Who benefits from extended continuing care for cocaine dependence?

Risk and protective factors for early dropout from telephone monitoring for individuals with drug convictions in community mental health centers in Japan

INTRODUCTION

Individuals involved with the criminal justice system face challenges in receiving and maintaining substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and support. Although telephone monitoring (TM) could reduce these barriers, data on TM for community-dwelling individuals involved with the criminal justice system and research on individuals who drop out of TM are scarce. We examined the factors associated with dropping out early from the Voice Bridges Project, which provides TM for individuals on probation for drug-related convictions through community mental health centers in Japan.

METHODS

Participants (n = 546) were individuals aged ≥20 years with methamphetamine-related convictions who were on probation. Univariate analyses examine the associations between one-year follow-up status and baseline variables, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses identify the risk and protective factors associated with dropping out. Stratified analyses report results based on sex and halfway-house residency.

RESULTS

The one-year dropout rate was 43.6 % (n = 238). Multivariate analysis identified two risk factors for dropping out-halfway-house residency and suicide attempts in the past year, and two protective factors-higher education and the current use of SUD services. Sex-stratified analyses showed that halfway-house residency was a risk factor for both men and women. Attempted suicide was a risk factor for women. Conversely, higher education and current use of SUD services were protective factors for men.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results identify unique risk factors for women, such as a recent history of suicide attempts, and distinctive protective factors for men, including higher education and current use of SUD services, emphasizing the importance of sex-specific approaches. Furthermore, the study reveals that irrespective of sex, vulnerable individuals, such as halfway-house residents, are at a higher risk of dropping out from TM.

The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder

The American Society of Addiction Medicine/American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (ASAM/AAAP) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder provides guidance on evidence-based strategies for the treatment of stimulant use disorders (StUDs), stimulant intoxication, and stimulant withdrawal, as well as secondary and tertiary prevention of harms associated with stimulant use. The Clinical Guideline Committee (CGC) comprised experts from ASAM and AAAP representing a range of clinical settings and patient populations. The guideline was developed following modified GRADE methodology. The process included a systematic literature review as well as several targeted supplemental searches. The CGC utilized Evidence to Decision tables to review available evidence and rate the strength of each recommendation. The clinical practice guideline was revised based on external stakeholder review. Key takeaways included: Contingency management represents the current standard of care for treatment of StUDs; Pharmacotherapies may be utilized off-label to treat StUDs; Acute stimulant intoxication can result in life-threatening complications that should be addressed in an appropriate level of care; Secondary and tertiary prevention strategies should be used to reduce harms related to risky stimulant use.

Contingency management plus acceptance and commitment therapy for initial cocaine abstinence: Results of a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART)

BACKGROUND

This study tested an adaptive intervention for optimizing abstinence outcomes over phases of treatment for cocaine use disorder using a SMART design. Phase 1 assessed whether 4 weeks of contingency management (CM) improved response with the addition of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). Phase 2 assessed pharmacological augmentation with modafinil (MOD) vs. placebo (PLA) for individuals not achieving abstinence during Phase 1.

METHOD

For Phase 1 of treatment, participants (N=118) were randomly allocated to ACT+CM or Drug Counseling (DC+CM), the comparison condition. At week 4, treatment response was defined as the submission of six consecutive cocaine-negative urine drug screens (UDS). Phase 1 non-responders were re-randomized to MOD or PLA as adjunct to their initial treatment. Phase 1 responders continued receiving their initial treatment. Primary outcomes included response rate and proportion of cocaine-negative UDS for Phase 1 and 2. Analyses used Bayesian inference with 80% pre-specified as the posterior probability (PP) threshold constituting moderate evidence that an effect exists.

RESULTS

Phase 1 response was higher in the ACT+CM group (24.5%) compared to the DC+CM group (17.5%; PP = 84.5%). In Phase 2, the proportion of cocaine-negative UDS among Phase 1 responders did not differ by initial treatment (PP = 61.8%) but remained higher overall compared to Phase 1 non-responders (PPs > 99%). No evidence of an effect favoring augmentation with MOD was observed.

DISCUSSION

Adding ACT to CM increased abstinence initiation. Initial responders were more likely to remain abstinent compared to initial non-responders, for whom modafinil was not an effective pharmacotherapy augmentation strategy.

Psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder

BACKGROUND

Stimulant use disorder is a continuously growing medical and social burden without approved medications available for its treatment. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help people reduce or cease stimulant consumption. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in September 2023. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched the references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU), or a different intervention in adults with stimulant use disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 64 RCTs (8241 participants). Seventy-three percent of studies included participants with cocaine or crack cocaine use disorder; 3.1% included participants with amphetamine use disorder; 10.9% included participants with methamphetamine use disorder; and 12.5% included participants with any stimulant use disorder. In 18 studies, all participants were in methadone maintenance treatment. In our primary comparison of any psychosocial treatment to no intervention, we included studies which compared a psychosocial intervention plus TAU to TAU alone. In this comparison, 12 studies evaluated cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), 27 contingency management, three motivational interviewing, one study looked at psychodynamic therapy, and one study evaluated CBT plus contingency management. We also compared any psychosocial intervention to TAU. In this comparison, seven studies evaluated CBT, two contingency management, two motivational interviewing, and one evaluated a combination of CBT plus motivational interviewing. Seven studies compared contingency management reinforcement related to abstinence versus contingency management not related to abstinence. Finally, seven studies compared two different psychosocial approaches. We judged 65.6% of the studies to be at low risk of bias for random sequence generation and 19% at low risk for allocation concealment. Blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so we judged all the studies to be at high risk of performance bias for subjective outcomes but at low risk for objective outcomes. We judged 22% of the studies to be at low risk of detection bias for subjective outcomes. We judged most of the studies (69%) to be at low risk of attrition bias. When compared to no intervention, we found that psychosocial treatments: reduce the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.91; 30 studies, 4078 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.41; 12 studies, 1293 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.62; 9 studies, 1187 participants; high-certainty evidence); probably increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.97; 12 studies, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.46; 4 studies, 295 participants; low-certainty evidence); reduce the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.19; 10 studies, 1215 participants; high-certainty evidence); and increase the longest period of abstinence (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; 17 studies, 2118 participants; high-certainty evidence). When compared to TAU, we found that psychosocial treatments reduce the dropout rate (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; 9 studies, 735 participants; high-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.64 to 4.31; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether they make any difference in point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.99; 2 studies, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to TAU, psychosocial treatments may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.53; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence); probably make little to no difference in the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (SMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.81 to 0.47, 4 studies, 479 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); and may make little to no difference in the longest period of abstinence (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.21; 1 study, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies for this comparison assessed continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up. Only five studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions; four of them stated that no adverse events occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review's findings indicate that psychosocial treatments can help people with stimulant use disorder by reducing dropout rates. This conclusion is based on high-certainty evidence from comparisons of psychosocial interventions with both no treatment and TAU. This is an important finding because many people with stimulant use disorders leave treatment prematurely. Stimulant use disorders are chronic, lifelong, relapsing mental disorders, which require substantial therapeutic efforts to achieve abstinence. For those who are not yet able to achieve complete abstinence, retention in treatment may help to reduce the risks associated with stimulant use. In addition, psychosocial interventions reduce stimulant use compared to no treatment, but they may make little to no difference to stimulant use when compared to TAU. The most studied and promising psychosocial approach is contingency management. Relatively few studies explored the other approaches, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were imprecise due to small sample sizes.

Telephone monitoring and 15-month outcomes for patients with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders: Moderating effects of high-risk patient characteristics

INTRODUCTION

Telephone monitoring interventions for substance use disorders are an important component of continuing care to reduce relapse and connect patients to services. However, a knowledge gap still exists as to which patient groups benefit most from them. This secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial examined moderators of associations between telephone monitoring and 15-month substance use outcomes among patients with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders. High-risk patient characteristics at baseline were examined as potential moderators of the effectivness of telephone monitoring, including history of incarceration, severity of depression symptoms, and suicide risk.

METHODS

Participants were 406 psychiatry inpatients with documented substance use and mental health disorders who were randomized to treatment as usual (TAU; n = 199) or TAU plus telephone monitoring (TM; n = 207). Outcomes included abstinence self-efficacy (Brief Situational Confidence Questionnaire) and alcohol and drug use severity (Addiction Severity Index composites) at 15-month follow-up. Analyses examined main effects of treatment condition and moderators, and interactions between treatment condition and moderators.

RESULTS

The study found five significant main effects, three of which were qualified by significant interactions. Incarceration history was associated with higher drug use severity; higher suicide risk was associated with higher abstinence self-efficacy. Regarding interaction effects, among participants with an incarceration history, TM compared to TAU was associated with significantly lower alcohol use severity at 15-month follow-up; this finding did not hold for never-incarcerated participants. For participants with less severe depression symptoms, TM compared to TAU was associated with significantly lower alcohol use severity and higher abstinence self-efficacy at follow-up; this did not hold for participants with more severe depression symptoms. Suicide risk was not a significant moderator of any outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that TM is effective in improving alcohol use severity and abstinence self-efficacy for some subgroups of patients, including patients with an incarceration history or less severe depression. Results inform the clinical provision of substance use disorder care by means of telehealth, which increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Digital approaches to continuing care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update of studies on the effectiveness of digital and telephonic approaches to providing remote continuing care for substance use disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Effective continuing care can be provided via smartphone apps, text messaging, interactive voice response, and structured telephone counseling. The remote continuing care interventions with the strongest evidence of efficacy are the Addiction Comprehensive Health Enhancement Support System app and Telephone Monitoring and Counseling. Positive effects for these intervention on drinking outcomes in patients with alcohol use disorders were replicated in a recent randomized controlled study.

SUMMARY

Continuing care is widely believed to be an important component of treatment for substance use disorders, especially for sustaining positive outcomes. However, many individuals do not attend clinic-based continuing care, due to a variety of reasons, including competing work and family responsibilities, disabilities, transportation challenges, and recently the COVID-19 pandemic. Remote continuing care, provided via smartphone apps, text messaging, and various telephonic approaches, has been shown to be effective, and could be used to provide continuing care to patients who would otherwise not receive it. Further work is needed to determine how to effectively combine more traditional continuing care with newer digitized and telephonic approaches.

Efficacy and comparative effectiveness of telephone and smartphone remote continuing care interventions for alcohol use disorder: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Management of alcohol use disorder (AUD) could be enhanced by effective remote treatments. This study tested whether supplementing intensive outpatient programs (IOPs) with continuing care delivered via (1) telephone, (2) smartphone or (3) their combination improves outcomes relative to (4) IOP only. Continuing care conditions were also compared.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial of four groups with 3-, 6-, 9-, 12- and 18-month follow-ups.

SETTING

University research center in Philadelphia, PA, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants (n = 262) met DSM-V criteria for AUD, were largely male (71%) and African American (82%).

INTERVENTIONS AND COMPARATOR

Telephone monitoring and counseling (TMC; n = 59), addiction comprehensive health enhancement support system (ACHESS; n = 68) and TMC + ACHESS (n = 70) provided for 12 months. The control condition received IOP only (TAU; n = 65).

MEASUREMENT

The primary outcome was percentage of days heavy drinking (PDHD) in months 1-12. Secondary outcomes were any drinking, any drug use, drinking consequences and quality of life.

FINDINGS

Mean PDHD in months 1-12 was 10.29 in TAU, 5.41 in TMC, 6.80 in ACHESS and 5.99 in TMC + ACHESS. PDHD was lower in TMC [Cohen's d = 0.35, P = 0.018, 95% confidence interval (CI) = (-1.42, -0.20)], ACHESS [d = 0.31, P = 0.031, 95% CI = (-1.27, -0.06)] and TMC + ACHESS [d = 0.36, P = 0.009, 95% CI = (-1.40, -0.20)] than in TAU. Differences between TMC + ACHESS, TMC and ACHESS were small (d ≤ 0.06) and non-significant. Findings were inconclusive as to whether or not the treatment conditions differed on PDHD at 18 months. A significant effect was obtained on any drinking, which was higher in months 1-12 in TAU than in TMC [odds ratio (OR) = 3.02, standard error (SE) = 0.43, 95% CI = (1.30, 6.99), P = 0.01] and TMC + ACHESS [OR = 2.43, SE = 0.39, 95% CI = (1.12, 5.27), P = 0.025). No other significant effects were obtained on other secondary outcomes during or after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A telephone-delivered intervention and a smartphone-delivered intervention, alone and in combination, provided effective remote continuing care for alcohol use disorder. The combination of both interventions was not superior to either alone and effects did not persist post-treatment.

Ready2Change: Preliminary effectiveness of a telephone-delivered intervention program for alcohol, methamphetamine and cannabis use problems

INTRODUCTION

Telehealth has considerable potential to overcome many of the barriers to accessing care for substance use problems, thereby increasing the opportunity for earlier intervention. The Ready2Change program is a multiple-session outbound telephone-delivered cognitive and behavioural intervention for mild-to-moderate substance use disorders, embedded within a long-established 24/7 alcohol and drug helpline. We sought to analyse routinely collected program data in a preliminary study to examine the effectiveness of Ready2Change in reducing substance use problem severity and psychological distress.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of program data from December 2013 to June 2018 was performed. Analysed cases were 249 clients living in Victoria, Australia with alcohol (n = 191), methamphetamine (n = 40) or cannabis (n = 18) as their primary drug of concern. A within-subjects design was used to examine pre- and post-intervention substance use problem severity and psychological distress.

RESULTS

For alcohol cases, there was a statistically significant decrease in alcohol problem severity [AUDIT, mean difference = -12.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) -14.0, -11.5]. Statistically significant reductions in drug problem severity (DUDIT) were observed for methamphetamine (mean difference = -17.3, 95% CI -20.9, -13.7) and cannabis (mean difference = -15.9, 95% CI -22.3, -9.6) cases. All groups showed reductions in problem severity for other substances used (P < 0.05) and psychological distress (P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest Ready2Change benefits clients with alcohol, methamphetamine and cannabis use problems, with the potential to improve treatment access for health inequity groups including those living in remote areas. These findings warrant further investigation into the effectiveness of this program.

Impact of Continuing Care on Recovery From Substance Use Disorder

Continuing care is widely believed to be an important component of effective treatment for substance use disorder, particularly for those individuals with greater problem severity. The purpose of this review was to examine the research literature on continuing care for alcohol and drug use disorders, including studies that addressed efficacy, moderators, mechanisms of action, and economic impact. This narrative review first considered findings from prior reviews (published through 2014), followed by a more detailed examination of studies published more recently. The review found that research has generally supported the efficacy of continuing care for both adolescents and adults, but the picture is complex. Reviews find relatively small effects when results from individual studies are combined. However, continuing care of longer duration that includes more active efforts to keep patients engaged may produce more consistently positive results. Moreover, patients at higher risk for relapse may benefit to a greater degree from continuing care. Several newer approaches for the provision of continuing care show promise. These include incentives for abstinence and automated mobile health interventions to augment more conventional counselor-delivered interventions. Primary care can be used to provide medications for opioid and alcohol use disorders over extended periods, although more research is needed to determine the optimal mix of behavioral treatments and other psychosocial services in this setting. Regardless of the intervention selected for use, the status of most patients will change and evolve over time, and interventions need to include provisions to assess patients on a regular basis and to change or adapt treatment when warranted.

Sex and Gender Effects in Recovery From Alcohol Use Disorder

The current article provides a brief summary of biopsychosocial gender differences in alcohol use disorder (AUD), then reviews existing literature on gender differences in treatment access, retention, outcomes, and longer-term recovery. Among psychotherapies for AUD, there is support for the efficacy of providing female-specific treatment, and for female-only treatment settings but only when female-specific treatment is included. However, despite mandates from the National Institutes of Health to do so, there is little work thus far that directly compares genders on outcomes of specific psychotherapies or pharmacotherapies for AUD. Although existing research has mixed findings on sex and gender differences in overall outcomes, there are more consistent findings suggesting different mechanisms of behavior change among men and women in AUD treatment and long-term recovery. Thus, more work is needed that attends to gender and sex differences, including planning studies that are structured to examine not only gender-differentiated outcomes in treatment response, but equally important, differences in treatment access and attendance as well as differences in mechanisms of change in drinking behavior.

Rural Clients' Continuity Into Follow-Up Substance Use Disorder Treatment: Impacts of Travel Time, Incentives, and Alerts

PURPOSE

Treatment after discharge from detoxification or residential treatment is associated with improved outcomes. We examined the influence of travel time on continuity into follow-up treatment and whether financial incentives and weekly alerts have a modifying effect.

METHODS

For a research intervention during October 2013 to December 2015, detoxification and residential substance use disorder treatment programs in Washington State were randomized into 4 groups: potential financial incentives for meeting performance goals, weekly alerts to providers, both interventions, and control. Travel time was used as both a main effect and interacted with other variables to explore its modifying impact on continuity of care in conjunction with incentives or alerts. Continuity was defined as follow-up care occurring within 14 days of discharge from detoxification or residential treatment programs. Travel time was estimated as driving time from clients' home ZIP Code to treatment agency ZIP Code.

FINDINGS

Travel times to the original treatment agency were in some cases significant with longer travel times predicting lower likelihood of continuity. For detoxification clients, those with longer travel times (over 91 minutes from their residence) are more likely to have timely continuity. Conversely, residential clients with travel times of more than 1 hour are less likely to have timely continuity. Interventions such as alerts or incentives for performance had some mitigating effects on these results. Travel times to the closest agency for potential further treatment were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Among rural clients discharged from detoxification and residential treatment, travel time can be an important factor in predicting timely continuity.

Randomized controlled trial of telephone monitoring with psychiatry inpatients with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders

Background Psychiatry inpatients frequently have co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders, which are related to poor post-discharge outcomes. Telephone monitoring is effective in specialty substance use disorder treatment settings in increasing continuing care and 12-step program utilization and improving substance use outcomes. This study examined the effectiveness of telephone monitoring among psychiatry inpatients with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders. Methods This randomized controlled trial (n = 406) compared usual care to usual care plus telephone monitoring (one in-person session during the inpatient stay, followed by weekly telephone contact for three months post-discharge). Follow-ups were conducted at end-of-intervention (three months post-baseline) and nine and 15 months post-baseline (73% followed). Primary outcomes were number of days out of the past 30 of drinking alcohol, using drugs, and experiencing psychological problems. Secondary outcomes were outpatient substance use treatment, and 12-step group, utilization. Results Longitudinal modeling found that patients in both conditions improved over time on each primary outcome. Improvement was comparable between conditions on alcohol and drug use and psychological problems. Receipt of outpatient treatment decreased over the follow-up period and was not related to condition. Likelihood of attending 12-step group meetings did not change over follow-ups, and was not related to condition. Conclusions Improvement over time was evident regardless of condition assignment. Patients maintained attendance at 12-step groups from pre- to post-discharge. Short-term telephone monitoring in addition to usual care for patients with co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders may not be sufficiently intensive to achieve additional improvements on outcomes.

Effects of automated smartphone mobile recovery support and telephone continuing care in the treatment of alcohol use disorder: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

New smartphone communication technology provides a novel way to provide personalized continuing care support following alcohol treatment. One such system is the Addiction version of the Comprehensive Health Enhancement Support System (A-CHESS), which provides a range of automated functions that support patients. A-CHESS improved drinking outcomes over standard continuing care when provided to patients leaving inpatient treatment. Effective continuing care can also be delivered via telephone calls with a counselor. Telephone Monitoring and Counseling (TMC) has demonstrated efficacy in two randomized trials with alcohol-dependent patients. A-CHESS and TMC have complementary strengths. A-CHESS provides automated 24/7 recovery support services and frequent assessment of symptoms and status, but does not involve regular contact with a counselor. TMC provides regular and sustained contact with the same counselor, but no ongoing support between calls. The future of continuing care for alcohol use disorders is likely to involve automated mobile technology and counselor contact, but little is known about how best to integrate these services.

Methods/Design

To address this question, the study will feature a 2 × 2 design (A-CHESS for 12 months [yes/no] × TMC for 12 months [yes/no]), in which 280 alcohol-dependent patients in intensive outpatient programs (IOPs) will be randomized to one of the four conditions and followed for 18 months. We will determine whether adding TMC to A-CHESS produces fewer heavy drinking days than TMC or A-CHESS alone and test for TMC and A-CHESS main effects. We will determine the costs of each of the four conditions and the incremental cost-effectiveness of the three active conditions. Analyses will also examine secondary outcomes, including a biological measure of alcohol use, and hypothesized moderation and mediation effects.

Discussion

The results of the study will yield important information on improving patient alcohol use outcomes by integrating mobile automated recovery support and counselor contact.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02681406. Registered on 2 September 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2466-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse

BACKGROUND

Psychostimulant misuse is a continuously growing medical and social burden. There is no evidence proving the efficacy of pharmacotherapy. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help patients in reducing or ceasing drug consumption.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register (via CRSLive); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science and PsycINFO, from inception to November 2015. We also searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (apps.who.int/trialsearch/).All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU) or a different intervention in adults with psychostimulant misuse or dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 trials (6923 participants).The psychosocial interventions considered in the studies were: cognitive behavioural therapy (19 studies), contingency management (25 studies), motivational interviewing (5 studies), interpersonal therapy (3 studies), psychodynamic therapy (1 study), 12-step facilitation (4 studies).We judged most of the studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias; blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so all the studies were at high risk of performance bias with regard to subjective outcomes; the majority of studies did not specify whether the outcome assessors were blind. We did not consider it likely that the objective outcomes were influenced by lack of blinding.The comparisons made were: any psychosocial intervention versus no intervention (32 studies), any psychosocial intervention versus TAU (6 studies), and one psychosocial intervention versus an alternative psychosocial intervention (13 studies). Five of included studies did not provide any useful data for inclusion in statistical synthesis.We found that, when compared to no intervention, any psychosocial treatment: reduced the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR): 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to -0.91, 24 studies, 3393 participants, moderate quality evidence); increased continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 2.14, 95% CI 1.27 to -3.59, 8 studies, 1241 participants, low quality evidence); did not significantly increase continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR: 2.12, 95% CI 0.77 to -5.86, 4 studies, 324 participants, low quality evidence); significantly increased the longest period of abstinence: (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.63, 10 studies, 1354 participants, high quality evidence). However, it should be noted that the in the vast majority of the studies in this comparison the specific psychosocial treatment assessed in the experimental arm was given in add on to treatment as usual or to another specific psychosocial or pharmacological treatment which was received by both groups. So, many of the control groups in this comparison were not really untreated. Receiving some amount of treatment is not the same as not receiving any intervention, so we could argue that the overall effect of the experimental psychosocial treatment could be smaller if given in add on to TAU or to another intervention than if given to participants not receiving any intervention; this could translate to a smaller magnitude of the effect of the psychosocial intervention when it is given in add on.When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment reduced dropout rate (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.89, 6 studies, 516 participants, moderate quality evidence), did not increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.72, 2 studies, 224 participants, low quality evidence), did not increase longest period of abstinence (MD -3.15 days, 95% CI -10.35 to 4.05, 1 study, 110 participants, low quality evidence). No studies in this comparison assessed the outcome of continuous abstinence at longest follow-up.There were few studies comparing two or more psychosocial interventions, with small sample sizes and considerable heterogeneity in terms of the types of interventions assessed. None reported significant results.None of the studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of any psychosocial treatment to treatment as usual (usually characterised by group counselling or case management) probably reduces the dropout rate and increases the longest period of abstinence. It may increase the number of people achieving continuous abstinence at the end of treatment, although this might not be maintained at longest follow-up. The most studied and the most promising psychosocial approach to be added to treatment as usual is probably contingency management. However, the other approaches were only analysed in a few small studies, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were not significant because of imprecision. When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment may improve adherence, but it may not improve abstinence at the end of treatment or the longest period of abstinence.The majority of the studies took place in the United States, and this could limit the generalisability of the findings, because the effects of psychosocial treatments could be strongly influenced by the social context and ethnicity. The results of our review do not answer the most relevant clinical question, demonstrating which is the most effective type of psychosocial approach.Further studies should directly compare contingency management with the other psychosocial approaches.

An Initial Evaluation of a Comprehensive Continuing Care Intervention for Clients with Substance Use Disorders: My First Year of Recovery (MyFYR)

INTRODUCTION

Physician health programs (PHPs) generate high rates of sustained abstinence in addicted physicians, through a combination of formal treatment, self-help involvement, regular monitoring via random urine toxicology tests, and powerful incentives generated by the threat of losing one's medical license. Recently, Caron Treatment Centers developed a new continuing care intervention, "My First Year of Recovery" (MyFYR), which is modeled after PHPs but provides extended recovery support to a broader segment of those with substance use disorders. This paper presents initial outcome data from MyFYR.

METHODS

MyFYR features frequent outcomes monitoring via urine toxicology tests, and also includes a web-based social platform to coordinate efforts of recovery coaches, family members, and others (e.g., employers, probation officers). Participants were the first 198 clients who enrolled in MyFYR after participating in residential treatment at Caron. Substance use outcomes were determined by a combination of urine toxicology tests, client self-report, and information from family members obtained during a 12-month period following entry into MyFYR.

RESULTS

Clients in MyFYR provided 70% of scheduled urine samples, for an average of 16.4 urine samples per client. Only 4.1% of the samples tested positive for alcohol or any drug. As determined by urine toxicology and client and family reports, 54% of the participants had some use of alcohol or drugs during the follow-up. Of these relapsed clients, 70.1% were retained or re-engaged in MyFYR, and of these, half were able to re-establish abstinence of two months duration or more, as documented by urine toxicology.

DISCUSSION

These initial results are extremely promising, as they document high rates of sustained participation in urine drug test monitoring and positive outcome in clients not under the threat of losing a professional license or incarceration.

The effectiveness of telephone counselling in the treatment of illicit drug and alcohol use concerns

INTRODUCTION

Technology-assisted substance use interventions such as 'high-tech' internet-based treatments are thought to be effective; however, the relatively 'low-tech' use of telephone counselling does not yet have an established evidence base. This paper reviews the literature including articles with information on the use of telephone counselling for the treatment of illicit drug or alcohol use.

METHODS

A systematic literature search using a set of telephone counselling and substance-related terms was conducted across four electronic databases. English studies prior to June 2014 that involved the use of telephone counselling with the treatment of illicit drug or alcohol use as a primary or secondary outcome were included. Review papers, opinion pieces, letters or editorials, case studies, published abstracts, and posters were excluded. In all, 94 publications were included in the review.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The literature was supportive of telephone counselling for the treatment of alcohol use in the short term; however, literature regarding illicit drug use was particularly scarce. The generalisability of findings was limited by evident methodological issues in the included studies.