorders, we compared perceived barriers to these two types of treatments. Data were drawn from the 2005-2011 U.S. National Surveys on Drug Use and Health. Overall, the same individuals experienced different barriers to mental health treatment versus substance use disorder treatment. Concerns about negative views of the community, effects on job, and inconvenience of services were more commonly reported as reasons for not receiving substance use disorder treatment. Not affording the cost of care was the most common barrier to both types of treatments, but more commonly reported as a barrier to mental health treatment. Improved financial access through the Affordable Care Act and parity legislation and integration of mental health and substance use disorder services may help to reduce treatment barriers among individuals with comorbid mental health and substance disorders.

Dually diagnosed patients' benefits of mutual-help groups and the role of social anxiety

There is debate about whether dually diagnosed patients benefit from mutual-help groups (MHGs), partly because social anxiety may make participation problematic. We examined dually diagnosed patients' participation in MHGs and outcomes at 6, 12, and 24 months post-treatment, and the extent to which social anxiety was associated with participation. We also examined whether MHG participation and social anxiety were related to outcomes, and whether social anxiety moderated associations between participation and outcomes. We found high rates of MHG participation. Among patients who attended at least one meeting, outcomes were positive. Social anxiety was not associated with levels of MHG participation, but more participation was associated with better outcomes. When social anxiety moderated associations between MHG participation and outcomes, patients with more social anxiety benefited more from participation. Treated dually diagnosed patients participate in, and benefit from, MHGs, and participation and benefits are comparable, or even strengthened, among more socially-anxious patients.

Health behaviour interventions to improve physical health in individuals diagnosed with a mental illness: a systematic review

Individuals diagnosed with mental illness experience high rates of morbidity and mortality as a result of poor physical health and unhealthy lifestyle behaviours. The aim of this paper is to systematically review the literature on health behaviour interventions to improve the physical health of individuals diagnosed with a mental illness. A systematic search strategy was undertaken using four of the major electronic databases. Identified articles were screened for inclusion, included articles were coded, and data were extracted and critically reviewed. A total of 42 articles were identified for inclusion. The most commonly targeted physical health behaviour was weight management. The majority of studies reported improvements in health behaviours following interventions. The findings provide evidence for the positive effect of health behaviour interventions in improving the physical health of individuals diagnosed with a serious mental illness. A focus on health behaviour interventions within the mental health nursing profession might lead to improvements in health behaviours and general health in consumers of mental health services.

Testing healthy immigrant effects among late life immigrants in the United States: using multiple indicators

OBJECTIVE

This study tested a healthy immigrant effect (HIE) and postimmigration health status changes among late life immigrants.

METHODS

Using three waves of the Second Longitudinal Study of Aging (1994-2000) and the linked mortality file through 2006, this study compared (a) chronic health conditions, (b) longitudinal trajectories of self-rated health, (c) longitudinal trajectories of functional impairments, and (d) mortality between three groups (age 70+): (i) late life immigrants with less than 15 years in the United States (n = 133), (ii) longer term immigrants (n = 672), and (iii) U.S.-born individuals (n = 8,642). Logistic and Poisson regression, hierarchical generalized linear modeling, and survival analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Late life immigrants were less likely to suffer from cancer, had lower numbers of chronic conditions at baseline, and displayed lower hazards of mortality during the 12-year follow-up. However, their self-rated health and functional status were worse than those of their counterparts over time.

CONCLUSION

A HIE was only partially supported among older adults.

Treatment outcomes of an integrated residential programme for patients with schizophrenia and substance use disorder

BACKGROUND

About half of all schizophrenic patients have a co-occurring substance use disorder, leading to poorer social and functional outcomes than obtained in non-abusing patients. To improve outcomes, integrated treatments have been designed that address the two conditions simultaneously. Results are, however, conflicting because the available effect studies are hampered by various methodological issues, among which are heterogeneous patient samples.

METHODS

In this comparative study, two well-described patient samples diagnosed with schizophrenia and co-morbid substance abuse disorders either received an integrated treatment (IDDT) or treatment as usual (TAU).

RESULTS

Patients in the IDDT condition showed significant reductions in illicit drug and alcohol use, improvements on all psychiatric symptom domains, reported higher quality of life and improved on social and community functioning. In contrast, patients' improvements in the TAU group were moderate and limited to a few substance use and psychiatric outcomes. The TAU group had significantly higher dropout rates 6 and 12 months after baseline, suggesting that the IDDT programme was more successful in committing patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that an integrated approach to schizophrenic patients and co-morbid substance use disorders is superior to standard treatment and may be considered as the treatment of choice for this patient group.

Predictors of longitudinal substance use and mental health outcomes for patients in two integrated service delivery systems

AIM

Individuals who have both substance use disorders and mental health problems have poorer treatment outcomes. This study examines the relationship of service utilization and 12-step participation to outcomes at 1 and 5 years for patients treated in one of two integrated service delivery systems: the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) system and a health maintenance organization (HMO).

METHODS

Sub-samples from each system were selected using multiple criteria indicating severity of mental health problems at admission to substance use disorder treatment (VA=401; HMO=331). Separate and multiple group structural equation model analyses used baseline characteristics, service use, and 12-step participation as predictors of substance use and mental health outcomes at 1 and 5 years following admission.

RESULTS

Substance use and related problems showed stability across time, however, these relationships were stronger among VA patients. More continuing care substance use outpatient visits were associated with reductions in mental health symptoms in both groups, whereas receipt of outpatient mental health services was associated with more severe psychological symptoms. Participation in 12-step groups had a stronger effect on reducing cocaine use among VA patients, whereas it had a stronger effect on reducing alcohol use among HMO patients. More outpatient psychological services had a stronger effect on reducing alcohol use among HMO patients.

CONCLUSION

Common findings across these two systems demonstrate the persistence of substance use and related psychological problems, but also show that continuing care services and participation in 12-step groups are associated with better outcomes in both systems.

Patients with dual diagnoses or substance use disorders only: 12-step group participation and 1-year outcomes

We compared outpatients (regional facility) with substance use and psychiatric (N = 199) or only substance use (N = 146) disorders on baseline and one-year symptoms (93% follow-up), and treatment and 12-step group participation over the year (2005). We examined whether diagnostic status moderated associations between participation and outcomes (Addiction Severity Index) with regressions. At follow-up, dual diagnosis patients had more severe symptoms, despite comparable treatment. The groups were comparable on 12-step participation, which was associated with better outcomes. However, associations of participation with better outcomes were weaker for dual diagnosis patients. Study (VA HSR&D-funded) implications and limitations are noted and research suggested.

The 2009 schizophrenia PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations and summary statements

The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) psychosocial treatment recommendations provide a comprehensive summary of current evidence-based psychosocial treatment interventions for persons with schizophrenia. There have been 2 previous sets of psychosocial treatment recommendations (Lehman AF, Steinwachs DM. Translating research into practice: the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) treatment recommendations. Schizophr Bull. 1998;24:1-10 and Lehman AF, Kreyenbuhl J, Buchanan RW, et al. The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT): updated treatment recommendations 2003. Schizophr Bull. 2004;30:193-217). This article reports the third set of PORT recommendations that includes updated reviews in 7 areas as well as adding 5 new areas of review. Members of the psychosocial Evidence Review Group conducted reviews of the literature in each intervention area and drafted the recommendation or summary statement with supporting discussion. A Psychosocial Advisory Committee was consulted in all aspects of the review, and an expert panel commented on draft recommendations and summary statements. Our review process produced 8 treatment recommendations in the following areas: assertive community treatment, supported employment, cognitive behavioral therapy, family-based services, token economy, skills training, psychosocial interventions for alcohol and substance use disorders, and psychosocial interventions for weight management. Reviews of treatments focused on medication adherence, cognitive remediation, psychosocial treatments for recent onset schizophrenia, and peer support and peer-delivered services indicated that none of these treatment areas yet have enough evidence to merit a treatment recommendation, though each is an emerging area of interest. This update of PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations underscores both the expansion of knowledge regarding psychosocial treatments for persons with schizophrenia at the same time as the limitations in their implementation in clinical practice settings.

12-step participation among dually-diagnosed individuals: a review of individual and contextual factors

The frequent co-occurrence of substance abuse disorders along with psychiatric disorders creates a number of complexities and needs in terms of long-term treatment for individuals. 12-step groups might provide unique mechanisms by which dually-diagnosed individuals can maintain their abstinence and improve their psychological functioning. This paper reviews the literature on outpatient community 12-step participation among dually-diagnosed individuals, and also focuses on individual factors that may interact with treatment: homelessness, legal status, and ethnicity. A total of 59 articles was included in the review, with an emphasis on these individual factors and findings regarding mechanisms of action. Overall, findings from the studies reviewed suggest a general benefit of 12-step participation across these individual factors and some potential for dual-focus 12-step programs for dually-diagnosed individuals via social support and self-efficacy. However, methodological limitations and lack of research in the area of ethnicity limited some of the conclusions that can be made. Suggestions for further research are discussed.

Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Even low levels of substance misuse by people with a severe mental illness can have detrimental effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for substance reduction in people with a serious mental illness.

SEARCH STRATEGY

For this update (2007) we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (May 2006) which is based on regular searches of major databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychosocial interventions for substance misuse with standard care in people with serious mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis, based on a random effects model. We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where data were homogeneous. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) again based on a random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Evaluation of long-term integrated care included 4 RCTs (total n=735). We found no significant difference on measures of substance use (n=85, 1 RCT, RR 0.89 CI 0.6 to 1.3) or loss to treatment (n=603, 3 RCTs, RR 1.09 CI 0.8 to 1.5). For the non-integrated intensive case management trials (4 RCTs, total n=151) we also found no significant difference for loss (n=134, 3 RCTs, RR 1.35 CI 0.8 to 2.2). Motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioural therapy (3 RCTs, total n=276) did not reveal any advantage for retaining participants (n=36, 1 RCT, RR lost to treatment 0.50 CI 0.1 to 5.0) or for relapse (n=36, 1 RCT, RR 0.58 CI 0.3 to 1.1), and no benefit for reducing substance use (n=119, 1 RCT, RR 0.19 CI -0.2 to 0.6). Cognitive behavioural therapy alone (4 trials, total n=260) showed fewer participants lost from treatment (n=260, 4 RCTs, p=0.02, RR 0.61 CI 0.4 to 0.9). No benefits were observed on measures of lessening cannabis use (n=47, 1 RCT, RR 1.30 CI 0.8 to 2.2) or on the number of participants using substances (alcohol; n=46, 1 RCT, RR 5.88 CI 0.8 to 44.0, drugs; n=46, 1 RCT, RR 2.02 CI 0.9 to 4.8) and no differences were observed on measures of mental state (n=105, 1 RCT, RR 0.52 CI -0.8 to 1.8). We found no advantage for motivational interviewing alone (5 trials, total n=338) in reducing 'lost to evaluation' (n=338, 5 RCTs, RR 0.96 CI 0.6 to 1.5) compared with treatment as usual, although significantly more participants in the motivational interviewing group reported for their first aftercare appointment (n=93, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 CI 0.5 to 0.9, NNT 4 CI 3 to 12). Some differences were observed in abstaining from alcohol favouring treatment (n=28, 1 RCT, RR 0.36 CI 0.2 to 0.8, NNT 2 CI 2 to 5), but not other substances (n=89, 1 RCT, RR -0.07 CI -0.6 to 0.4) and no differences were observed in mental state (n=30, 1 RCT, WMD -4.20 CI -18.7 to 10.3). Finally, we found no significant differences for skills training in the numbers lost to treatment by 12 months (n=94, 2 RCTs, RR 0.70 CI 0.4 to 1.1).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included 25 RCTs and found no compelling evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over another to reduce substance use (or improve mental state) by people with serious mental illnesses. Furthermore, methodological difficulties exist which hinder pooling and interpreting results; high drop out rates, varying fidelity of interventions, varying outcome measures, settings and samples and comparison groups may have received higher levels of treatment than standard care. Further studies are required which address these concerns and improve the evidence in this important area.

Treatments for patients with dual diagnosis: a review

BACKGROUND

Comorbid substance use and mental illness is prevalent and often results in serious consequences. However, little is known about the efficacy of treatments for patients with dual diagnosis.

METHODS

This paper reviews both the psychosocial and medication treatments for those diagnosed with a substance-related disorder and one of the following disorders: (a) depression, (b) anxiety disorder, (c) schizophrenia, (d) bipolar disorder, (e) severe mental illness, and (f) nonspecific mental illness. We made no restriction of study design to include all published studies, due to the dearth of studies on treatments of patients with dual diagnosis.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies were identified (36 randomized-controlled trials; RCT). Limited number of studies, especially RCTs, have been conducted within each comorbid category. This review did not find treatments that had been replicated and consistently showed clear advantages over comparison condition for both substance-related and other psychiatric outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no treatment was identified as efficacious for both psychiatric disorders and substance-related disorder, this review finds: (1) existing efficacious treatments for reducing psychiatric symptoms also tend to work in dual-diagnosis patients, (2) existing efficacious treatments for reducing substance use also decrease substance use in dually diagnosed patients, and (3) the efficacy of integrated treatment is still unclear. This review provides a critique of the current state of the literature, identifies the directions for future research on treatment of dual-diagnosis individuals, and calls for urgent attention by researchers and funding agencies to conduct more and more methodologically rigorous research in this area.

The effect of individual, program, and neighborhood variables on continuity of treatment among dually diagnosed individuals

This study reviewed the medical charts of 271 patients diagnosed with co-morbid mental health and substance-use disorders who were discharged from a hospital acute inpatient unit to various outpatient treatment programs in Philadelphia. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology and logistic regression modeling were employed to investigate the effects of individual, neighborhood, and program-level variables on arrival to the first treatment appointment within 30 days of discharge. Four models are presented. The results of the study suggest that having had three or more treatment episodes prior to inpatient hospitalization, and living in a neighborhood in which temporary or transitional, and presumably, other low income housing is located, increased the likelihood of patients continuing with treatment in the community. Discharge to the preadmission address, a chief complaint of bizarre behavior, close proximity of two or more liquor and/or beer stores, a high density of narcotics anonymous (NA) and/or alcoholics anonymous (AA) meetings within the neighborhood, an axis I diagnosis of substance-induced mood disorder, and a urine drug screen positive for heroin reduced the likelihood of attending outpatient treatment. We conclude that geographic and community variables as they relate to substance abuse may add an important dimension to our understanding of patient functioning and well being in the community following inpatient treatment.

Impact of program services on treatment outcomes of patients with comorbid mental and substance use disorders

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the outcomes of individuals with co-occurring disorders who received drug treatment in programs that varied in their integration of mental health services. Patients treated in programs that provided more on-site mental health services and had staff with specialized training were expected to report less substance use and better psychological outcomes at follow-up.

METHODS

Participants with co-occurring disorders were sampled from 11 residential drug abuse treatment programs for adults in Los Angeles County. In-depth assessments of 351 patients were conducted at treatment entry and at follow-up six months later. Surveys conducted with program administrators provided information on program characteristics. Latent variable structural equation models revealed relationships of patient characteristics and program services with drug use and psychological functioning at follow-up.

RESULTS

Individuals treated in programs that provided specific dual diagnosis services subsequently had higher rates of utilizing mental health services over six months and, in turn, showed significantly greater improvements in psychological functioning (as measured by the Brief Symptom Inventory and the RAND Health Survey 36-item short form) at follow-up. More use of psychological services was also associated with less heroin use at follow-up. African Americans reported poorer levels of psychological functioning than others at both time points and were less likely to be treated in programs that provided mental health services.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings support continued efforts to provide specialized services for individuals with co-occurring disorders within substance abuse treatment programs as well as the need to address additional barriers to obtaining these services among African Americans.

The Role of Twelve-Step Approaches in Dual Diagnosis Treatment and Recovery

The authors reviewed the empirical literature concerning the use of twelve-step programs and treatments by patients with co-occurring substance use disorders and other psychiatric disorders. Strong evidence was found that dually diagnosed individuals (DDI), with the possible exception of those with psychotic disorders, attend twelve-step programs at rates comparable to non-DDI. Twelve-step involvement is consistently associated with improved substance use outcomes. Although there have been numerous clinical trials involving twelve step-oriented interventions for DDI, most of the studies suffered from substantial methodological limitations. More work is needed to determine what kinds of twelve-step treatments and programs are effective for various types of patients and elucidate the mechanisms by which these approaches facilitate recovery.

Integrated versus non-integrated management and care for clients with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders: a qualitative systematic review of randomised controlled trials

The purpose of this paper is to conduct a qualitative review of randomised controlled trials in relation to the treatment of adults with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorder (MH/SUD). In particular, integrated approaches are compared with non-integrated approaches to treatment. Ten articles were identified for inclusion in the review. The findings are equivocal with regard to the superior efficacy of integrated approaches to treatment, although the many limitations of the studies need to be considered in our understanding of this finding. Clearly, this is an extremely challenging client group to engage and maintain in intervention research, and the complexity and variability of the problems render control particularly difficult. The lack of available evidence to support the superiority of integration is discussed in relation to these challenges. Much remains to be investigated with regard to integrated management and care for people with co-occurring and MH/SUD, particularly for specific combinations of dual diagnosis and giving consideration to the level of inter-relatedness between the disorders.

Perceptions of mental health and substance abuse program administrators and staff on service delivery to persons with co-occurring substance abuse and mental disorders

Several initiatives in the past 20 years have been implemented in Los Angeles County to improve service delivery across the mental health and substance abuse treatment systems, with the goal of increasing access to and coordination of services for individuals with co-occurring substance abuse and mental disorders. To examine the current status of service delivery to this population, a survey was conducted with administrators of mental health and substance abuse programs that provide services to dually diagnosed patients and with the treatment staff in those programs. Administrators (n = 15) and staff (n = 99) in substance abuse programs rated the accessibility and coordination of services to dually diagnosed patients significantly lower than the mental health administrators (n = 10) and staff (n = 136). Efforts to coordinate service delivery across the two systems need to address these divergent perceptions between staff in programs that are increasingly called upon to work together to jointly deliver services.

Addictive disorders in context: principles and puzzles of effective treatment and recovery

To consider key issues in understanding effective treatment and recovery, the author reviews selected principles and unresolved puzzles about the context of addictive disorders and the structure, process, and outcome of treatment. The principles focus on the process of problem resolution, the duration and continuity of care, treatment provided by specialist versus nonspecialist providers, alliance and the goals and structure of treatment, characteristics of effective interventions, and the outcome of treatment versus remaining untreated. The unresolved puzzles involve how to concepualize service episodes and treatment careers, connections between the theory and process of treatment effective patient-treatment matching strategies, integration of treatment and self-help, and the development of unified models to encompass life context factors and treatment within a common framework.

Co-operation and co-morbidity: Managing dual diagnosis in rural South Australia

This paper reports a small portion of the findings from a research study that explored how the use of the label 'dual diagnosis' impacts on service delivery to people with concurrent mental health and alcohol and/or other drug problems in rural South Australia. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with registered nurses from Rural Mental Health Services and Rural Drug and Alcohol Services. Using a form of discourse analysis we explored the interview data for descriptions of management of people with dual diagnosis. This paper focuses on the two positions of 'pulling together' and 'sharing resources' that we found in the data. Where the literature on management of co-morbidity usually suggests integrating services or expertise at the systemic level, this study shows that what may work best is contingent on the needs of individual clients.

Victimization and Substance Abuse among Women: Contributing Factors, Interventions, and Implications

Although the literature indicates that there is an association of victimization with substance abuse, there has been limited research focused on understanding and synthesizing the factors that have been identified as contributing to victimization and substance abuse and on interventions designed to address these contributing factors. The purposes of this article are to (a) review the literature on factors related to victimization and substance abuse, (b) review interventions and outcomes, and (c) discuss clinical implications for interventions and research. Results suggest that there is a high rate of co-occurrence of victimization and substance abuse among women, that the factors contributing to victimization and substance abuse are complex, and that there is a lack of treatment models addressing victimization and substance abuse.