Neurobehavioral treatment for cocaine-using methadone patients: a preliminary report

Psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder

BACKGROUND

Stimulant use disorder is a continuously growing medical and social burden without approved medications available for its treatment. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help people reduce or cease stimulant consumption. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in September 2023. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched the references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU), or a different intervention in adults with stimulant use disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 64 RCTs (8241 participants). Seventy-three percent of studies included participants with cocaine or crack cocaine use disorder; 3.1% included participants with amphetamine use disorder; 10.9% included participants with methamphetamine use disorder; and 12.5% included participants with any stimulant use disorder. In 18 studies, all participants were in methadone maintenance treatment. In our primary comparison of any psychosocial treatment to no intervention, we included studies which compared a psychosocial intervention plus TAU to TAU alone. In this comparison, 12 studies evaluated cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), 27 contingency management, three motivational interviewing, one study looked at psychodynamic therapy, and one study evaluated CBT plus contingency management. We also compared any psychosocial intervention to TAU. In this comparison, seven studies evaluated CBT, two contingency management, two motivational interviewing, and one evaluated a combination of CBT plus motivational interviewing. Seven studies compared contingency management reinforcement related to abstinence versus contingency management not related to abstinence. Finally, seven studies compared two different psychosocial approaches. We judged 65.6% of the studies to be at low risk of bias for random sequence generation and 19% at low risk for allocation concealment. Blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so we judged all the studies to be at high risk of performance bias for subjective outcomes but at low risk for objective outcomes. We judged 22% of the studies to be at low risk of detection bias for subjective outcomes. We judged most of the studies (69%) to be at low risk of attrition bias. When compared to no intervention, we found that psychosocial treatments: reduce the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.91; 30 studies, 4078 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.41; 12 studies, 1293 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.62; 9 studies, 1187 participants; high-certainty evidence); probably increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.97; 12 studies, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.46; 4 studies, 295 participants; low-certainty evidence); reduce the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.19; 10 studies, 1215 participants; high-certainty evidence); and increase the longest period of abstinence (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; 17 studies, 2118 participants; high-certainty evidence). When compared to TAU, we found that psychosocial treatments reduce the dropout rate (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; 9 studies, 735 participants; high-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.64 to 4.31; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether they make any difference in point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.99; 2 studies, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to TAU, psychosocial treatments may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.53; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence); probably make little to no difference in the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (SMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.81 to 0.47, 4 studies, 479 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); and may make little to no difference in the longest period of abstinence (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.21; 1 study, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies for this comparison assessed continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up. Only five studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions; four of them stated that no adverse events occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review's findings indicate that psychosocial treatments can help people with stimulant use disorder by reducing dropout rates. This conclusion is based on high-certainty evidence from comparisons of psychosocial interventions with both no treatment and TAU. This is an important finding because many people with stimulant use disorders leave treatment prematurely. Stimulant use disorders are chronic, lifelong, relapsing mental disorders, which require substantial therapeutic efforts to achieve abstinence. For those who are not yet able to achieve complete abstinence, retention in treatment may help to reduce the risks associated with stimulant use. In addition, psychosocial interventions reduce stimulant use compared to no treatment, but they may make little to no difference to stimulant use when compared to TAU. The most studied and promising psychosocial approach is contingency management. Relatively few studies explored the other approaches, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were imprecise due to small sample sizes.

A review of research-supported group treatments for drug use disorders

This paper reviews methodologically rigorous studies examining group treatments for interview-diagnosed drug use disorders. A total of 50 studies reporting on the efficacy of group drug use disorder treatments for adults met inclusion criteria. Studies examining group treatment for cocaine, methamphetamine, marijuana, opioid, mixed substance, and substance use disorder with co-occurring psychiatric conditions are discussed. The current review showed that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) group therapy and contingency management (CM) groups appear to be more effective at reducing cocaine use than treatment as usual (TAU) groups. CM also appeared to be effective at reducing methamphetamine use relative to standard group treatment. Relapse prevention support groups, motivational interviewing, and social support groups were all effective at reducing marijuana use relative to a delayed treatment control. Group therapy or group CBT plus pharmacotherapy are more effective at decreasing opioid use than pharmacotherapy alone. An HIV harm reduction program has also been shown to be effective for reducing illicit opioid use. Effective treatments for mixed substance use disorder include group CBT, CM, and women's recovery group. Behavioral skills group, group behavioral therapy plus CM, Seeking Safety, Dialectical behavior therapy groups, and CM were more effective at decreasing substance use and psychiatric symptoms relative to TAU, but group psychoeducation and group CBT were not. Given how often group formats are utilized to treat drug use disorders, the present review underscores the need to understand the extent to which evidence-based group therapies for drug use disorders are applied in treatment settings.

Comparison of Treatments for Cocaine Use Disorder Among Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

In the US and the United Kingdom, cocaine use is the second leading cause of illicit drug overdose death. Psychosocial treatments for cocaine use disorder are limited, and no pharmacotherapy is approved for use in the US or Europe.

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatments for active cocaine use among adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for clinical trials published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

This meta-analysis was registered on Covidence.org (study 8731) on December 31, 2015. Clinical trials were included if they (1) had the term cocaine in the article title; (2) were published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017; (3) were written in English; (4) enrolled outpatients 18 years or older with active cocaine use at baseline; and (5) reported treatment group size, treatment duration, retention rates, and urinalysis results for the presence of cocaine metabolites. A study was excluded if (1) more than 25% of participants were not active cocaine users or more than 80% of participants had negative test results for the presence of cocaine metabolites at baseline and (2) it reported only pooled urinalysis results indicating the presence of multiple substances and did not report the specific proportion of positive test results for cocaine metabolites. Multiple reviewers reached criteria consensus. Of 831 records screened, 157 studies (18.9%) met selection criteria and were included in the analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Search results were imported from PubMed XML into Covidence.org then Microsoft Excel. Data extraction was completed in 2 iterations to ensure fidelity. Analyses included a multilevel random-effects model, a multilevel mixed-effects meta-regression model, and sensitivity analyses. Treatments were clustered into 11 categories (psychotherapy, contingency management programs, placebo, opioids, psychostimulants, anticonvulsants, dopamine agonists, antidepressants, antipsychotics, miscellaneous medications, and other therapies). Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations. The significance threshold for all analyses was P = .05. Data were analyzed using the metafor and mice packages in R software, version 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Data were analyzed from January 1, 2018, to February 28, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the intention-to-treat logarithm of the odds ratio (OR) of having a negative urinalysis result for the presence of cocaine metabolites at the end of each treatment period compared with baseline. The hypothesis, which was formulated after data collection, was that no treatment category would have a significant association with objective reductions in cocaine use.

RESULTS

A total of 157 studies comprising 402 treatment groups and 15 842 participants were included. Excluding other therapies, the largest treatment groups across all studies were psychotherapy (mean [SD] number of participants, 40.04 [36.88]) and contingency management programs (mean [SD] number of participants, 37.51 [25.51]). Only contingency management programs were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of having a negative test result for the presence of cocaine (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.62-2.80), and this association remained significant in all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis, contingency management programs were associated with reductions in cocaine use among adults. Research efforts and policies that align with this treatment modality may benefit those who actively use cocaine and attenuate societal burdens.

A meta-analysis of the effect of substance use interventions on emotion outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Emotional distress has been posited as a key underlying mechanism in the development and maintenance of substance use disorder (SUD), and patients seeking SUD treatment are often experiencing high levels of negative emotion and/or low levels of positive emotion. But the extent to which SUD interventions impact emotional outcomes among general SUD populations is yet unquantified. The current meta-analysis aims to fill this gap.

METHOD

A total of 11,754 records were screened for randomized, controlled trials examining the effect of behavioral SUD interventions on emotion outcomes. Our search yielded a total of 138 effect sizes calculated based on data from 5,146 individuals enrolled in 30 independent clinical trials. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled effect sizes, and metaregression analyses examined study-level moderators (e.g., intervention type).

RESULTS

Findings indicated a small but significant effect of SUD interventions on emotion outcomes, d = 0.157, 95% CI [0.052, 0.262] (k = 30). The effect size for negative emotion was nominally bigger, d = 0.162, 95% CI [0.056, 0.269] (k = 30), whereas the effect for positive emotion did not reach statistical significance, d = 0.062, 95% CI [-0.089, 0.213] (k = 7). Studies featuring SUD interventions designed to specifically target emotions (i.e., affect-regulation, mindfulness-based treatments) produced larger reductions in negative emotion compared with studies featuring interventions that did not contain specific emotion modules (e.g., contingency management).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that SUD interventions-especially mindfulness-based and affect-regulation treatments-indeed significantly reduce negative emotion, although relatively small effect sizes indicate potential room for improvement. Conclusions regarding positive emotion should be considered preliminary because of the limited numbers of samples assessing these outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Positive and negative affect in cocaine use disorder treatment: Change across time and relevance to treatment outcome

BACKGROUND

Cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) for substance use disorder is empirically supported, and may be associated with change in affect over time.

OBJECTIVES

Understanding the role of affect in cocaine use disorder could help to improve CBT outcomes.

METHODS

This secondary analysis included 140 adults with cocaine use disorder, 57.9% female, drawn from two randomized controlled studies of web-based cognitive-behavior therapy who completed the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) before and during treatment.

RESULTS

In mixed-effects regression models, baseline negative affect (NA) scores were not associated with self-reported cocaine use during treatment, but baseline PA scores were associated with less frequent cocaine use (β = -0.04, p = .02). During treatment, NA scores reduced over time in CBT and treatment as usual (β = -0.27, p < .01), although PA scores did not change. Higher weekly NA scores were associated with weekly cocaine use (β = .02, SE = .01, t(746.15) = 2.37, p = .02), although weekly PANAS PA scores were not associated with weekly cocaine use.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Results indicated that individuals with higher baseline PA were more likely to abstain from cocaine use during treatment, even when controlling for baseline cocaine use frequency. Although baseline NA was not associated with cocaine use, NA during treatment was associated with greater cocaine use.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

PA at baseline and NA during treatment were associated with cocaine use. If findings are replicated, treatment developers may wish to include treatment interventions to boost early PA and reduce NA throughout treatment. (Am J Addict 2018;XX:1-8).

Psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse

BACKGROUND

Psychostimulant misuse is a continuously growing medical and social burden. There is no evidence proving the efficacy of pharmacotherapy. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help patients in reducing or ceasing drug consumption.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register (via CRSLive); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science and PsycINFO, from inception to November 2015. We also searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (apps.who.int/trialsearch/).All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU) or a different intervention in adults with psychostimulant misuse or dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 trials (6923 participants).The psychosocial interventions considered in the studies were: cognitive behavioural therapy (19 studies), contingency management (25 studies), motivational interviewing (5 studies), interpersonal therapy (3 studies), psychodynamic therapy (1 study), 12-step facilitation (4 studies).We judged most of the studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias; blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so all the studies were at high risk of performance bias with regard to subjective outcomes; the majority of studies did not specify whether the outcome assessors were blind. We did not consider it likely that the objective outcomes were influenced by lack of blinding.The comparisons made were: any psychosocial intervention versus no intervention (32 studies), any psychosocial intervention versus TAU (6 studies), and one psychosocial intervention versus an alternative psychosocial intervention (13 studies). Five of included studies did not provide any useful data for inclusion in statistical synthesis.We found that, when compared to no intervention, any psychosocial treatment: reduced the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR): 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to -0.91, 24 studies, 3393 participants, moderate quality evidence); increased continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 2.14, 95% CI 1.27 to -3.59, 8 studies, 1241 participants, low quality evidence); did not significantly increase continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR: 2.12, 95% CI 0.77 to -5.86, 4 studies, 324 participants, low quality evidence); significantly increased the longest period of abstinence: (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.63, 10 studies, 1354 participants, high quality evidence). However, it should be noted that the in the vast majority of the studies in this comparison the specific psychosocial treatment assessed in the experimental arm was given in add on to treatment as usual or to another specific psychosocial or pharmacological treatment which was received by both groups. So, many of the control groups in this comparison were not really untreated. Receiving some amount of treatment is not the same as not receiving any intervention, so we could argue that the overall effect of the experimental psychosocial treatment could be smaller if given in add on to TAU or to another intervention than if given to participants not receiving any intervention; this could translate to a smaller magnitude of the effect of the psychosocial intervention when it is given in add on.When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment reduced dropout rate (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.89, 6 studies, 516 participants, moderate quality evidence), did not increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.72, 2 studies, 224 participants, low quality evidence), did not increase longest period of abstinence (MD -3.15 days, 95% CI -10.35 to 4.05, 1 study, 110 participants, low quality evidence). No studies in this comparison assessed the outcome of continuous abstinence at longest follow-up.There were few studies comparing two or more psychosocial interventions, with small sample sizes and considerable heterogeneity in terms of the types of interventions assessed. None reported significant results.None of the studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of any psychosocial treatment to treatment as usual (usually characterised by group counselling or case management) probably reduces the dropout rate and increases the longest period of abstinence. It may increase the number of people achieving continuous abstinence at the end of treatment, although this might not be maintained at longest follow-up. The most studied and the most promising psychosocial approach to be added to treatment as usual is probably contingency management. However, the other approaches were only analysed in a few small studies, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were not significant because of imprecision. When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment may improve adherence, but it may not improve abstinence at the end of treatment or the longest period of abstinence.The majority of the studies took place in the United States, and this could limit the generalisability of the findings, because the effects of psychosocial treatments could be strongly influenced by the social context and ethnicity. The results of our review do not answer the most relevant clinical question, demonstrating which is the most effective type of psychosocial approach.Further studies should directly compare contingency management with the other psychosocial approaches.

Psychometric properties of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) in a heterogeneous sample of substance users

BACKGROUND

The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is a widely used measure of affect. A comprehensive psychometric evaluation among substance users, however, has not been published.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the psychometric properties of the PANAS in a sample of outpatient treatment substance users.

METHODS

We used pooled data from four randomized clinical trials (N = 416; 34% female, 48% African American).

RESULTS

A confirmatory factor analysis indicated adequate support for a two-factor correlated model comprised of Positive Affect and Negative Affect with correlated item errors (Comparative Fit Index = 0.93, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.07, χ(2) = 478.93, df = 156). Cronbach's α indicated excellent internal consistency for both factors (0.90 and 0.91, respectively). The PANAS factors had good convergence and discriminability (Composite Reliability > 0.7; Maximum Shared Variance < Average Variance Extracted). A comparison from baseline to Week 1 indicated acceptable test-retest reliability (Positive Affect = 0.80, Negative Affect = 0.76). Concurrent and discriminant validity were demonstrated with correlations with the Brief Symptom Inventory and Addiction Severity Index. The PANAS scores were also significantly correlated with treatment outcomes (e.g. Positive Affect was associated with the maximum days of consecutive abstinence from primary substance of abuse, r = 0.16, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the psychometric properties of the PANAS are retained in substance using populations. Although several studies have focused on the role of Negative Affect, our findings suggest that Positive Affect may also be an important factor in substance use treatment outcomes.

WITHDRAWN: Psychosocial interventions for cocaine and psychostimulant amphetamines related disorders

Review withdrawn as the Cochrane Funding Arbitration Panel found this review non‐compliant with the Cochrane’s commercial sponsorship policy. The new author team will update and replace this review.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Psychosocial interventions for cocaine and psychostimulant amphetamines related disorders

BACKGROUND

The consumption of psychostimulants for non-medical reasons probably occurs because of their euphoriant and psychomotor-stimulating properties. Chronic consumption of these agents results in development of stereotyped behaviour, paranoia, and possibly aggressive behaviour. Psychosocial treatments for psychostimulant use disorder are supposed to improve compliance, and to promote abstinence. Evidence from randomised controlled trials in this subject needs to be summarised.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review of all RCTs on psychosocial interventions for treating psychostimulant use disorder.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and LILACS (to may 2006); reference searching; personal communication; conference abstracts; unpublished trials from pharmaceutical industry; book chapters on treatment of psychostimulants abuse/ dependence.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised-controlled trials focusing on psychosocial interventions for treating psychostimulants abuse/ dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors extracted the data independently and Relative Risks, weighted mean difference and number needed to treat were estimated, when possible. The reviewers assumed that people who died or dropped out had no improvement (intention to treat analysis) and tested the sensitivity of the final results to this assumption.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven randomised controlled studies (3663 participants) fulfilled inclusion criteria and had data that could be used for at least one of the main comparisons. There was a wide heterogeneity in the interventions evaluated: this did not allow to provide a summary estimate of effect and results cannot be summarised in a clear cut way. The comparisons between different type of Behavioural Interventions showed results in favour of treatments with some form of Contingency management in respect to both reducing drop outs and lowering cocaine use..

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall this review reports little significant behavioural changes with reductions in rates of drug consumption following an intervention. Moreover, with the evidence currently available, there are no data supporting a single treatment approach that is able to comprise the multidimensional facets of addiction patterns and to significantly yield better outcomes to resolve the chronic, relapsing nature of addiction, with all its correlates and consequences.

A combined cognitive and behavioral intervention for cocaine-using methadone clients

Treating cocaine use by opiate-dependent clients in methadone programs is a well-documented challenge. Both behavioral (contingency management) and cognitive (relapse prevention) interventions have shown promise in helping engage these clients in treatment. In this study, the effectiveness of combining contingency management with a cocaine-specific relapse prevention counseling module was examined. Sixty-one cocaine-using methadone clients were randomly assigned to one of four treatment conditions to participate in the eight-week intervention and eight-week follow-up period. Using analysis of variance (ANOVA), differences in cocaine use and treatment retention were examined. Contingency management was significantly related to reductions in cocaine use and the counseling module was positively related to six-month retention rates. Both interventions were associated with positive treatment response but the effects were reflected in different behavioral outcomes.

Dialectical behavior therapy versus comprehensive validation therapy plus 12-step for the treatment of opioid dependent women meeting criteria for borderline personality disorder

We conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), a treatment that synthesizes behavioral change with radical acceptance strategies, would be more effective for heroin-dependent women with borderline personality disorder (N = 23) than Comprehensive Validation Therapy with 12-Step (CVT + 12S), a manualized approach that provided the major acceptance-based strategies used in DBT in combination with participation in 12-Step programs. In addition to psychosocial treatment, subjects also received concurrent opiate agonist therapy with adequate doses of LAAM (thrice weekly; modal dose 90/90/130 mg). Treatment lasted for 12 months. Drug use outcomes were measured via thrice-weekly urinalyses and self-report. Three major findings emerged. First, results of urinalyses indicated that both treatment conditions were effective in reducing opiate use relative to baseline. At 16 months post-randomization (4 months post-treatment), all participants had a low proportion of opiate-positive urinalyses (27% in DBT; 33% in CVT + 12S). With regard to between-condition differences, participants assigned to DBT maintained reductions in mean opiate use through 12 months of active treatment while those assigned to CVT + 12S significantly increased opiate use during the last 4 months of treatment. Second, CVT + 12S retained all 12 participants for the entire year of treatment, compared to a 64% retention rate in DBT. Third, at both post-treatment and at the 16-month follow-up assessment, subjects in both treatment conditions showed significant overall reductions in level of psychopathology relative to baseline. A noteworthy secondary finding was that DBT participants were significantly more accurate in their self-report of opiate use than were those assigned to CVT + 12S.

The effectiveness of drug abuse treatment: a meta-analysis of comparison group studies

A meta-analysis was conducted on 78 studies of drug treatment conducted between 1965 and 1996. Each study compared outcomes among clients who received drug treatment with outcomes among clients who received either minimal treatment or no treatment. Five methodological variables were significant predictors of effect size. Larger effect sizes were associated with studies with the following characteristics: smaller numbers of dependent variables, significant differences between groups at admission, low levels of attrition in the treatment group, a passive comparison group (no treatment, minimal treatment) as opposed to an active comparison group (standard treatment), and drug use determined by a drug test. Controlling for these methodological variables, further analyses indicated that drug abuse treatment has both a statistically significant and a clinically meaningful effect in reducing drug use and crime, and that these effects are unlikely to be due to publication bias. For substance abuse outcomes, larger effect sizes tended to be found in studies in which treatment implementation was rated high, the degree of theoretical development of the treatment was rated low, or researcher allegiance to the treatment was rated as favorable. For crime outcomes, only the average age of study participants was a significant predictor of effect size, with treatment reducing crime to a greater degree among studies with samples consisting of younger adults as opposed to older adults. Treatment modality and other variables were not related to effect sizes for either drug use or crime outcomes

Evaluation of an alternative program for MMTP drop-outs: impact on treatment re-entry

INTRODUCTION

Retention in a Methadone Maintenance Treatment Program (MMTP) is predictive of abstaining from heroin and has other benefits. Many individuals leave treatment before they experience these positive outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This research project targeted MMTP drop-outs with an intervention designed to assist them in returning to drug treatment.

METHODS

Subjects who had left MMTP within the prior 12 months were randomly assigned to intervention or comparison groups. The 3-month long intervention consisted of street outreach, cognitive behavioral groups, and individual counseling. Data were analyzed for 175 subjects who were out of treatment at baseline and who returned for a 6-month follow-up interview (Intervention group, N=111; Comparison group, N=64).

RESULTS

A total of 87% of subjects assigned to the intervention condition participated in at least one component. Intervention subjects who attended two or more cognitive behavioral group sessions were more likely than those who attended 0-1 sessions or those in the comparison group to have returned to treatment during the 6 month follow up time period (72 vs. 53 vs. 50%, respectively, P<0.05, chi square test).

CONCLUSION

MMTP drop-outs need not be lost to the drug treatment system if special efforts are made to engage them in interventions developed to encourage treatment re-entry.

Treating cocaine-using methadone patients: predictors of outcomes in a psychosocial clinical trial

Cocaine-using methadone patients in two clinics were assigned to 8 months of enhanced methadone treatment-primarily cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for cocaine use-while similar patients in two "sibling" clinics were assigned to standard methadone treatment during 1995-1998. Cocaine use declined significantly from baseline to 4- and 12-month follow-ups. Patients receiving CBT rated the quality of their counseling relationship higher and obtained more supportive services than those receiving standard treatment. However, study treatment condition itself was not associated with outcome. Baseline measures associated with poorer outcomes across both treatment conditions were: currently enrolled in methadone treatment (in contrast to being newly enrolled), higher cocaine use frequency, greater cocaine use associated problem recognition, and an ambivalent attitude toward methadone. The results are consistent with some previous clinical trials showing that psychosocial treatments of different intensities result in similar declines in cocaine use. The findings indicate that methadone maintenance treatment can help dually-addicted patients reduce their cocaine use.

Enhanced treatment outcomes for cocaine-using methadone patients

Cocaine dependent methadone patients were randomly assigned to 6 months of high intensity cognitive-behavioral therapy or low intensity therapy. A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted with patients stratified on severity of cocaine use at baseline. Both treatment groups showed significant and equivalent reductions in cocaine use during the post-treatment period. Completing either therapy and lower cocaine severity at baseline were associated with lower proportion of cocaine-positive urines across a 48-week post-treatment period. Examination of the treatment x cocaine severity interaction provided some evidence that high-severity patients improved more if exposed to high intensity treatment than to low intensity treatment. Positive outcomes for therapy completers relative to non-completers increased over time. The results are consistent with several clinical trials showing that: (1) participation in treatment is associated with reductions in cocaine use; and (2) the relationship between treatment intensity and outcome is not linear and may better be explained by an interaction between patient and treatment factors.

The autonomy of mood disorders among cocaine-using methadone patients

This study uses an algorithm to determine whether patients dually diagnosed with a mood disorder and cocaine dependence have either (a) an autonomous mood disorder (onset of mood disorder prior to substance use disorder (SUD) or mood disorder symptoms persist during periods of abstinence or (b) a nonautonomous mood disorder (onset of SUD preceded mood disorder and mood disorder symptoms remit during periods of abstinence). The relationship among autonomy, patient characteristics, and treatment completion is examined. The sample included 67 methadone patients with a mood disorder (87% major depression, 13% bipolar) who were enrolling in a 6-month psychosocial treatment for cocaine use. Of these subjects, 27% were rated as having an autonomous mood disorder and 73% a nonautonomous mood disorder. Mean age was 37 years; 55% were female and 82% were Hispanic or African-American. All subjects had been stabilized on methadone (mean = 70 mg). During the 30 days prior to study intake, subjects with an autonomous mood disorder, compared to subjects with a nonautonomous mood disorder, reported fewer days using cocaine (12.5 versus 21.1) and fewer days drinking four or more drinks of alcohol (1.1 versus 6. 1). Treatment completion was associated with less cocaine use, autonomy, and African-American ethnicity. However, when these variables were controlled using logistic regression, only autonomous mood disorder and ethnicity predicted treatment completion. These results suggest that autonomy may be a useful construct to measure, and that subjects with nonautonomous mood disorders may need special efforts to ensure treatment retention.

Changes in HIV risk behaviors among cocaine-using methadone patients

Cocaine use among methadone patients has been related to higher prevalence of HIV risk behaviors. HIV risk behaviors for cocaine-using patients in methadone treatment (N = 207) were examined for two time periods, the current month in-treatment and the month previous to treatment admission. All needle-related and sexually-related risk behaviors (except for needle hygiene) significantly and substantially declined over the average two year time interval. Several variables were associated with needle and sexual risks in multivariate regression analyses. Dropping apparent opiate use underreporters from the analyses did not alter the results. From a harm reduction perspective, high priority should be given to retaining cocaine-using patients in methadone maintenance, intensifying in-program services for those with anti-social personality, bipolar disorder or alcoholism, as well as increasing access to needle exchanges and free condoms.

Follow-up of inpatient cocaine withdrawal for cocaine-using methadone patients

Significant proportions of opiate-dependent persons entering methadone treatment are also addicted to cocaine and continue to use cocaine during treatment. One standard response to cocaine use has been inpatient detoxification. This study examined the effectiveness of this procedure by comparing pre- and posttreatment urine toxicologies for methadone patients who had been hospitalized for cocaine withdrawal. The results showed a negligible effect on cocaine abstinence (less than 1 out of 10 patients abstinent 12 weeks after detox) and a modest reduction in the frequency of cocaine use (one-quarter decline in urine tests positive after 12 weeks). These findings raise serious doubts about the cost-effectiveness of inpatient cocaine detoxification. Better strategies need to be implemented to enhance the chances of remaining abstinent once detoxified.

Video techniques with chemically-dependent patients

This paper describes the use of videotaping as an adjunctive intervention in the treatment of substance-dependent patients. In the context of a cognitive-behavioral treatment extensively modified to work with inner-city, methadone-maintained cocaine users, videotaping in both individual and group formats is described. Video sessions create an opportunity for patients to reflect on their experience, enhance their self-esteem, aid in teaching social skills, and help hard-to-engage patients begin to participate in treatment. In order to compete with both the powerfully reinforcing qualities of cocaine and the extreme degree of avoidance exhibited by this population, therapy has to provide intense capturing experiences at the outset of treatment. Patient's reactions indicate that the experience they have is captivating and stimulating more than most other early therapy experiences. It is additionally concluded that the use of video can be instrumental in addressing the severe psychological deficits of this population that otherwise impede treatment efforts. While the role of video was not independently evaluated for its contribution to patient retention, 62% of patients were retained through completion of an intensive 6-month protocol.

Patients' perspective on the process of change in substance abuse treatment

Understanding how methadone patients view treatment for their cocaine dependence and the process of recovery from cocaine addiction, is important in helping to design treatment strategies that will effectively motivate and engage these patients. There has been little development or testing of treatment approaches for cocaine-dependent, methadone-maintained patients and research on the effectiveness of outpatient cocaine treatment has excluded the perspectives of patients. This article presents the patient's view, using ethnographic interviews with 17 patients enrolled in a relapse prevention treatment program for cocaine dependence, that was set up in an inner-city methadone maintenance clinic. Findings suggest that despite initial ambivalence or resistance, patients became highly engaged by the positively reinforcing treatment intervention. In addition, patients found the highly structured nature of the program and the cognitive behavioral techniques critical in reducing their cocaine use. Finally, patients responded positively to the psychodynamic issues addressed within a cognitive behavioral format, and reported improvements in certain areas of psychological functioning.

Treatment intensity and reduction in drug use for cocaine-dependent methadone patients: a dose-response relationship

This study examined the impact of treatment intensity on cocaine use. Seventy-seven cocaine-using methadone patients were enrolled in a six-month, structured, manual-driven, cognitive-behavioral treatment program. Sessions consisted of five individual and/or group sessions per week. At intake subjects showed extensive polydrug abuse, psychiatric comorbidity, criminal histories, and HIV risk behaviors. Treatment intensity was measured by dividing number of sessions attended into quartiles. Paired comparisons, within treatment quartiles, were made between subjects' intake and six-month self-reports of cocaine use. Subjects in quartiles two through four showed significant reductions in frequency of cocaine use at follow-up, with subjects who received the most treatment showing the greatest reductions in cocaine use. Bivariate and multivariate analyses showed that treatment sessions attended remained a strong predictor of reduction in cocaine use at follow-up, even after controlling for drug use at intake and background variables. The results indicate that there is a substantial treatment dose-response relationship.

An intensive outpatient approach for cocaine abuse treatment. The Matrix model

The Matrix model of outpatient treatment was developed during the 1980s in response to an overwhelming demand for cocaine abuse treatment services. The model was constructed using components based upon empirically supported findings from the substance abuse research field. Over the course of development, data were collected on the treatment model and the model was modified based upon empirical evaluation. A pilot study comparing the Matrix outpatient model with an inpatient hospital treatment program produced preliminary support for the clinical utility of the model. An open trial comparing publicly and privately funded patients demonstrated that patients with fewer resources were more difficult to engage and retain in this model of outpatient treatment. In a controlled trial, a clear positive relationship was documented between duration and amount of treatment involvement in the Matrix model and positive outcome at 1 year. Due to a variety of methodological issues, the study was not able to answer definitively the question of clinical efficacy. In all of these studies, patients treated with the Matrix model demonstrated statistically significant reductions in drug and alcohol use and improvements in psychological indicators. This body of work, along with the public acceptance the model has received in the treatment community, support the usefulness of this intensive outpatient approach for cocaine abuse. Further research is underway to provide additional controlled information on the value of this treatment approach.

An enhanced positive reinforcement model for the severely impaired cocaine abuser

This article describes a cognitive-behavioral treatment approach that has been extensively modified to work with inner-city methadone-maintained cocaine users. Modifications were deemed essential to address the problems of engagement and retention in treatment that are typically encountered with this population. While this approach relies on such basic tenets of treatment as relapse prevention, cognitive restructuring, and psychoeducation, an understanding of the particular psychological vulnerabilities of this population has been incorporated into the model. The modified approach utilizes positive reinforcement extensively. This includes use of concrete reinforcers to facilitate initial engagement, and use of interpersonal reinforcers (therapist positive regard, attention, and respect) to increase program retention and sustain posttreatment change. Preliminary results indicate that 63% of patients can complete this intensive 6-month program, with considerable reductions in cocaine use and significant change in drug injection behavior.