Use of vouchers to reinforce abstinence and positive behaviors among clients in a drug court treatment program

A call to action: Contingency management to improve post-release treatment engagement among people with opioid use disorder who are incarcerated

People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are overrepresented in US correctional facilities and experience disproportionately high risk for illicit opioid use and overdose after release. A growing number of correctional facilities offer medication for OUD (MOUD), which is effective in reducing these risks. However, a recent evaluation found that <50% of those prescribed MOUD during incarceration continued MOUD within 30 days after release, demonstrating a need to improve post-release continuity of care. We describe available evidence on contingency management (CM), an intervention wherein patients receive incentives contingent on behavior change, to achieve this goal. A prior systematic review reported strong evidence in support of CM for increasing treatment adherence in MOUD programs, but the trials reviewed did not include incarcerated participants. Research on CM to increase treatment adherence among participants in the criminal justice system is limited with mixed findings. However, in comparison to the trials that supported CM's efficacy in the community, CM trials in the criminal justice system provided smaller rewards with greater delays in the delivery of rewards to patients, which likely contributed to null findings. Indeed, a prior meta-analysis demonstrates a dose-response relationship between the magnitude and immediacy of reward and CM effectiveness. Thus, CM involving larger and more immediately delivered rewards are likely necessary to improve MOUD adherence during the critical period following release from incarceration. Future research on the effectiveness and implementation of CM to improve MOUD retention after release from incarceration is warranted.

Effects of contingency management and use of reminders for drug use treatment on readmission and criminality among young people: A linkage study of a randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

An increasing number of adolescents and emerging adults are entering treatment for drug use disorders in high-income countries. This fact points not only to a need to evaluate treatment outcomes related to drug use reduction, but also to evaluate other indicators of treatment success. The aim of this study was to examine treatment effects on predicting readmission to drug use treatment and being convicted for a criminal offence among youth. A second aim was to examine whether a psychiatric history had an impact on these outcomes.

METHODS

Participants were 460 youth aged 15-25 who took part in the YouthDAT, a randomized pragmatic clinical trial for outpatient drug use treatment. The trial compared four treatment conditions consisting of 12 sessions of a manualized treatment based on cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational interviewing. Condition one was the standard (only the manual); condition two consisted of standard treatment and contingency management (CM) (Vouchers); condition three included standard treatment, text reminders, and low-intensity aftercare (Reminders+LIA); and condition four combined the standard treatment, CM, text reminders, and low-intensity aftercare (Combined+LIA). The study linked participants to register data on psychiatric history, drug use treatment history, and criminal convictions.

RESULTS

Treatment conditions Reminders+LIA (aB = 0.42, p = .026) and Combined+LIA (aB = 0.69, p = .000) predicted longer time to readmission compared to standard treatment. The Vouchers condition predicted a lower risk for criminal convictions (aIRR = 0.26, p = .001). Half of the participants had a psychiatric history. The treatments with additional strategies were useful in delaying readmission and reducing convictions for these youth. The results remained significant in the adjusted models accounting for relevant participant characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional treatment strategies in outpatient drug use treatment, such as CM, text reminders, and low-intensity aftercare, predicted delayed readmission to treatment and fewer legal problems. Mental health problems were common among youth. However, the treatments with additional strategies were effective with youth with a psychiatric history. Overall, while the additional strategies may be resource demanding for clinical settings, they support treatment success and may also help to decrease other public costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN27473213.

Assessing the Use and Impact of Points and Rewards across Four Federal Probation Districts: A Contingency Management Approach

Contingency management (CM) is a well-acknowledged behavioral approach for incentivizing changes in behavior and attitudes. A version of CM was piloted in four federal probation districts to determine whether systematically awarding points and rewards for key behaviors could be implemented and impact recidivism rates. A case controlled match design was conducted with a CM sample (referred to as Justice Steps (JSTEPS)) (n=128) who were individually matched to a comparison sample (n=128) on six variables related to recidivism. Analyses compared the number of technical violations and new arrests between JSTEPS participants and a historical comparison sample. Using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, results indicate JSTEPS sites using early CM rewarding strategies tend have delayed recidivism than others. A research agenda is outlined.

Using the research domain criteria (RDoC) to conceptualize impulsivity and compulsivity in relation to addiction

Nomenclature for mental disorder was updated in 2013 with the publication of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5). In DSM-5, substance use disorders are framed as more dimensional. First, the distinction between abuse and dependence is replaced by substance use. Second, the addictions section now covers both substances and behavioral addictions. This contemporary move toward dimensionality and transdiagnosis in the addictions and other disorders embrace accumulating cognitive-affective neurobiological evidence that is reflected in the United States' National Institutes of Health Research Domain Criteria (NIH RDoC). The RDoC calls for the further development of transdiagnostic approaches to psychopathy and includes five domains to improve research. Additionally, the RDoC suggests that these domains can be measured in terms of specific units of analysis. In line with these suggestions, recent publications have stimulated updated neurobiological conceptualizations of two transdiagnostic concepts, namely impulsivity and compulsivity and their interactions that are applicable to addictive disorders. However, there has not yet been a review to examine the constructs of impulsivity and compulsivity in relation to addiction in light of the research-oriented RDoC. By doing so it may become clearer as to whether impulsivity and compulsivity function antagonistically, complementarily or in some other way at the behavioral, cognitive, and neural level and how this relationship underpins addiction. Thus, here we consider research into impulsivity and compulsivity in light of the transdiagnostic RDoC to help better understand these concepts and their application to evidence-based clinical intervention for addiction.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Ethyl Glucuronide-Based Contingency Management for Outpatients With Co-Occurring Alcohol Use Disorders and Serious Mental Illness

OBJECTIVE

The authors examined whether a contingency management intervention using the ethyl glucuronide (EtG) alcohol biomarker resulted in increased alcohol abstinence in outpatients with co-occurring serious mental illnesses. Secondary objectives were to determine whether contingency management was associated with changes in heavy drinking, treatment attendance, drug use, cigarette smoking, psychiatric symptoms, and HIV-risk behavior.

METHOD

Seventy-nine (37% female, 44% nonwhite) outpatients with serious mental illness and alcohol dependence receiving treatment as usual completed a 4-week observation period and were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of contingency management for EtG-negative urine samples and addiction treatment attendance, or reinforcement only for study participation. Contingency management included the variable magnitude of reinforcement "prize draw" procedure contingent on EtG-negative samples (<150 ng/mL) three times a week and weekly gift cards for outpatient treatment attendance. Urine EtG, drug test, and self-report outcomes were assessed during the 12-week intervention and 3-month follow-up periods.

RESULTS

Contingency management participants were 3.1 times (95% CI=2.2-4.5) more likely to submit an EtG-negative urine test during the 12-week intervention period, attaining nearly 1.5 weeks of additional alcohol abstinence compared with controls. Contingency management participants had significantly lower mean EtG levels, reported less drinking and fewer heavy drinking episodes, and were more likely to submit stimulant-negative urine and smoking-negative breath samples, compared with controls. Differences in self-reported alcohol use were maintained at the 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first randomized trial utilizing an accurate and validated biomarker (EtG) to demonstrate the efficacy of contingency management for alcohol dependence in outpatients with serious mental illness.

A Randomized Trial of the Effectiveness of Using Incentives to Reinforce Parolee Attendance in Community Addiction Treatment

This study was a randomized effectiveness trial of the use of incentives to improve treatment retention and post-treatment outcomes among parolees in community treatment. Parolees entering community treatment were randomized to incentives ( N = 104) or brief education ( N = 98). It was hypothesized that the use of incentives to increase treatment retention would result in improved post-treatment outcomes (i.e., arrest, employment, and drug use), but at 18 months post-intake, there were no group differences for any outcome. In secondary analyses, rearrest by 18 months post-intake was predicted by substance use, greater number or severity of psychological symptoms, treatment non-completion, unemployment, and younger age. Contrary to expectations, results indicated that participants who received incentives for attendance had arrest, employment, and drug use outcomes similar to those who received a brief education session. Our findings, in concert with those of several other researchers, suggest that there may be certain populations or settings where incentives may not be effective.

Are Non-Pharmacological Interventions Effective in Reducing Drug Use and Criminality? A Systematic and Meta-Analytical Review with an Economic Appraisal of These Interventions

Background: The numbers of incarcerated people suffering from drug dependence has steadily risen since the 1980s and only a small proportion of these receive appropriate treatment. A systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and economic evidence of non-pharmacological interventions for drug using offenders was conducted. Methods: Cochrane Collaboration criteria were used to identify trials across 14 databases between 2004 and 2014. A series of meta-analyses and an economic appraisal were conducted. Results: 43 trials were identified showing to have limited effect in reducing re-arrests RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.89-1.07) and drug use RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.80-1.00) but were found to significantly reduce re-incarceration RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.85). Therapeutic community programs were found to significantly reduce the number of re-arrests RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.56-0.87). 10 papers contained economic information. One paper presented a cost-benefit analysis and two reported on the cost and cost effectiveness of the intervention. Conclusions: We suggest that therapeutic community interventions have some benefit in reducing subsequent re-arrest. We recommend that economic evaluations should form part of standard trial protocols.

Measuring Drug Court Adherence to the What Works Literature: The Creation of the Evidence-Based Correctional Program Checklist-Drug Court

Quality correctional programming is important, particularly for drug courts. In this article, we chronicle the development of a tool designed to evaluate juvenile and adult drug courts, the Evidence-Based Correctional Program Checklist-Drug Court (CPC-DC). The history of the CPC-DC is traced by exploring research that indicates why program evaluation is important. This article also discusses the development of two predecessor assessment tools designed to measure how closely correctional programs adhere to evidence-based practice, the Correctional Program Assessment Inventory (CPAI) and the Evidence-Based Correctional Program Checklist (CPC). Results are briefly presented on the outcomes of the CPC-DC assessments completed to date by the University of Cincinnati (UC). Finally, recommendations are offered for operating an evidence-based drug court.

Effectiveness of Using Incentives to Improve Parolee Admission and Attendance in Community Addiction Treatment

This study is a randomized effectiveness trial of the use of incentives to improve treatment utilization among parolees in community treatment. In prison, Admission phase parolees were randomized to Admission Incentive (N=31) or Education (N=29). Attendance phase parolees entering community treatment were randomized to Attendance Incentive (N=104) or Education (N=98). There was no main effect for incentives in either study phase. Neither admission to community treatment (Incentive 60%, Education 64%; p =.74), nor intervention completion (Incentive 22%; Education 27%; p =.46) appeared to be impacted. Time-in-treatment was predicted by age, first arrest age, and type of parole status (Cox regression p<.05), but not by treatment group. Providing incentives did not increase the likelihood that parolees enrolled in or stayed in community treatment. In light of this finding, criminal justice practitioners who are considering incentives to increase admission or retention should be aware that they may not produce the desired outcomes.

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on a range of different interventions for drug-using offenders. This specific review considers pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing drug use or criminal activity, or both, for illicit drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Fourteen electronic bibliographic databases up to May 2014 and five additional Web resources (between 2004 and November 2011). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of any pharmacological intervention a component of which is designed to reduce, eliminate or prevent relapse of drug use or criminal activity, or both, in drug-using offenders. We also report data on the cost and cost-effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials with 2647 participants met the inclusion criteria. The interventions included in this review report on agonistic pharmacological interventions (buprenorphine, methadone and naltrexone) compared to no intervention, other non-pharmacological treatments (e.g. counselling) and other pharmacological drugs. The methodological trial quality was poorly described, and most studies were rated as 'unclear' by the reviewers. The biggest threats to risk of bias were generated through blinding (performance and detection bias) and incomplete outcome data (attrition bias). Studies could not be combined all together because the comparisons were too different. Only subgroup analysis for type of pharmacological treatment were done. When compared to non-pharmacological, we found low quality evidence that agonist treatments are not effective in reducing drug use or criminal activity, objective results (biological) (two studies, 237 participants (RR 0.72 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.00); subjective (self-report), (three studies, 317 participants (RR 0.61 95% CI 0.31 to 1.18); self-report drug use (three studies, 510 participants (SMD: -0.62 (95% CI -0.85 to -0.39). We found low quality of evidence that antagonist treatment was not effective in reducing drug use (one study, 63 participants (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.70) but we found moderate quality of evidence that they significantly reduced criminal activity (two studies, 114 participants, (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.74).Findings on the effects of individual pharmacological interventions on drug use and criminal activity showed mixed results. In the comparison of methadone to buprenorphine, diamorphine and naltrexone, no significant differences were displayed for either treatment for self report dichotomous drug use (two studies, 370 participants (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.55), continuous measures of drug use (one study, 81 participants, (mean difference (MD) 0.70, 95% CI -5.33 to 6.73); or criminal activity (one study, 116 participants, (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.88) between methadone and buprenorphine. Similar results were found for comparisons with diamorphine with no significant differences between the drugs for self report dichotomous drug use for arrest (one study, 825 participants, (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.51) or naltrexone for dichotomous measures of reincarceration (one study, 44 participants, (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.26), and continuous outcome measure of crime, (MD -0.50, 95% CI -8.04 to 7.04) or self report drug use (MD 4.60, 95% CI -3.54 to 12.74).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared to non-pharmacological treatment, agonist treatments did not seem effective in reducing drug use or criminal activity. Antagonist treatments were not effective in reducing drug use but significantly reduced criminal activity. When comparing the drugs to one another we found no significant differences between the drug comparisons (methadone versus buprenorphine, diamorphine and naltrexone) on any of the outcome measures. Caution should be taken when interpreting these findings, as the conclusions are based on a small number of trials, and generalisation of these study findings should be limited mainly to male adult offenders. Additionally, many studies were rated at high risk of bias.

Interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of an original Cochrane review published in Issue 3 2006 (Perry 2006). The review represents one from a family of four reviews focusing on interventions for drug-using offenders. This specific review considers interventions aimed at reducing drug use or criminal activity, or both for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases up to May 2014 and 5 Internet resources (searched between 2004 and 11 November 2009). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials designed to reduce, eliminate, or prevent relapse of drug use and criminal activity, or both in drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness. We also reported data on the cost and cost-effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight trials with 2058 participants met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the trials was generally difficult to rate due to a lack of clear reporting. On most 'Risk of bias' items, we rated the majority of studies as unclear. Overall, we could not statistically combine the results due to the heterogenous nature of the different study interventions and comparison groups. A narrative summary of the findings identified that the interventions reported limited success with reducing self report drug use, but did have some impact on re-incarceration rates, but not re-arrest. In the single comparisons, we found moderate-quality evidence that therapeutic communities determine a reduction in re-incarceration but reported less success for outcomes of re-arrest, moderate quality of evidence and self report drug use. Three single studies evaluating case management via a mental health drug court (very low quality of evidence), motivational interviewing and cognitive skills (low and very low quality of evidence) and interpersonal psychotherapy (very low quality of evidence) did not report significant reductions in criminal activity and self report drug use respectively. Quality of evidence for these three types of interventions was low to very low. The trials reported some cost information, but it was not sufficient to be able to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Two of the five trials showed some promising results for the use of therapeutic communities and aftercare, but only in relation to reducing subsequent re-incarceration. Overall, the studies showed a high degree of variation, warranting a degree of caution in the interpretation of the magnitude of effect and direction of benefit for treatment outcomes. More evaluations are required to assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in Issue 3, 2006 (Perry 2006). The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders. This specific review considers interventions for female drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity, or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases up to May 2014 and five additional Website resources (between 2004 and November 2011). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) designed to reduce, eliminate or prevent relapse of drug use or criminal activity in female drug-using offenders. We also reported data on the cost and cost-effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials with 1792 participants met the inclusion criteria. Trial quality and risks of bias varied across each study. We rated the majority of studies as being at 'unclear' risk of bias due to a lack of descriptive information. We divided the studies into different categories for the purpose of meta-analyses: for any psychosocial treatments in comparison to treatment as usual we found low quality evidence that there were no significant differences in arrest rates, (two studies; 489 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 1.52) or drug use (one study; 77 participants; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.12), but we found moderate quality evidence that there was a significant reduction in reincarceration, (three studies; 630 participants; RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.64). Pharmacological intervention using buprenorphine in comparison to a placebo did not significantly reduce self reported drug use (one study; 36 participants; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35). No cost or cost-effectiveness evidence was reported in the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Three of the nine trials show a positive trend towards the use of any psychosocial treatment in comparison to treatment as usual showing an overall significant reduction in subsequent reincarceration, but not arrest rates or drug use. Pharmacological interventions in comparison to a placebo did not significantly reduce drug use and did not measure criminal activity. Four different treatment comparisons showed varying results and were not combined due to differences in the intervention and comparison groups. The studies overall showed a high degree of heterogeneity for types of comparisons and outcome measures assessed, which limited the possibility to pool the data. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required to identify the important elements for treatment success in drug-using female offenders. More trials are required to increase the precision of confidence with which we can draw conclusions about the effectiveness of treatments for female drug-using offenders.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in Issue 3, 2006 (Perry 2006). The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders. This specific review considers interventions for female drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases (between 2004 and 21st March 2013) and five additional web resources (between 2004 and November 2011). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We include randomised controlled trials designed to reduce, eliminate or prevent relapse in female drug-using offenders. We also report data on the cost and cost effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 76 trials across the four reviews. Following a process of prescreening, we judged that 11 trials met the inclusion criteria of the specified review; four of the 11 trials are awaiting classification in the review. The remaining seven trials cover 1236 participants. The interventions included in this review report on therapeutic communities (TCs), gender-responsive treatment (GRT), use of case management and cognitive skills, and a pharmacological intervention using buprenorphine. Trial quality and risks of bias varied across each study. The majority of studies were rated as being at 'unclear' risk of bias due to a lack of descriptive information. Overall the interventions showed statistically significant reductions in self-reported drug use, (four studies, 734 participants, risk ratio (RR) 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.80) and re-incarceration, (four studies, 745 participants, RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.72). We found a statistically non-significant result for re-arrest (three studies, 803 participants, RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.19). Individual treatment results found that TCs and a GRT programme showed a statistically significant reduction in re-incarceration (one study, 509 participants, RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.60) but not for re-arrest, (one study, 314 participants, RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03) and self-reported drug use (two studies, 825 participants, RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.14 to 1.53). Case management and cognitive skills programmes did not significantly reduce re-arrests, (one study, 183 participants RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.41) or self-reported drug use, (one study, 77 participants, RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.20 to 2.12), but did show a statistically significant reduction in re-incarceration, (three studies, 236 participants, RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.81). Buprenorphine did not significantly reduce self-reported drug use (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35), but this result came from a single study with only 36 participants. Due to the small number of studies we were unable to analyse the impact of treatment setting on outcome. No cost and cost effectiveness evidence was reported in the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The seven trials show some positive results for the use of treatments to reduce self-reported drug use and subsequent re-incarceration. However, the studies overall showed a high degree of statistical variation, requiring a degree of caution in the interpretation of the magnitude of effect and direction of benefit for treatment outcomes. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required to identify the important elements for treatment success in drug-using female offenders. More trials are required to increase the confidence with which we can draw conclusions about the effectiveness of treatments for female drug-using offenders.

Interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of an original Cochrane review published in Issue 3 2006 (Perry 2006). The review represents one from a family of four reviews focusing on interventions for drug-using offenders. This specific review considers interventions aimed at reducing drug use or criminal activity, or both for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases (searched between 2004 and 21 March 2013) and five internet resources (searched between 2004 and 11 November 2009). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials designed to reduce, eliminate or prevent relapse in drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental illness. We also reported data on the cost and cost effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 76 trials across the four reviews. Following a process of pre-screening, we judged eight trials to meet the inclusion criteria for this specific review (three of the five trials are awaiting classification). The five included 1502 participants. The interventions reported on case management via a mental health drugs court, a therapeutic community, and an evaluation of a motivational interviewing technique and cognitive skills in comparison to relaxation training. The methodological quality of the trials was generally difficult to rate due to a lack of clear reporting. On most risk of bias items, we rated the majority of studies as unclear. Overall, the combined interventions did not show a statistically significant reduction in self reported drug use (2 studies, 715 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 1.55). A statistically significantly reduction was shown for re-incarceration (4 studies, 627 participants; RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.67 and mean difference (MD) 28.72, 95% CI 5.89 to 51.54) but not re-arrest (2 studies, 518 participants; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12). A specific subgroup analysis combining studies using therapeutic community interventions showed a statistically significant reduction in re-incarceration (2 studies, 266 participants; RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.54) but not re-arrest (1 study, 428 participants; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.33). Case management via a mental health court and motivational interviewing with cognitive skills did not show a statistically significant reduction in criminal activity (1 study, 235 participants; RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.22) or self reported drug misuse (1 study, 162 participants; MD -7.42, 95% CI -20.12 to 5.28). Due to the small number of studies, we were unable to analyse the impact of setting on outcome. Some cost information was provided in the trials but not sufficient to be able to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the paucity of evidence for drug misusing offenders with co-occurring mental health problems. Two of the five trials showed some promising results for the use of therapeutic communities and aftercare, but only in relation to reducing subsequent re-incarceration. The studies overall, showed a high degree of statistical variation demonstrating a degree of caution in the interpretation of the magnitude of effect and direction of benefit for treatment outcomes. More evaluations are required to assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on a range of different interventions for drug-using offenders. This specific review considers pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing drug use and/or criminal activity for illicit drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity and/or drug use.

SEARCH METHODS

Fourteen electronic bibliographic databases (searched between 2004 and 21 March 2013) and five additional Web resources (searched between 2004 and 11 November 2011) were searched. Experts in the field were contacted for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of any pharmacological interventions for reducing, eliminating or preventing relapse in drug-using offenders were included. Data on the cost and cost-effectiveness of interventions were reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 76 trials across the four reviews were identified. After a process of prescreening had been completed, 17 trials were judged to meet the inclusion criteria for this specific review (six of the 17 trials are awaiting classification for the review). The remaining 11 trials contained a total of 2,678 participants. Nine of the eleven studies used samples with a majority of men. The interventions (buprenorphine, methadone and naltrexone) were compared to non pharmacological treatments (e.g., counselling) and other pharmacological drugs. The methodological trial quality was poorly described, and most studies were rated as 'unclear' by the reviewers. The biggest threats to risk of bias were generated through blinding (performance and detection bias) and incomplete outcome data (attrition bias). When combined, the results suggest that pharmacological interventions do significantly reduce subsequent drug use using biological measures, (three studies, 300 participants, RR 0.71 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.97)), self report dichotomous data (three studies, 317 participants, RR 0.42, (95% CI 0.22 to 0.81)) and continuous measures (one study, MD -59.66 (95% CI -120.60 to 1.28)) . In the subgroups analysis for community setting, (two studies, 99 participants: RR 0.62 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.09)) and for secure establishment setting, (one study, 201 participants: RR 0.76 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.10)), the results are no longer statistically significant. Criminal activity was significantly reduced favouring the dichotomous measures of re arrest, (one study, 62 participants, RR 0.60 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.14)), re-incarceration, (three studies, 142 participants, RR 0.33 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.56)) and continuous measures (one study, 51 participants, MD -74.21 (95% CI -133.53 to -14.89)). Findings on the effects of individual pharmacological interventions on drug use and criminal activity show mixed results. Buprenorphine in comparison to a non pharmacological treatment seemed to favour buprenorphine but not significantly with self report drug use, (one study, 36 participants, RR 0.58 (95% CI 0.25 to 1.35)). Methadone and cognitive behavioural skills in comparison to standard psychiatric services, did show a significant reduction for self report dichotomous drug use (one study, 253 participants, RR 0.43 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.56)) but not for self report continuous data (one study 51 participants) MD -0.52 (95% CI -1.09 to 0.05)), or re incarceration RR 1.23 (95% CI 0.53 to 2.87)). Naltrexone was favoured significantly over routine parole and probation for re incarceration (two studies 114 participants, RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.69)) but no data was available on drug use. Finally, we compared each pharmacological treatment to another. In each case we compared methadone to: buprenorphine, diamorphine and naltrexone. No significant differences were displayed for either treatment for self report dichotomous drug use (one study, 193 participants RR 1.23 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.76)), continuous measures of drug use MD 0.70 (95% CI -5.33 to 6.73) or criminal activity RR 1.25 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.88)) between methadone and buprenorphine. Similiar results were found for comparisons with Diamorphine with no significant differences between the drugs for self report dichotomous drug use for arrest (one study, 825 participants RR 1.25 (95% CI 1.03-1.51)) or Naltrexone for dichotomous measures of re incarceration (one study, 44 participants, RR 1.10 (95% CI 0.37 to 3.26)), and continuous outcome measure of crime MD -0.50 (95% CI -8.04 to 7.04)) or self report drug use MD 4.60 (95% CI -3.54 to 12.74)).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders do appear to reduce overall subsequent drug use and criminal activity (but to a lesser extent). No statistically significant differences were displayed by treatment setting. Individual differences are displayed between the three pharmacological interventions (buprenorphine, methadone and naltrexone) when compared to a non pharmacological intervention, but not when compared to each other. Caution should be taken when interpreting these findings, as the conclusions are based on a small number of trials, and generalisation of these study findings should be limited mainly to male adult offenders. Additionally, many studies were rated at high risk of bias because trial information was inadequately described.

An analysis of relapse prevention factors and their ability to predict sustained abstinence following treatment completion

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the role of 14 specific relapse-prevention activities and their underlying factors in maintaining abstinence among subjects (N = 302) completing outpatient treatment for stimulant dependence.

METHODS

We examined what broader dimensions might subsume the 14 items constituting the Drug Avoidance Activities checklist (Farabee et al. J Subst Abuse Treat 2002;23:343-350), and how well these derived factors predicted concurrent drug use at baseline and again 3 and 12 months later.

RESULTS

Although four factors were identified consistently for the three time points, only avoidance strategies had sufficient internal consistency to be retained for further analysis. Controlling for age, gender, and ethnicity, the avoidance subscale was a significant predictor of UA results at all time periods: a one-point increase in the avoidance strategies scale was associated with an 86% increase in odds of a negative UA at baseline (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.37-2.53, p < .001), a 77% increase at 3-month follow-up (OR = 1.77, CI = 1.37-2.29, p < .001), and a 37% increase at 12-month follow-up (OR = 1.37, CI = 1.04-1.81, p = .026).

CONCLUSIONS

Although correlations of individual items with UA results showed statistically significant (p < .05) results for 8 of 14 items at one or more observation points, avoidance-related behaviors showed the strongest associations with sustained abstinence.

Psychosocial Functioning Among Inmates in Prison-Based Drug Treatment: Results from Project BRITE

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of a positive behavioral reinforcement intervention on psychosocial functioning of inmates over the course of treatment and on post-treatment self-reported measures of treatment participation, progress, and satisfaction.

METHOD

Male (n = 187) and female (n = 143) inmates participating in 12-week prison-based Intensive Outpatient (IOP) drug treatment were randomly assigned to receive standard treatment (ST) or standard treatment plus positive behavioral reinforcement (BR) for engaging in targeted activities and behaviors. Participants were assessed for psychosocial functioning at baseline and at the conclusion of treatment (post-treatment). Self-reported measures of treatment participation, treatment progress, and treatment satisfaction were also captured at post-treatment.

RESULTS

The intervention affected female and male subjects differently and not always in a way that favored BR subjects, as compared to the ST subjects, most notably on measures of depression and criminal thinking.

CONCLUSIONS

Possible explanations for the results include differences in the male and female custody environments combined with the procedures that study participants had to follow to earn and/or receive positive reinforcement at the two study sites, as well as baseline differences between the genders and a possible floor effect among females on measures of criminality. Limitations of the study included the inability to make study participants blind to the study conditions and the possible over-branding of the study, which may have influenced the results.

Criminal justice referral and incentives in outpatient substance abuse treatment

A substantial number of substance abusers entering outpatient psychosocial counseling treatment are referred from the criminal justice (CJ) system. This secondary analysis of previously published findings from a large (N=415) multi-site trial of a prize-based abstinence incentive intervention (Petry et al., 2005) examined the influence of CJ referral on usual care outcomes and response to the incentive procedure. CJ referrals (n=138) were more likely than those not CJ referred (n=277) to provide stimulant negative urine samples whether missing samples were counted as positive (50 versus 41%, p=.016) or as missing (96 versus 91%, p<.001). A significant interaction term was found only for percentage of treatment completers (p=.027). However, on that retention variable, and three additional drug use measures, significant incentive effects were confined to participants who entered treatment without referral from the criminal justice system. The study suggests that abstinence incentives should be offered as a first priority to stimulant users entering treatment without criminal justice referral. However, incentives can be considered for use with CJ-referred stimulant users based on the observation that best outcomes were obtained in CJ referrals who also received the abstinence incentive program.

Contingency management in community programs treating adolescent substance abuse: a feasibility study

PROBLEM

Adolescent substance abuse remains a public health problem, and more effective treatment approaches are needed.

PURPOSE

The study aims to determine the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of implementing a cost-effective contingency management (CM) intervention in community substance abuse treatment for adolescents with marijuana use disorders.

METHODS

Thirty-one adolescents with primary marijuana use disorder enrolled in a community treatment were randomized into either a prize-based CM intervention contingent when submitting negative urine drug screens (UDS) or a noncontingent control group.

FINDINGS

There were no significant group differences in percent negative UDS, sustained negative UDS, or retention in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

CM was difficult to integrate into community treatment programs and did not seem to be an effective adjunct to standard community substance abuse treatment for adolescents with marijuana use disorders. Modifying the CM procedure for adolescents, changing staff attitudes toward CM, and/or combining CM with other evidence-based psychosocial treatment may improve outcomes.

Contingency management in substance abuse treatment: a structured review of the evidence for its transportability

AIMS

Extant literature on contingency management (CM) transportability, or its transition from academia to community practice, is reviewed. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR; Damschroder et al., 2009) guides the examination of this material.

METHODS

PsychInfo and Medline database searches identified 27 publications, with reviewed reference lists garnering 22 others. These 49 sources were examined according to CFIR domains of the intervention, outer setting, inner setting, clinicians, and implementation processes.

RESULTS

Intervention characteristics were focal in 59% of the identified literature, with less frequent focus on clinicians (34%), inner setting (32%), implementation processes (18%), and outer setting (8%). As intervention characteristics, adaptability and trialability most facilitate transportability whereas non-clinical origin, perceived inefficacy or disadvantages, and costs are impediments. Clinicians with a managerial focus and greater clinic tenure and CM experience are candidates to curry organizational readiness for implementation, and combat staff disinterest or philosophical objection. A clinic's technology comfort, staff continuity, and leadership advocacy are inner setting characteristics that prompt effective implementation. Implementation processes in successful demonstration projects include careful fiscal/logistical planning, role-specific staff engagement, practical adaptation in execution, and evaluation via fidelity-monitoring and cost-effectiveness analyses. Outer setting characteristics-like economic policies and inter-agency networking or competition-are salient, often unrecognized influences.

CONCLUSIONS

As most implementation constructs are still moving targets, CM transportability is in its infancy and warrants further scientific attention. More effective dissemination may necessitate that future research weight emphasis on external validity, and utilize models of implementation science.

Developing and implementing a positive behavioral reinforcement intervention in prison-based drug treatment: Project BRITE

Within prison settings, the reliance on punishment for controlling inappropriate or noncompliant behavior is self-evident. What is not so evident is the similarity between this reliance on punishment and the use of positive reinforcements to increase desired behaviors. However, seldom do inmates receive positive reinforcement for engaging in prosocial behaviors or, for inmates receiving drug treatment, behaviors that are consistent with or support their recovery. This study provides an overview of the development and implementation of a positive behavioral reinforcement intervention in male and female prison-based drug treatment programs. The active involvement of institutional staff, treatment staff, and inmates enrolled in the treatment programs in the development of the intervention along with the successful branding of the intervention were effective at promoting support and participation. However, these factors may also have ultimately impacted the ability of the randomized design to reliably demonstrate the effectiveness of the intervention.

Design considerations for a study to evaluate the impact of smoking cessation treatment on stimulant use outcomes in stimulant-dependent individuals

Cigarette smoking is prevalent in cocaine/methamphetamine-dependent patients and associated with significant morbidity and mortality, yet, the provision of smoking cessation treatment in conjunction with substance use disorder (SUD) treatment is not standard practice. This is due, in part, to clinician concern that combining smoking cessation treatment with SUD treatment could lead to poorer SUD outcomes. The NIDA Clinical Trials Network is conducting a 10-week, two-group, randomized trial to evaluate the impact of providing smoking cessation treatment (SCT) with SUD treatment as usual (TAU), compared to TAU alone, in smokers who are in outpatient treatment for cocaine or methamphetamine dependence. Approximately 528 participants, recruited from 12 community treatment programs, will be randomized into the trial. The present paper describes key design decisions made during protocol development. The trial is designed to evaluate the relationship between cigarette smoking and stimulant use, which prior research suggests is linked, and should contribute to our understanding of how best to address the co-occurring problems of nicotine dependence and cocaine/methamphetamine-dependence. Unique aspects of the trial include the primary question of interest, which concerns the impact of providing SCT on SUD outcomes rather than on smoking outcomes, and the intensity of the SCT chosen, which includes bupropion, nicotine replacement, and two psychosocial interventions.

Implementation of a Contingency Management-Based Intervention in a Community Supervision Setting: Clinical Issues and Recommendations

A cognitive-behaviorally based substance abuse treatment program was implemented within a Community Supervision setting. This program included a goals group that included a contingency management component and included the probation agent as a part of treatment. This paper describes the contingency management component of the treatment and discusses, in detail, issues that arose throughout the course of the study. Possible causes and solutions to the issues are discussed from a contingency management perspective that can result in improved reinforcements to achieve better probationer outcomes.

Reinforcing Abstinence and Treatment Participation among Offenders in a Drug Diversion Program: Are Vouchers Effective?

This study assessed a 26-week voucher-based intervention to reinforce abstinence and participation in treatment-related activities among substance-abusing offenders court referred to outpatient treatment under drug diversion legislation (California's Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act). Standard treatment consisted of criminal justice supervision and an evidence-based model for treating stimulant abuse. Participants were randomly assigned to four groups, standard treatment (ST) only, ST plus vouchers for testing negative, ST plus vouchers for performing treatment plan activities, and ST plus vouchers for testing negative and/or performing treatment plan activities. Results indicate that voucher-based reinforcement of negative urines and of treatment plan tasks (using a flat reinforcement schedule) showed no statistically significant effects on measures of retention or drug use relative to the standard treatment protocol. It is likely that criminal justice contingencies had a stronger impact on participants' treatment retention and drug use than the relatively low-value vouchers awarded as part of the treatment protocol.