Challenges and Possible Solutions for Implementing Contingency Management for Adolescent Substance Use Disorder in Community-Based Settings

JUVENILE PROBATION OFFICER PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN JUVENILE PROBATION AND WITH CONTINGENCY MANAGEMENT

Probation is a common sanction for youth substance users, and as such, juvenile probation officers (JPOs) shoulder much of the burden for treatment and rehabilitation. To improve youth outcomes and alleviate some of the burden, JPOs may seek parental involvement in the probation and substance use desistance processes. Using focus group data, we analyzed JPO perceptions of the role parents play in contingency management (CM)-an incentive system designed to produce and reward decreased substance use-and whether they perceived any value in CM. We found that most JPOs perceived parental involvement as critical to the success of both substance use treatment and CM for youth. Our findings also suggest JPOs found parental involvement in CM valuable given that CM was employed on nonstudy clients and future clients. This has implications for the practicality and sustainability of CM as a youth probation intervention.

Core Elements of CBT for Adolescent Conduct and Substance Use Problems: Comorbidity, Clinical Techniques, and Case Examples

Adolescent externalizing problems (AEPs), including serious conduct problems, delinquency, and substance misuse, are the most common adolescent behavioral issues in specialty care. High rates of comorbidity between conduct and substance use problems necessitate multidomain treatment strategies that can effectively address the AEP spectrum. One strategy to increase delivery of evidence-based interventions for multiproblem youth in usual care is to focus on core elements of empirically supported treatments that can be judiciously applied to clients presenting with diverse clinical profiles. This article describes six core practice elements of the cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) approach for AEPs: (1) Functional Analysis of Behavior Problems; (2) Prosocial Activity Sampling; (3) Cognitive Monitoring and Restructuring; (4) Emotion Regulation Training; (5) Problem-solving Training; (6) Communication Training. Integrated delivery of these core CBT elements is illustrated in two case examples, and implications for treatment planning for youth with AEPs are discussed.

Evidence Base on Outpatient Behavioral Treatments for Adolescent Substance Use, 2014-2017: Outcomes, Treatment Delivery, and Promising Horizons

This article updates the evidence base on outpatient behavioral treatments for adolescent substance use (ASU) since publication of the previous review completed for this journal by Hogue, Henderson, Ozechowski, and Robbins (2014). It first summarizes the Hogue et al. findings along with those from recent literature reviews and meta-analytic studies of ASU treatments. It then presents study design and methods criteria used to select 11 comparative studies subjected to Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology level of support evaluation. These 11 studies are detailed in terms of their sample characteristics, methodological quality, and substance use outcomes. Cumulative level of support designations are then made for each identified treatment approach. These cumulative designations are virtually identical to those of the previous review: ecological family-based treatment, individual cognitive-behavioral therapy, and group cognitive-behavioral therapy remain well-established; behavioral family-based treatment and motivational interviewing remain probably efficacious; drug counseling remains possibly efficacious; and an updated total of 5 multicomponent treatments combining more than 1 approach (3 of which include contingency management) are deemed well-established or probably efficacious. Treatment delivery issues associated with evidence-based approaches are then reviewed, focusing on client engagement, fidelity and mediator, and predictor and moderator effects. Finally, to help accelerate innovation in ASU treatment science and practice, the article outlines promising horizons in improving youth identification and access, specifying and implementing pragmatic treatment in community settings, and leveraging emerging lessons from implementation science.