Cash value of voucher reinforcers in pregnant drug-dependent women

OUP accepted manuscript

Introduction

Financial incentive programs promote smoking cessation. However, the incentive amount which should be provided—and how this may interact with other program characteristics—is unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of the design of incentive programs for smoking cessation on current smokers’ perceptions of programs and willingness to enroll.

Method

An online discrete choice experiment was conducted amongst adult current smokers residing in the United Kingdom (N = 430). Hypothetical incentive programs were described using five attributes (incentive amount, incentive type, frequency of sessions, reward schedules, program location). Participants responded to a series of choice sets comprised of two hypothetical programs. For each set, participants selected their preferred program. They then specified whether they would enroll in their preferred program if it were available. Analyses also considered the effect of participant income on preferences.

Results

Overall, participants preferred higher amounts over lower amounts, cash over vouchers, healthcare settings over workplaces, and consistent amounts over an escalating schedule. One session per week was the most preferred session frequency. Willingness to enroll increased quadratically with the incentive amount, although this increase slowed for higher amounts. Although middle- and high-income smokers preferred slightly higher amounts (cf. low-income participants), enrollment choices did not differ by income.

Conclusion

The characteristics of incentive programs influence smokers’ perceptions of programs and willingness to enroll. Higher amounts may encourage greater enrollment rates, but there will likely be a ceiling point beyond which increasing the incentive amount does not meaningfully increase enrollments.

Implications

There is increasing evidence incentive programs aid smoking cessation. Yet, the variety in previous program designs means how to best structure programs, including optimal incentive amount and the impact of the design on potential enrollment rates, remains unclear. This study suggests enrollments may be highest when incentive amounts are higher, rewards of a consistent amount in cash are provided, and sessions occur once per week in a healthcare setting. Although higher-income participants may desire higher incentive amounts compared to lower-income participants, this may not translate into differences in willingness to enroll.

A preliminary randomized controlled trial of contingency management for alcohol use reduction using a transdermal alcohol sensor

AIMS

We tested the efficacy of daily contingent reinforcement for reducing alcohol use compared with (yoked) non-contingent reinforcement (NR) using a transdermal alcohol sensor to detect alcohol use.

DESIGN

Pilot randomized controlled design with 1 baseline week, 3 intervention weeks and 1-month follow-up.

SETTING

New England, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Heavy drinking adults (46.7% female) not seeking treatment were randomized to (1) an escalating schedule of cash reinforcement (CR; n = 15) for days on which alcohol was neither reported nor detected or (2) yoked NR (n = 15).

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Reinforcement for CR participants started at $5 and increased $2 every subsequent day on which alcohol was not detected or reported, to a maximum of $17. Participants received no reinforcement for days on which alcohol use was detected or reported, and the reinforcer value was re-set to $5 the day after a drinking day. NR participants were yoked to the daily reinforcer value of an individual in the CR condition, in order of enrollment. Paired participants in CR and NR therefore received the same amount of money, but the amount for the NR participant was not behavior-related.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was percentage of days without sensor-detected drinking. Secondary outcomes were number of consecutive days with no detected drinking, peak transdermal alcohol concentration (TAC), self-reported drinks per week and drinking below NIH low-risk guidelines.

FINDINGS

Controlling for baseline, CR had a higher percentage of days with no drinking detected (54.3%) than NR (31.2%) during intervention weeks [P = 0.05, Cohen's d = 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.007-1.47]. The longest period of consecutive days with no drinking detected was 8.0 for CR versus 2.9 for NR (P = 0.03, d = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.08-1.61). Peak TAC during intervention showed a non-significant group difference (P = 0.20; d = 0.48; 95% CI = 0.00-1.18); a similar result was found for drinks per week (P = 0.12; d = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.00-1.30). Four times more participants in CR drank below NIH low-risk drinking guidelines during intervention than did participants in NR: 31.1 versus 7.1% (P = 0.07; d = 0.71; 95% CI = -0.04 to 1.46). At 1-month follow-up, the highest number of consecutive days without drinking (self-report) did not differ significantly between conditions (P = 0.26), but showed a medium effect size (d = 0.44; 95% CI = -0.32 to 1.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Cash incentives linked to a transdermal alcohol sensor can reduce heavy alcohol consumption while the incentives are in operation.

Contingency management for cocaine treatment: cash vs. vouchers

The efficacy of contingency management (CM) for treating drug abuse is well supported. The most widely used form of CM is voucher-based reinforcement therapy (VBRT), where clients receive an escalating schedule of vouchers that can be redeemed for goods and services for meeting treatment goals. Though generally rejected due to concerns about potential harms to drug using participants, research suggests that cash may be a more effective reinforcer. This three-group randomized trial compared the efficacy of cash-based reinforcement therapy (CBRT) to VBRT and a non-CM condition on cocaine abstinence and treatment attendance; and examined whether CBRT resulted in greater levels of harm than VBRT. Findings indicated that the CBRT was as effective as VBRT when compared to the non-CM condition and that it did not increase rates of drug use, cravings, or high-risk behaviors. Future research should examine potential cost savings associated with a cash-based CM approach as this could have important implications for the wider adoption of the CM model.

Monetary-based consequences for drug abstinence: methods of implementation and some considerations about the allocation of finances in substance abusers

Conceptualizing drug abuse within the framework of behavioral theories of choice highlights the relevance of environmental variables in shifting behavior away from drug-related purchases. Choosing to use drugs results in immediate and certain consequences (e.g., drug high and relief from withdrawal), whereas choosing abstinence typically results in delayed, and often uncertain, consequences (e.g., improved health, interpersonal relationships, money).

METHODS

This is a selective review of the literature on Contingency management (CM).

RESULTS

We highlight a variety of methods to deliver CM in practical, effective, and sustainable ways. We consider a number of parameters that are critical to the success of monetary-based CM, and the role of the context in influencing CM's effects. To illustrate the broad range of applications of CM, we also review different methods for arranging contingencies to promote abstinence and other relevant behavior. Finally, we discuss some considerations about how drug-dependent individuals allocate their finances in the context of CM interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Contingency management (CM) increases choice for drug abstinence via the availability of immediate, financial-based gains, contingent on objective evidence of abstinence.

Regulatory Issues Encountered when Conducting Longitudinal Substance Abuse Research

OBJECTIVE: To summarize challenges unique to obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for longitudinal substance abuse research, focusing on solutions and lessons learned. METHODS: Thirteen senior Principal Investigators with experience conducting research on substance abuse treatment and health services outcomes recalled instances from the prior 5 years when obtaining UCLA and non-UCLA IRB approval was hampered by differences in the interpretation of regulatory guidelines and how those differences were resolved. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Comprehensive yet flexible research protocols regarding (1) informed and voluntary consent, (2) participant payment, and (3) re-contact efforts are essential for securing IRB approval of longitudinal substance abuse studies. Specific examples of lessons learned are provided. CONCLUSIONS: Experiences can help researchers to provide appropriate and explicit justification for longitudinal substance abuse research protocols, thereby minimizing the burden and cost associated with meeting regulatory requirements as well as enhancing the efficiency, quantity, and quality of data collected.

Human drug addiction is more than faulty decision-making

We commend Redish et al. for the progress they have made in bringing a measure of theoretical order to the processes that underlie drug addiction. However, incorporating information about situations in which drug users do not exhibit faulty decision-making into the theory would greatly enhance its generality and practical value. This commentary draws attention to the relevant human substance abuse literature.

Higher magnitude cash payments improve research follow-up rates without increasing drug use or perceived coercion

In a prior study [Festinger, D.S., Marlowe, D.B., Croft, J.R., Dugosh, K.L., Mastro, N.K., Lee, P.A., DeMatteo, D.S., Patapis, N.S., 2005. Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation? Drug Alcohol Depend. 78 (3) 275-281] we found that neither the mode (cash vs. gift card) nor magnitude ($10, $40, or $70) of research follow-up payments increased rates of new drug use or perceptions of coercion. However, higher payments and payments in cash were associated with better follow-up attendance, reduced tracking efforts, and improved participant satisfaction with the study. The present study extended those findings to higher payment magnitudes. Participants from an urban outpatient substance abuse treatment program were randomly assigned to receive $70, $100, $130, or $160 in either cash or a gift card for completing a follow-up assessment at 6 months post-admission (n congruent with 50 per cell). Apart from the payment incentives, all participants received a standardized, minimal platform of follow-up efforts. Findings revealed that neither the magnitude nor mode of payment had a significant effect on new drug use or perceived coercion. Consistent with our previous findings, higher payments and cash payments resulted in significantly higher follow-up rates and fewer tracking calls. In addition participants receiving cash vs. gift cards were more likely to use their payments for essential, non-luxury purchases. Follow-up rates for participants receiving cash payments of $100, $130, and $160 approached or exceeded the FDA required minimum of 70% for studies to be considered in evaluations of new medications. This suggests that the use of higher magnitude payments and cash payments may be effective strategies for obtaining more representative follow-up samples without increasing new drug use or perceptions of coercion.

Contingency management in cocaine abusers: a dose-effect comparison of goods-based versus cash-based incentives

Goods-based contingency management interventions (e.g., those using vouchers or prizes as incentives) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing cocaine use, but cost has limited dissemination to community clinics. Recent research suggests that development of a cash-based contingency management approach may improve treatment outcomes while reducing operational costs of the intervention. However, the clinical safety of providing cash-based incentives to substance abusers has been a concern. The present 16-week study compared the effects of goods-based versus cash-based incentives worth $0, $25, $50, and $100 on short-term cocaine abstinence in a small sample of cocaine-dependent methadone patients (N = 12). A within-subject design was used; a 9-day washout period separated each of 8 incentive conditions. Higher magnitude ($50 and $100) cash-based incentives (checks) produced greater cocaine abstinence compared with the control ($0) condition, but a magnitude effect was not seen for goods-based incentives (vouchers). A trend was observed for greater rates of abstinence in the cash-based versus goods-based incentives at the $50 and $100 magnitudes. Receipt of $100 checks did not increase subsequent rates of cocaine use above those seen in control conditions. The efficacy and safety data provided in this and other recent studies suggest that use of cash-based incentives deserves consideration for clinical applications of contingency management, but additional confirmation in research using larger samples and more prolonged periods of incentive delivery is needed.