The efficacy of contingency management for adolescent cannabis use disorder: a controlled study

Cognitive-behavioral therapies in the management of adolescents with cannabis use disorder (CUD): A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Cannabis currently stands as the most prevalent illicit substance used by adolescents in France. Its use is associated with an elevated risk of developing psychiatric disorder, affecting neuro-cognitive development, or leading to psycho-social challenges in the long run. Cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBT) have emerged as a preferred approach for treating cannabis use disorders (CUD) in adults.

METHODS

This review is grounded in a systematic search of the PubMed scientific database for randomized controlled trials focusing on CBT treatment for adolescents (12-18 years old) with CUD.

RESULTS

Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Currently, several variants of CBT-based treatments are available for adolescents, differing in duration based on the intended objectives (ranging from 3 to 24 weeks). These CBT therapies are often complemented by motivational interviewing or family therapy. Only two studies draw comparisons between CBT and alternative therapeutic approaches.

DISCUSSION

The current scientific literature in this field is limited, and the study designs display heterogeneity. However, abbreviated treatment courses appear to have value, especially within the adolescent population. These courses offer treatment advantages and may enhance treatment adherence among these young patients, who may face challenges in maintaining consistent follow-up. Additionally, involving parents in psychotherapeutic care seems to have a positive impact.

CONCLUSION

CBT in adolescents with CUD appears to be a promising approach to assist with maintaining abstinence and managing emotions. However, given the diverse study designs found in the literature, conducting research with standardized treatments on larger patient cohorts would be valuable.

A new approach to urinalysis: effectiveness of a contingency management program among adolescent offenders in Spain

Background

When addressing antisocial behaviour among adolescents, programs based on the paradigm of positive psychology through enhancing self-efficacy have demonstrated their effectiveness in furthering the positive development of young people with a history of antisocial behaviour. Nevertheless, there has been little research into the effectiveness of these type of programs in mitigating substance abuse among juvenile offenders. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effectiveness of a contingency management program in reducing the prevalence of relapses into drug consumption among adolescents who have committed serious crimes.

Methods

The study consisted of a sample of 91 male adolescents, between 15 and 19 years, in juvenile detention, who were divided into two treatment groups. For both groups, biological testing was used to detect drug consumption upon their re-turn from leave permits from the Centre.

Results

The quasi-experimental group had significantly lower rates of relapse than the quasi-control group. Furthermore, being part of the quasi-experimental group was a significant predictor of reduced rates of relapses.

Conclusion

The results suggest that the incorporation of treatment strategies which reinforce feelings of self-efficacy and adequate orientation towards the future, as a complement to disciplinary sanctions, are effective in reducing relapses in drug use among adolescent offenders.

Contingency management is associated with positive changes in attitudes and reductions in cannabis use even after discontinuation of incentives among non-treatment seeking youth

BACKGROUND

It is important to identify interventions that reduce harm in youth not motivated to change their cannabis use. This study evaluated how short-duration contingency management (CM) impacts cannabis use attitudes and behavior after abstinence incentives are discontinued among non-treatment seeking youth.

METHODS

Participants (N=220) were randomized to 4 weeks of abstinence-based CM (CB-Abst; n=126) or monitoring (CB-Mon; n=94). Participants completed self-report and provided biochemical measures of cannabis exposure at baseline, end-of-intervention, and 4-week follow-up. Changes in self-reported cannabis use frequency (days/week; times/week) and biochemically verified creatinine-adjusted 11-nor-9-carboxy-tetrahydrocannabinol concentrations (CN-THCCOOH) were analyzed between groups from baseline to follow-up. In CB-Abst, cannabis use goals at end-of-intervention were described and changes in cannabis use at follow-up were explored by goals and cannabis use disorder (CUD) diagnosis.

RESULTS

There was a group by visit interaction on cannabis use (days: beta=0.93, p=0.005; times: beta=0.71, p<0.001; CN-THCCOOH: beta=0.26, p=0.004), with reductions at follow-up detected only in CB-Abst. Following 4 weeks of abstinence, 68.4% of CB-Abst participants wanted to reduce or abstain from cannabis use following completion of CM. Those in CB-Abst who set end-of-intervention reduction goals and were without CUD had greater decreases in cannabis use frequency at follow-up (Goals*time on days/week: beta=-2.27, p<0.001; CUD*time on times/week: beta=0.48, SE=0.24, t=2.01, p=0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support the utility of brief incentivized abstinence for generating motivation to reduce cannabis use and behavior change even after incentives end. This study supports CM as a potentially viable harm reduction strategy for those not yet ready to quit.

Potential Uses of Blockchain Technology for Outcomes Research on Opioids

The scale and severity of the opioid epidemic call for innovative, multipronged solutions. Research and development is key to accelerate the discovery and evaluation of interventions that support pain and substance use disorder management. In parallel, the use and integration of blockchain technology within research networks holds the potential to address some of the unique challenges facing opioid research. This paper discusses the applications of blockchain technology and illustrates potential ways in which it could be applied to strengthen the validity of outcomes research on the opioid epidemic. We reviewed published and gray literature to identify useful applications of blockchain, specifically those that address the challenges faced by opioid research networks and programs. We then convened a panel of experts to discuss the strengths, limitations, and feasibility of each application. Blockchain has the potential to address some of the issues surrounding health data management, including data availability, data sharing and interoperability, and privacy and security. We identified five primary applications of blockchain to opioids: clinical trials and pharmaceutical research, incentivizing data donation and behavior change, secure exchange and management of e-prescriptions, supply chain management, and secondary use of clinical data for research and public health surveillance. The published literature was limited, leading us to rely on gray literature, which was also limited in its discussion of the technical aspects of implementation. The technical expert panel provided additional context and an assessment of feasibility that was lacking in the literature. Research on opioid use and misuse is challenging because of disparate data stored across different systems, data and system interoperability issues, and legal requirements. These areas must be navigated to make data accessible, timely, and useful to researchers. Blockchain technologies have the potential to act as a facilitator in this process, offering a more efficient, secure, and privacy-preserving solution for data exchange. Among the 5 primary applications, we found that clinical trial research, supply chain management, and secondary use of data had the most examples in practice and the potential effectiveness of blockchain. More discussions and studies should focus on addressing technical questions concerning scalability and tackling practical concerns such as cost, standards, and governance around the implementation of blockchain in health care. Policy concerns related to balancing the need for data accessibility that also protects patient privacy and autonomy in revoking consent should also be examined.

Changes in delay discounting, substance use, and weight status across adolescence

OBJECTIVE

Higher rates of delay discounting have been consistently linked to maladaptive health behaviors, including substance use and overeating, among adults. Despite adolescence representing a critical period for the escalation of these risky health behaviors, little is known about the developmental course of delay discounting or how this construct relates to important health outcomes in youth. The current study examined change in delay discounting over time using a latent growth curve approach and the relation between growth in this construct and changes in substance use and body-mass index over a 6-year period.

METHOD

Participants included 247 adolescents (44% female) with a mean age of 13 at the initial assessment.

RESULTS

Findings suggest that, on average, rates of delay discounting are stable across adolescence; however, there are significant individual differences around this trajectory. Moreover, youth who demonstrate significant increases in delay discounting over time are also more likely to experience more rapid escalations of both substance use and Body Mass Index across adolescence.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that delay discounting is an important trans-disease process among adolescents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Contingency Management: Using Incentives to Improve Outcomes for Adolescent Substance Use Disorders

Multiple interventions for treating adolescents with substance use disorders have demonstrated efficacy, but most teens do not show an enduring positive response to these treatments. Contingency management (CM)-based strategies provide a promising alternative, and clinical research focused on the development and testing of innovative CM models continues to grow. This article provides information on the principles that underlie CM interventions, key metrics that define their development and implementation, a brief review of studies that have tested these approaches, and some clinical CM tools. As with other interventions to help youth with substance use problems, there is much to learn about CM approaches.

End User-Informed Mobile Health Intervention Development for Adolescent Cannabis Use Disorder: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

The rates of cannabis use continue to increase among adolescents and the current interventions have modest effects and high rates of relapse following treatment. There is increasing evidence for the efficacy of mobile technology-based interventions for adults with substance use disorders, but there is limited study of this technology in adolescents who use cannabis.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of our study was to elucidate elements of an app-based adjunctive intervention for cannabis cessation that resonate with adolescents who use cannabis.

METHODS

Adolescents, aged between 14 and 17 years, who used cannabis were recruited from San Diego County high schools. Semistructured focus groups (6 total; N=37) were conducted to examine the ways in which participants used smartphones, including the use of any health behavior change apps, as well as to elicit opinions about elements that would promote engagement with an app-based intervention for adolescent cannabis cessation. An iterative coding structure was used with first cycle structural coding, followed by pattern coding.

RESULTS

Themes that emerged from the analysis included (1) youth valued rewards to incentivize the progressive reduction of cannabis use, which included both nontangible rewards that mimic those obtained on social media platforms and prosocial activity-related rewards, (2) having the ability to self-monitor progression, (3) peer social support, (4) privacy and confidentiality discrete logo and name and usernames within the app, and (5) individualizing frequency and content of notifications and reminders.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrating content, language, interfaces, delivery systems, and rewards with which adolescents who use cannabis are familiar, engage with on a day-to-day basis, and identify as relevant, may increase treatment engagement and retention for adolescents in substance use treatment. We may increase treatment effectiveness by adapting and individualizing current evidence-based interventions, so that they target the needs of adolescents and are more easily incorporated into their everyday routines.

The dissemination and implementation of contingency management for substance use disorders: A systematic review

Contingency management is one of the most effective behavioral interventions for substance use. However, the implementation of contingency management has not been as widespread as might be expected given its efficacy. This review summarizes literature that examines the dissemination and implementation of contingency management for substance use in community (e.g., specialized substance use treatment) and clinical (e.g., primary care) settings. A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Databases including Google Scholar, World of Knowledge, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched. Search results yielded 100 articles and after the screening of titles and abstracts 44 were identified. Full-text articles were examined for eligibility and yielded 24 articles that were included in this review. Of the 24 articles included in the review, the majority (n = 11) focused on implementing contingency management in methadone clinics and opioid treatment programs. Training methods, implementation strategies, fidelity assessments, and attitudes toward the implementation of contingency management are discussed in greater detail. These findings highlight the importance of organizational input and ongoing supervision and consultation, and the need for additional research that is guided by theoretical frameworks and use rigorous study designs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Working memory training and high magnitude incentives for youth cannabis use: A SMART pilot trial

The purpose of this sequential multiple-assignment randomization treatment pilot study was to examine if (a) adding working memory training to contingency management (CM) for youth with cannabis use disorder (CUD) and (b) switching nonresponding youth to higher magnitude CM incentives boosts outcomes. In Phase 1, youth with CUD (n = 59, M age = 16, male = 71%) attending an intensive outpatient program were randomly assigned to 14 weeks of CM only or CM plus working memory training (WMT). In Week 4, a Phase 2 treatment was assigned. Those with negative urine drug tests (responders) continued in their Phase 1 treatment. Those who were drug positive (nonresponders) were randomly assigned to remain in their Phase 1 treatment or to higher magnitude CM. Zero-inflated negative binomial models comparing those assigned to CM versus CM + WMT indicated no differences in the likelihood of having ≥ 1 week of continuous abstinence or longer abstinence duration. Those assigned to WMT showed greater but nonsignificant improvements in working memory (n = 35; β = .69, p = .06). Working memory improvements were associated with achieving any abstinence (odds ratio = 3.50, 95% CI [1.01, 12.10], p = .05). Phase 2 randomization to higher magnitude CM did not boost outcomes. Overall results suggest that WMT appears promising, but the sample size was small, attrition was high, and replication is important. Alternative strategies should continue to be explored to improve outcomes for adolescent substance use disorders, such as different approaches for nonresponders, tailoring to other baseline or response characteristics, or more robust first-line interventions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Systematic review of outcome domains and measures used in psychosocial and pharmacological treatment trials for cannabis use disorder

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is prevalent and demand for treatment is increasing, yet few individuals engage in formal treatment and the efficacy of established interventions for CUD is modest. Existing clinical trials evaluating psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for CUD have incorporated a wide variety of measures for assessing cannabis use outcomes, including abstinence, self-reported frequency and quantity used, withdrawal, use/dependence severity, and other psychosocial outcomes. The heterogeneity of measures and outcomes has limited quantitative analyses of the comparative effectiveness of existing interventions. The purpose of this systematic review is to: 1) identify and characterize approaches for measuring cannabis use in existing CUD intervention trials, including abstinence, frequency and quantity of use, and 2) summarize measures used to assess treatment efficacy in other outcome domains (e.g., cannabis use severity, psychosocial functioning, cannabis withdrawal), and provide a platform for future research to evaluate which outcome measures are most likely to reflect treatment efficacy and clinically significant improvement in other outcome domains.

Recovery schools for improving behavioral and academic outcomes among students in recovery from substance use disorders: a systematic review

This Campbell systematic review examines the effects of recovery schools on student behavioral and academic outcomes, compared to the effects of non-recovery schools. The review summarizes evidence from one quasi-experimental study (with a total of 194 participants) that had potential serious risk of bias due to confounding. Sizable portions of youth are in recovery from substance use disorders, and many youth will return to use after receiving substance use treatment. Youth spend most of their waking hours at school, and thus schools are important social environments for youth in recovery from substance use disorders. Recovery schools have been identified as educational programs that may help support youth in recovery from substance use disorders. This review focused on two types of recovery schools: RHSs, which are schools that award secondary school diplomas and offer a range of therapeutic services in addition to standard educational curricula; and CRCs, which offer therapeutic and sober support services on college campuses. This review looked at whether recovery schools (RHSs or CRCs) affect academic success and substance use outcomes among students, compared to similar students who are not enrolled in recovery schools.

Plain language summary

There is insufficient evidence to know whether recovery high schools and collegiate recovery communities are effective: Evidence that recovery high schools (RHSs) may improve academic and substance use outcomes is based on the findings from a single study with a serious risk of bias.The review in brief: Very limited evidence addresses the effectiveness of recovery high schools (RHSs). There is no rigorous evidence on the effectiveness of collegiate recovery communities (CRCs).It is unclear whether CRCs are effective in promoting academic success and reducing substance use among college students.What is the aim of this review?: This Campbell systematic review examines the effects of recovery schools on student behavioral and academic outcomes, compared to the effects of non-recovery schools. The review summarizes evidence from one quasi-experimental study (with a total of 194 participants) that had potential serious risk of bias due to confounding.What are the main findings of this review?: Sizable portions of youth are in recovery from substance use disorders, and many youth will return to use after receiving substance use treatment. Youth spend most of their waking hours at school, and thus schools are important social environments for youth in recovery from substance use disorders. Recovery schools have been identified as educational programs that may help support youth in recovery from substance use disorders.This review focused on two types of recovery schools: RHSs, which are schools that award secondary school diplomas and offer a range of therapeutic services in addition to standard educational curricula; and CRCs, which offer therapeutic and sober support services on college campuses.This review looked at whether recovery schools (RHSs or CRCs) affect academic success and substance use outcomes among students, compared to similar students who are not enrolled in recovery schools.What studies are included?: The included study of recovery high schools used a controlled quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design and reported on the following outcomes: grade point average, truancy, school absenteeism, alcohol use, marijuana use, other drug use, and abstinence from alcohol/drugs. The included study focused on a sample of U.S. high school students. There were no eligible studies of CRCs.What do the findings of this review mean?: Findings from this review indicate insufficient evidence on the effects of recovery schools on student well-being. Although there is some indication RHSs may improve academic and substance use outcomes, this is based on the findings from a single study. There is no available evidence on the effects of CRCs.No strong conclusions can be drawn at this time, given the lack of available evidence on RHSs and CRCs, and the serious risk of bias in the one RHS study included in the review. The evidence from this review suggests there is a clear need for additional rigorous evaluations of recovery school effects prior to widespread implementation.How up-to-date is this review?: The review authors searched for studies until September 2018. This Campbell systematic review was published in 2018.

Executive Summary/Abstract

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders (SUDs) among youth are a major public health problem. In the United States, for example, the incidence of SUDs increases steadily after age 12 and peaks among youth ages 18-23 (White, Evans, Ali, Achara-Abrahams, & King, 2009). Although not every youth who experiments with alcohol or illicit drugs is diagnosed with an SUD, approximately 7-9% of 12-24 year olds in the United States were admitted for public SUD treatment in 2013 (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], 2016). Recovery from an SUD involves reduction or complete abstinence of use, defined broadly as "voluntarily sustained control over substance use, which maximises health and wellbeing and participation in the rights, roles and responsibilities of society" (UK Drug Policy Commission, 2008). However, SUDs are often experienced as chronic conditions; among youth who successfully complete substance use treatment, approximately 45-70% return to substance use within months of treatment discharge (Anderson, Ramo, Schulte, Cummins, & Brown, 2007; Brown, D'Amico, McCarthy, & Tapert, 2001; Ramo, Prince, Roesch, & Brown, 2012; White et al., 2004). Thus, multiple treatment episodes and ongoing recovery supports after treatment are often necessary to assist with the recovery process (Brown et al., 2001; Ramo et al., 2012; White et al., 2004).Success and engagement at school and in postsecondary education are critical to healthy youth development. For youth in recovery from SUDs, school attendance, engagement, and achievement build human capital by motivating personal growth, creating new opportunities and social networks, and increasing life satisfaction and meaning (Keane, 2011; Terrion, 2012; 2014). Upon discharge from formal substance use treatment settings, schools become one of the most important social environments in the lives of youth with SUDs. Healthy school peer environments can enable youth to replace substance use behaviors and norms with healthy activities and prosocial, sober peers. Conversely, many school environments may be risky for youth in recovery from SUDs due to perceived substance use among peers, availability of drugs or alcohol, and substance-approving norms on campus (Centers for Disease Control [CDC], 2011; Spear & Skala, 1995; Wambeam, Canen, Linkenbach, & Otto, 2014).Given the many social and environmental challenges faced by youth in recovery from substance use, recovery-specific institutional supports are increasingly being linked to educational settings. The two primary types of education-based continuing care supports for youth in recovery, defined under the umbrella term of "recovery schools" for this review, are recovery high schools (RHSs) and collegiate recovery communities (CRCs). RHSs are secondary schools that provide standard high school education and award secondary school diplomas, but also include therapeutic programming aimed at promoting recovery (e.g., group check-ins, community service, counseling sessions). CRCs also provide recovery oriented support services (e.g., self-help groups, counseling sessions, sober dorms) for students, but are embedded within larger college or university settings. The primary aims of RHSs and CRCs are to promote abstinence and prevent relapse among students, and thus ultimately improve students' academic success.OBJECTIVES: This review summarized and synthesized the available research evidence on the effects of recovery schools for improving academic success and behavioural outcomes among high school and college students who are in recovery from substance use. The specific research questions that guided the review are as follows: 1. What effect does recovery school attendance (versus attending a non-recovery or traditional school setting) have on academic outcomes for students in recovery from substance use? Specifically (by program type): a. For recovery high schools: what are the effects on measures of academic achievement, high school completion, and college enrolment?b. For collegiate recovery communities: what are the effects on measures of academic achievement and college completion?2. What effect does recovery school attendance have on substance use outcomes for students in recovery from substance use? Specifically, what are the effects on alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, or other substance use?3. Do the effects of recovery schools on students' outcomes vary according to the race/ethnicity, gender, or socioeconomic status of the students?4. Do the effects of recovery schools on students' outcomes vary according to existing mental health comorbidity status or juvenile justice involvement of the students? SEARCH METHODS: We aimed to identify all published and unpublished literature on recovery schools by using a comprehensive and systematic literature search. We searched multiple electronic databases, research registers, grey literature sources, and reference lists from prior reviews; and contacted experts in the field.SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included in the review if they met the following criteria:Types of studies: Randomized controlled trial (RCT), quasi-randomized controlled trial (QRCT), or controlled quasi-experimental design (QED).Types of participants: Students in recovery from substance use who were enrolled part-time or full-time in secondary (high school) or postsecondary (college or university) educational institutions.Types of interventions: Recovery schools broadly defined as educational institutions, or programs at educational institutions, developed specifically for students in recovery and that address recovery needs in addition to academic development.Types of comparisons: Traditional educational programs or services that did not explicitly have a substance use recovery focus.Types of outcome measures: The review focused on primary outcomes in the following two domains: academic performance (e.g., achievement test scores, grade-point average, high school completion, school attendance, college enrolment, college completion) and substance use (alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, heroin, stimulant, mixed drug use, or other illicit drug use). Studies that met all other eligibility criteria were considered eligible for the narrative review portion of this review even if they did not report outcomes in one of the primary outcome domains.Other criteria: Studies must have been reported between 1978 and 2016. The search was not restricted by geography, language, publication status, or any other study characteristic.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts of records identified in the systematic search. Records that were clearly ineligible or irrelevant were excluded at the title/abstract phase; all other records were retrieved in full-text and screened for eligibility by two independent reviewers. Any discrepancies in eligibility assessments were discussed and resolved via consensus. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were coded by two independent reviewers using a structured data extraction form; any disagreements in coding were resolved via discussion and consensus. If members of the review team had conducted any of the primary studies eligible for the review, external and independent data collectors extracted data from those studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized study designs (Sterne, Higgins, & Reeves, 2016).Inverse variance weighted random effects meta-analyses were planned to synthesize effect sizes across studies, as well as heterogeneity analysis, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias analysis. However, these synthesis methods were not used given that only one study met the inclusion criteria for the review. Instead, effect sizes (and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals) were reported for all eligible outcomes reported in the study.RESULTS: Only one study met criteria for inclusion in the review. This study used a QED to examine the effects of RHSs on high school students' academic and substance use outcomes. No eligible studies examining CRCs were identified in the search.The results from the one eligible RHS study indicated that after adjusting for pretest values, students in the RHS condition reported levels of grade point averages (= 0.26, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.56]), truancy (= 0.01, 95% CI [-0.29, 0.31]), and alcohol use (= 0.23, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.53]) similar to participants in the comparison condition. However, students in the RHS condition reported improvements in absenteeism (= 0.56, 95% CI [0.25, 0.87]), abstinence from alcohol/drugs (OR = 4.36, 95% CI [1.19, 15.98]), marijuana use (= 0.51, 95% CI [0.20, 0.82]), and other drug use (= 0.45, 95% CI [0.14, 0.76]).Overall, there was a serious risk of bias in the one included study. The study had a serious risk of bias due to confounding, low risk of bias due to selection of participants into the study, moderate risk of bias due to classification of interventions, inconclusive risk of bias due to deviations from intended interventions, inconclusive risk of bias due to missing data, moderate risk of bias in measurement of outcomes, and low risk of bias in selection of reported results.AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence regarding the effectiveness of RHSs and CRCs for improving academic and substance use outcomes among students in recovery from SUDs. Only one identified study examined the effectiveness of RHSs. Although the study reported some beneficial effects, the results must be interpreted with caution given the study's potential risk of bias due to confounding and limited external validity. No identified studies examined the effectiveness of CRCs across the outcomes of interest in this review, so it is unclear what effects these programs may have on students' academic and behavioral outcomes.The paucity of evidence on the effectiveness of recovery schools, as documented in this review, thus suggest the need for caution in the widespread adoption of recovery schools for students in recovery from SUDs. Given the lack of empirical support for these recovery schools, additional rigorous evaluation studies are needed to replicate the findings from the one study included in the review. Furthermore, additional research examining the costs of recovery schools may be needed, to help school administrators determine the potential cost-benefits associated with recovery schools.

Changes in marijuana use symptoms and emotional functioning over 28-days of monitored abstinence in adolescent marijuana users

RATIONALE

Advancing marijuana prevention and intervention efforts are important given the decreasing perception of harm among adolescents and increasing marijuana legalization.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluates how a monitored abstinence protocol may contribute to emotional functioning and changes in marijuana problems that can enhance successful outcomes for non-treatment-seeking adolescent marijuana users.

METHODS

Adolescent marijuana users (n = 26) and demographically matched controls (n = 30) completed 28 days of monitored abstinence confirmed by biweekly urine toxicology. Participants were given measures of emotional functioning, marijuana use symptoms, and reward sensitivity during monitored abstinence.

RESULTS

All participants (n = 56) completed the protocol, and 69% of marijuana users (n = 18 of 26) were confirmed abstinent for 28 days, with all users showing decreasing marijuana use. Reductions in subsyndromal depression, positive marijuana use expectancies, and poor sleep quality were observed by the end of the monitored abstinence period (n = 26, p values < .05). Marijuana users also reported more attentional impulsivity and less responsiveness to reward stimuli during the second week of abstinence compared to controls. Later age of onset of regular marijuana use and more cumulative lifetime use were associated with a greater degree of emotional change and increased recognition of the negative effects of marijuana use.

CONCLUSIONS

Monitored abstinence programs may be beneficial in reducing marijuana use, subsyndromal emotional distress symptoms, and changing beliefs about marijuana use. Future prevention and intervention efforts may consider targeting reward sensitivity and impulsivity, in addition to marijuana use, expectancies, and emotional functioning.

Abstinence based incentives plus parent training for adolescent alcohol and other substance misuse

The purpose of this study was to conduct a randomized test of clinic- and home-based incentives plus parent training for adolescent problem alcohol use. Adolescents (N = 75) with alcohol misuse, with or without other substance misuse, were enrolled. All youth received individual Motivational Enhancement Therapy/Cognitive Behavior Therapy and weekly urine drug testing. The experimental condition (EXP) included Abstinence Incentives (clinic-based incentives for abstinence from all substances) plus weekly behavioral parent training that included a parent-delivered, abstinence-based, substance monitoring contract. The comparison condition (CONTROL) included Attendance Incentives (ATTI). All adolescents met DSM-IV criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence or reported recent binge drinking, and 77% (N = 58) met criteria for a cannabis use disorder or had recent cannabis use at baseline. Alcohol and cannabis use outcomes were compared across treatment conditions. A similar percentage of youth maintained complete alcohol abstinence across the 36-week follow-up in both conditions. However, among youth not entirely abstinent from alcohol, EXP resulted in a lower percentage of days using alcohol during the 36 weeks after the end of treatment than CONTROL. Among youth who also used cannabis at baseline, results showed similar benefits of EXP on cannabis use days. Combined individual and family based treatment, plus abstinence based incentives can reduce substance use days during and after treatment over and above individual evidence-based psychosocial treatment plus attendance incentives. Future research should focus on identifying cost-effective components and incentive levels and delivery via technology to facilitate dissemination. (PsycINFO Database Record

A review of the literature on contingency management in the treatment of substance use disorders, 2009-2014

This report describes a systematic literature review of voucher and related monetary-based contingency management (CM) interventions for substance use disorders (SUDs) over 5.2years (November 2009 through December 2014). Reports were identified using the search engine PubMed, expert consultations, and published bibliographies. For inclusion, reports had to (a) involve monetary-based CM; (b) appear in a peer-reviewed journal; (c) include an experimental comparison condition; (d) describe an original study; (e) assess efficacy using inferential statistics; (f) use a research design allowing treatment effects to be attributed to CM. Sixty-nine reports met inclusion criteria and were categorized into 7 research trends: (1) extending CM to special populations, (2) parametric studies, (3) extending CM to community clinics, (4) combining CM with pharmacotherapies, (5) incorporating technology into CM, (6) investigating longer-term outcomes, (7) using CM as a research tool. The vast majority (59/69, 86%) of studies reported significant (p<0.05) during-treatment effects. Twenty-eight (28/59, 47%) of those studies included at least one follow-up visit after CM was discontinued, with eight (8/28, 29%) reporting significant (p<0.05) effects. Average effect size (Cohen's d) during treatment was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.54, 0.70) and post-treatment it was 0.26 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.41). Overall, the literature on voucher-based CM over the past 5years documents sustained growth, high treatment efficacy, moderate to large effect sizes during treatment that weaken but remain evident following treatment termination, and breadth across a diverse set of SUDs, populations, and settings consistent with and extending results from prior reviews.

Contingency Management Approaches for Adolescent Substance Use Disorders

Multiple interventions for treating adolescents with substance use disorders have demonstrated efficacy, but a majority of teens do not show an enduring positive response to these treatments. Contingency management (CM)-based strategies provide a promising alternative, and clinical research focused on the development and testing of innovative CM models continues to grow. This article provides an updated review on the progress made in this area. It is important to continue to search for more effective models, focus on post-treatment maintenance (reduce relapse), and strive for high levels of integrity and fidelity during dissemination efforts to optimize outcomes.

Using contingency management procedures to reduce at-risk drinking in heavy drinkers

BACKGROUND

Treatments for alcohol use disorders typically have been abstinence based, but harm reduction approaches that encourage drinkers to alter their drinking behavior to reduce the probability of alcohol-related consequences, have gained in popularity. This study used a contingency management procedure to determine its effectiveness in reducing alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers.

METHODS

Eighty-two nontreatment-seeking heavy drinkers (ages 21 to 54, M = 30.20) who did not meet diagnostic criteria for alcohol dependence participated in the study. The study had 3 phases: (i) an Observation phase (4 weeks) where participants drank normally; (ii) a Contingency Management phase (12 weeks) where participants were paid $50 weekly for not exceeding low levels of alcohol consumption as measured by transdermal alcohol concentrations, <0.03 g/dl; and (iii) a Follow-up phase (12 weeks) where participants (n = 66) returned monthly for 3 months to self-report drinking after the contingencies were removed. Transdermal alcohol monitors were used to verify meeting contingency requirements; all other analyses were conducted on self-reported alcohol use.

RESULTS

On average 42.3% of participants met the contingency criteria and were paid an average of $222 during the Contingency Management phase, with an average $1,998 in total compensation throughout the study. Compared to the Observation phase, the percent of any self-reported drinking days significantly decreased from 59.9 to 40.0% in the Contingency Management and 32.0% in the Follow-up phases. The percent of self-reported heavy drinking days reported also significantly decreased from 42.4% in the Observation phase to 19.7% in the Contingency Management phase, which was accompanied by a significant increase in percent days of self-reported no (from 40.1 to 60.0%) and low-level drinking (from 9.9 to 15.4%). Self-reported reductions in drinking either persisted, or became more pronounced, during the Follow-up phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Contingency management was associated with a reduction in self-reported episodes of heavy drinking among nontreatment-seeking heavy drinkers. These effects persisted even after incentives were removed, indicating the potential utility of contingency management as a therapeutic intervention to reduce harmful patterns of drinking.

Clinic- and home-based contingency management plus parent training for adolescent cannabis use disorders

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to conduct a randomized test comparing 2 multicomponent, contingency management interventions, 1 with and 1 without a full parent training curriculum, and an individual treatment for adolescent cannabis use disorders.

METHOD

A total of 153 adolescents who met DSM-IV criteria for cannabis abuse or dependence were randomized to motivational enhancement therapy/cognitive-behavioral therapy (MET/CBT), MET/CBT+abstinence-based contingency management (CM), or MET/CBT+CM+Parent Training (PT).

RESULTS

Overall, during treatment, abstinence was greater for youth receiving clinic- and home-based CM without PT compared to those who received individual MET/CBT. There was no additional benefit of the full PT curriculum on marijuana use, youth externalizing problems, or parenting.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that clinic- plus home-based CM for cannabis use disorders can increase rates of abstinence during treatment over and above an evidence-based treatment (individual MET/CBT), but in this study the addition of a comprehensive parenting training curriculum did not further enhance efficacy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Treatment for Adolescent Marijuana Abuse; http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00580671.