1
|
Donoghue K, Boniface S, Brobbin E, Byford S, Coleman R, Coulton S, Day E, Dhital R, Farid A, Hermann L, Jordan A, Kimergård A, Koutsou ML, Lingford-Hughes A, Marsden J, Neale J, O'Neill A, Phillips T, Shearer J, Sinclair J, Smith J, Strang J, Weinman J, Whittlesea C, Widyaratna K, Drummond C. Adjunctive Medication Management and Contingency Management to enhance adherence to acamprosate for alcohol dependence: the ADAM trial RCT. Health Technol Assess 2023; 27:1-88. [PMID: 37924307 PMCID: PMC10641712 DOI: 10.3310/dqkl6124] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Acamprosate is an effective and cost-effective medication for alcohol relapse prevention but poor adherence can limit its full benefit. Effective interventions to support adherence to acamprosate are therefore needed. Objectives To determine the effectiveness of Medication Management, with and without Contingency Management, compared to Standard Support alone in enhancing adherence to acamprosate and the impact of adherence to acamprosate on abstinence and reduced alcohol consumption. Design Multicentre, three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled clinical trial. Setting Specialist alcohol treatment services in five regions of England (South East London, Central and North West London, Wessex, Yorkshire and Humber and West Midlands). Participants Adults (aged 18 years or more), an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, diagnosis of alcohol dependence, abstinent from alcohol at baseline assessment, in receipt of a prescription for acamprosate. Interventions (1) Standard Support, (2) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management provided by pharmacists via a clinical contact centre (12 sessions over 6 months), (3) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management plus Contingency Management that consisted of vouchers (up to £120) to reinforce participation in Medication Management. Consenting participants were randomised in a 2 : 1 : 1 ratio to one of the three groups using a stratified random permuted block method using a remote system. Participants and researchers were not blind to treatment allocation. Main outcome measures Primary outcome: self-reported percentage of medication taken in the previous 28 days at 6 months post randomisation. Economic outcome: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, a five-level version, used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years, with costs estimated using the Adult Service Use Schedule. Results Of the 1459 potential participants approached, 1019 (70%) were assessed and 739 (73 consented to participate in the study, 372 (50%) were allocated to Standard Support, 182 (25%) to Standard Support with Medication Management and 185 (25%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. Data were available for 518 (70%) of participants at 6-month follow-up, 255 (68.5%) allocated to Standard Support, 122 (67.0%) to Standard Support and Medication Management and 141 (76.2%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. The mean difference of per cent adherence to acamprosate was higher for those who received Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management (10.6%, 95% confidence interval 19.6% to 1.6%) compared to Standard Support alone, at the primary end point (6-month follow-up). There was no significant difference in per cent days adherent when comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support alone 3.1% (95% confidence interval 12.8% to -6.5%) or comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management 7.9% (95% confidence interval 18.7% to -2.8%). The primary economic analysis at 6 months found that Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management was cost-effective compared to Standard Support alone, achieving small gains in quality-adjusted life-years at a lower cost per participant. Cost-effectiveness was not observed for adjunctive Medication Management compared to Standard Support alone. There were no serious adverse events related to the trial interventions reported. Limitations The trial's primary outcome measure changed substantially due to data collection difficulties and therefore relied on a measure of self-reported adherence. A lower than anticipated follow-up rate at 12 months may have lowered the statistical power to detect differences in the secondary analyses, although the primary analysis was not impacted. Conclusions Medication Management enhanced with Contingency Management is beneficial to patients for supporting them to take acamprosate. Future work Given our findings in relation to Contingency Management enhancing Medication Management adherence, future trials should be developed to explore its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness with other alcohol interventions where there is evidence of poor adherence. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN17083622 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17083622. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim Donoghue
- Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
| | - Sadie Boniface
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- Institute of Alcohol Studies, London, UK
| | - Eileen Brobbin
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
| | - Sarah Byford
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's Health Economics, King's College London, London UK
| | - Rachel Coleman
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute for Clinical and Applied Health Research (ICAHR), University of Hull, Hull, UK
| | - Simon Coulton
- Centre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK
| | - Edward Day
- Institute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Ranjita Dhital
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- Arts and Sciences Department, University College London, London, UK
| | - Anum Farid
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- What Works for Children's Social Care, London, UK
| | - Laura Hermann
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute for Clinical and Applied Health Research (ICAHR), University of Hull, Hull, UK
| | - Amy Jordan
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, West Bromwich, UK
| | - Andreas Kimergård
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
| | | | - Anne Lingford-Hughes
- Division of Psychiatry, Department of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - John Marsden
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Joanne Neale
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
| | - Aimee O'Neill
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Thomas Phillips
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute for Clinical and Applied Health Research (ICAHR), University of Hull, Hull, UK
| | - James Shearer
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's Health Economics, King's College London, London UK
| | - Julia Sinclair
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Joanna Smith
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - John Strang
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - John Weinman
- School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Cate Whittlesea
- Research Department of Practice and Policy, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
| | - Kideshini Widyaratna
- Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Colin Drummond
- National Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London, London, UK
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Karsberg SH, del Palacio-Gonzalez A, Pedersen MM, Frederiksen KS, Pedersen MU. Do adverse experiences predict unemployment and need of psychiatric help after treatment for drug use disorders? NORDIC STUDIES ON ALCOHOL AND DRUGS 2023; 40:520-535. [PMID: 37969902 PMCID: PMC10634390 DOI: 10.1177/14550725231170950] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2022] [Accepted: 04/05/2023] [Indexed: 11/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: This study prospectively examined the association between adverse experiences (physical abuse, sexual abuse and parental substance use problems [SUPs]), not being employed, in education or training (NEET) and being in need of acute psychiatric help among patients receiving treatment for substance use disorders. Methods: A total of 580 adolescents and early adults aged 15-25 years enrolled in treatment for drug use disorders were included in the analyses. Treatment data were linked to participants' register data on employment, education and acute contact to psychiatric services for the following two years. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine associations between the three adverse experiences, NEET and need of acute psychiatric help, adjusting for confounders such as age, gender, ethnicity, treatment response and treatment condition. Results: More than half of the participants were NEET two years after treatment enrolment. After controlling for demographics and treatment conditions, NEET was predicted by parental substance use problems (odds ratio [OR] = 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31- 2.70), exposure to physical abuse (OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.03-2.13) and non-abstinence (abstinence was negatively associated with NEET, OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.37-0.76). Being exposed to two (OR = 3.17, 95% CI 1.93-5.21) and three types of adverse experiences (OR = 3.14, 95% CI = 1.47-6.70) predicted NEET more strongly than exposure to one type. One out of 10 participants sought acute care from psychiatric services at least once within two years after treatment. Only sex and ethnic minority status were associated with contacting psychiatric services acutely. Conclusion: The present study suggests that adverse experiences, such as being exposed to parental problematic substance use and physical abuse, may be important predictors for NEET after treatment for SUDs.
Collapse
|
3
|
Rømer Thomsen K, Thylstrup B, Kenyon EA, Lees R, Baandrup L, Feldstein Ewing SW, Freeman TP. Cannabinoids for the treatment of cannabis use disorder: New avenues for reaching and helping youth? Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2021; 132:169-180. [PMID: 34822876 DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.11.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2021] [Revised: 11/17/2021] [Accepted: 11/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Cannabis use peaks during adolescence and emerging adulthood, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) is associated with a wide range of adverse outcomes. This is particularly pertinent in youth, because the developing brain may be more vulnerable to adverse effects of frequent cannabis use. Combining evidence-based psychosocial interventions with safe and effective pharmacotherapy is a potential avenue to improve youth outcomes, but we lack approved CUD pharmacotherapies. Here, we review new potential avenues for helping youth with CUD, with a particular focus on cannabinoid-based treatments. Evidence from placebo-controlled RCTs suggests synthetic delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) decreases withdrawal symptoms, but not cannabis use, in adults with daily cannabis use/CUD, while findings regarding formulations containing THC combined with cannabidiol (CBD) are mixed. Preliminary evidence from two placebo-controlled RCTs in adults with CUD suggests that both Fatty Acid Amide Hydrolase inhibitors and CBD can reduce cannabis use. However, larger trials are needed to strengthen the evidence. Findings from adults point to cannabinoid-based treatments as a potential strategy that should be examined in youth with CUD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristine Rømer Thomsen
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Aarhus University, Denmark.
| | - Birgitte Thylstrup
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Aarhus University, Denmark
| | - Emily A Kenyon
- Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, USA
| | - Rachel Lees
- Addiction and Mental Health Group (AIM), Department of Psychology, University of Bath, UK
| | - Lone Baandrup
- Mental Health Centre Copenhagen and Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Sarah W Feldstein Ewing
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Aarhus University, Denmark; Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, USA
| | - Tom P Freeman
- Addiction and Mental Health Group (AIM), Department of Psychology, University of Bath, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hesse M, Thylstrup B, Karsberg S, Mulbjerg Pedersen M, Pedersen MU. Voucher Reinforcement Decreases Psychiatric Symptoms in Young People in Treatment for Drug Use Disorders - A Post Hoc Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Dual Diagn 2021; 17:257-266. [PMID: 34289330 DOI: 10.1080/15504263.2021.1942379] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This multicenter, parallel randomized, open study examined the effect of using vouchers and session reminders as an added element to outpatient treatment for drug use disorders in youth. It was hypothesized that being randomly assigned to a contingency management condition would lead to a reduction of psychiatric symptoms, and that this reduction would be mediated through abstinence and treatment completion. METHODS A total of 460 participants aged 15 to 25 years from nine outpatient sites were randomized to one of four treatment conditions (standard treatment alone [STD], i.e., 12 sessions using motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioral therapy, STD plus vouchers for attendance [VOU], STD plus text reminders [REM], or STD plus vouchers and text reminders [REM + VOU]). Participants' symptoms of psychological distress were assessed using the YouthMap 12 instrument at intake, and at 3, 6, and 9 months post-treatment initiation. Interviewers were blinded to interventions. RESULTS 114 participants were randomized to STD, 112 to REM, 113 to VOU, and 121 to VOU + REM. 69 clients were never interviewed for follow-up, leaving 391 for analysis (n = 90, n = 94, n = 99, n = 108). The mean age was 20.5 years (SD = 2.6), 23% were female, and 34% reported having a psychiatric diagnosis. Random effects regression showed that participants randomized to one of the two voucher-based conditions experienced significantly steeper declines in symptoms compared with STD (p < .01). Structural equation modeling results indicated that the effects of contingency management on symptoms were mediated through abstinence, but not sessions attended. CONCLUSIONS Adding contingency management to interventions for drug use disorders can reduce symptoms of psychological and emotional distress among populations of treatment-seeking youth, in part due to indirect effects through abstinence at follow-up. The data is collected from a clinical trial registered as ISRCTN27473213, at https://www.isrctn.com/.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morten Hesse
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Aarhus University, Denmark
| | | | - Sidsel Karsberg
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Aarhus University, Denmark
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Karsberg S, Hesse M, Pedersen MM, Charak R, Pedersen MU. The impact of poly-traumatization on treatment outcomes in young people with substance use disorders. BMC Psychiatry 2021; 21:140. [PMID: 33685430 PMCID: PMC7941934 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-021-03129-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2020] [Accepted: 02/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is believed that clients with psychological trauma experiences have a poor prognosis with regard to treatment participation and outcomes for substance use disorders. However, knowledge on the effect of the number of trauma experiences is scarce. METHODS Using data from drug use disorder (DUD) treatment in Denmark, we assessed the impact of having experienced multiple potentially traumatic experiences on DUD treatment efficacy. Baseline and follow-up data from 775 young participants (mean age = 20.2 years, standard deviation = 2.6) recruited at nine treatment centers were included in analyses. RESULTS Analyses showed that participants who were exposed multiple trauma experiences also reported a significantly higher intake of cannabis at treatment entry, and a lower well-being score than participants who reported less types or no types of victimization experiences. During treatment, patients with multiple types of trauma experiences showed a slower rate of reduction of cannabis than patients with few or no trauma experiences. The number of trauma types was not associated with number of sessions attended or the development of well-being in treatment. CONCLUSION Overall, the results show that although traumatized youth in DUD treatment show up for treatment, helping them to reduce substance use during treatment is uniquely challenging. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN88025085 , date of registration: 29.08.2016, retrospectively registered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sidsel Karsberg
- grid.7048.b0000 0001 1956 2722Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Morten Hesse
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark.
| | - Michael Mulbjerg Pedersen
- grid.7048.b0000 0001 1956 2722Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Ruby Charak
- grid.449717.80000 0004 5374 269XDepartment of Psychological Science, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, 1201 W. University Dr, Edinburg, TX USA
| | - Mads Uffe Pedersen
- grid.7048.b0000 0001 1956 2722Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Karsberg SH, Pedersen MU, Hesse M, Thylstrup B, Pedersen MM. Group versus individual treatment for substance use disorders: a study protocol for the COMDAT trial. BMC Public Health 2021; 21:413. [PMID: 33637061 PMCID: PMC7913269 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-10271-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2021] [Accepted: 01/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Alcohol and other drug use disorders contribute substantially to the global burden of illness. The majority of people with substance use disorders do not receive any treatment for their problems, and developing treatments that are attractive and effective to patients should be a priority. However, whether treatment is best delivered in a group format or an individual format has only been studied to a very limited degree. The COMDAT (Combined Drug and Alcohol Treatment) trial evaluates the feasibility, acceptability, and cost effectiveness of MOVE group (MOVE-G) treatment versus MOVE individual (MOVE-I) treatment in four community-based outpatient treatment centres in Denmark. METHODS A two-arm non-inferiority trial comparing MOVE-I (Pedersen et al., Drug Alcohol Depend 218:108363, 2020) with MOVE-G a combined group treatment for both alcohol use disorder and drug use disorder. The primary objective is to examine whether MOVE-G is non-inferior to MOVE-I in relation to abstinence from drug and/or alcohol, number of sessions received, and completion of treatment as planned. All participants will receive treatment based on cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational interviewing, vouchers for attendance and text reminders, as well as medication as needed (MOVE). Participants (n = 300) will be recruited over a one-year period at four public treatment centers in four Danish municipalities. A short screening will determine eligibility and randomization status. Hereafter, participants will be randomized to the two treatment arms. A thorough baseline assessment will be conducted approximately 1 week after randomization. Follow-up assessments will be conducted at 9 months post-randomization. In addition, patients' use of drugs and alcohol, and patients' wellbeing will be measured in all sessions. The main outcome measures are drug and alcohol intake at 9 months follow-up, number of sessions attended, and dropout from treatment. DISCUSSION The present study will examine the potential and efficacy of combined groups (patients with alcohol and drug disorders in the same group) versus individually based treatment both based on the treatment method MOVE (Pedersen et al., Drug Alcohol Depend 218:108363, 2020). TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN88025085 , registration date 30/06/2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mads Uffe Pedersen
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
| | - Morten Hesse
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
| | - Birgitte Thylstrup
- Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Bartholins Allé 10, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
| | | |
Collapse
|