An effectiveness trial of contingency management in a felony preadjudication drug court

Contingency Management for Drug Use Disorders: Meta-Analysis and Application of Tolin's Criteria

Several professional organizations and federal agencies recommend contingency management (CM) as an empirically supported treatment for drug use disorder. However, the release of the "Tolin criteria" warrants an updated recommendation. Using this methodology, five meta-analyses (84 studies, 11,000 participants) were reviewed. Two meta-analyses were rated moderate quality, and three were rated low or critically low quality. Comparator conditions included active treatment, placebo, treatment as usual, and no treatment. The primary outcome was abstinence. Considering only the moderate quality meta-analyses, the effect of CM versus control on posttreatment abstinence was d = 0.54 [0.43, 0.64] and follow-up abstinence was d=0.08 [0.00, 0.16]. A "strong" recommendation was provided for CM as an empirically supported treatment for drug use disorder.

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

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

Assessing the reliability and validity of the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) program tool

BACKGROUND

Fidelity assessment tools can assess whether a program embraces a core set of principles and performs well. A quality fidelity tool with valid scales can be a feedback loop to identify areas that need further work to improve the program. Using data collected from 1816 correctional and reentry programs in the United States in the construction sample and 761 programs in the confirmation sample, this study examined the internal consistency of the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Program Tool, an online resource to capture information about structural features of a program.

RESULTS

The study reports on reliability statistics and factor analyses to highlight individual subscales. Six scales emerged and had acceptable to excellent levels of internal consistency. These scales are staffing, reward-and-sanction, clinical standards for programs, coaching, program duration, and risk-need assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

This article discusses fidelity scales from the RNR Program Tool and provides guidance on the importance of tool development processes to ensure accurate, valid, and reliable scales. The purpose of the RNR Program Tool is to create a modern, online tool integrating both the empirical (research) literature on effective practices and clinical standards on quality programming. This process minimizes the need for consultants by giving program administrators the ability to gather information on their programs, score them, and receive instant and targeted feedback with recommendations for improvement to assess their programs against empirical standards in the field. Furthermore, it provides a standardized tool that administrators can use to examine what type of individuals fare better in their programs. The provided targeted feedback can give the programs the ability to seek technical assistance or guidance in specific areas that can strategically strengthen their program.

Contingency management for treatment attendance: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Treatment providers have applied contingency management (CM) treatment, an intervention that often rewards individuals for drug abstinence (i.e., ABS CM), to treatment engagement as well. However, we know little about the magnitude of treatment effects when providers target attendance behaviors (i.e., ATT CM).

METHODS

This study conducted a systematic search to identify studies that included ATT CM, either in isolation or in combination with ABS CM. The study used meta-analysis to estimate the effect size of ATT CM and ABS CM + ATT CM on treatment attendance and drug abstinence. We identified a total of 10 studies including 12 CM treatments (6 ATT CM and 6 ABS CM + ATT CM) with 1841 participants.

RESULTS

Results indicated a moderate effect (d = 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.25, 0.69]) of ATT CM on attendance relative to non-reward active comparison conditions. Frequency of rewards was significantly associated with larger effect sizes. Results also indicated a small effect (d = 0.22, 95% CI [0.12, 0.33]) of ATT CM on abstinence outcomes relative to nonreward comparisons, p < 0.001. The study found no significant differences in attendance or abstinence between ATT CM and ABS CM + ATT CM (p's > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Overall, the results supported ATT CM for increasing treatment engagement, with smaller effects on abstinence. Effects on abstinence were smaller than those observed in prior meta-analyses focused on ABS CM. No significant differences existed in attendance or abstinence outcomes between ATT CM and ABS + ATT CM. However, future studies are needed to experimentally compare ABS CM + ATT CM to ABS CM, and ATT CM to determine additive effects. Clinics implementing CM should consider the differential effects between ATT CM and ABS CM when selecting target behavior(s).

The Legitimacy of Change: Adopting/Adapting, Implementing and Sustaining Reforms within Community Corrections Agencies

Many criminal justice institutions implement evidence-based reforms. While most scholars are aware of implementation challenges, we still know relatively little about sustainability. Using longitudinal data from criminal legal staff implementing an evidence-based reform, this paper considers: What happens during the implementation of an organizational reform that affects continued use of these reforms? Guided by an organizational change framework, findings suggest sustainability aligns with key organizational goals including legitimacy, efficiency and effectiveness. While all sites saw the reformed practices as legitimate enough to initially consider adoption, two sites never adopted, four sites toyed with reform, and two sites continued to use the reform after the study was over. This paper explores sustainability and identifies legitimacy as an important factor that affects the routinization of new practices. Transformation of organizational change initiatives into routine practices should consider efforts to build legitimacy in lieu of primarily rationalizing on the values of efficiency and effectiveness.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN27473213.

Juvenile probation officers' perceptions on youth substance use varies from task-shifting to family-based contingency management

The majority of justice-involved youth have problems with substance use, but juvenile justice agencies face numerous barriers to providing evidence-based treatments for these youth. Task-shifting is one strategy for increasing access to such treatments. That is, training juvenile probation officers (JPOs) to deliver substance use treatments, such as contingency management (CM) could improve youths' motivation and behavioral outcomes. However, probation traditionally emphasizes sanctions over incentives, so JPOs must alter their perspectives to accept protocols such as CM for substance use. Using mixed focus group and survey methods at baseline and one year later, this randomized study examined heretofore unstudied JPO perceptions during a task-shifting experiment in which JPOs were asked to start delivering CM for youth substance use, compared to a control group of JPOs who did not change their practices. At baseline, JPOs expressed a perception of hopelessness about their work with substance-using youth and their parents, but they generally held positive views toward use of tangible incentives. One year after randomization to participate in CM training and delivery, JPO perceptions changed positively about working with youth and their parents, substance use programs and resources, and whether they believed tangible incentive programs were worthwhile. Over the same time, there was a perceptual stasis in hopelessness for JPOs randomized to deliver probation services as usual, and there was degradation in their previously positive perception toward tangible incentives. The study advances thinking regarding tools that JPOs can use for working with youth and families and the role that task-shifting can play in both increasing access to evidence-based treatments and improving attitudinal outcomes of JPOs.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This review represents one in a family of three reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 electronic bibliographic databases up to February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials with 2560 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (7/13 studies, 53%) and community (6/13 studies, 47%) settings. The rating of bias was affected by the lack of clear reporting by authors, and we rated many items as 'unclear'. In two studies (190 participants) collaborative case management in comparison to treatment as usual did not reduce drug use (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 2.12; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), reincarceration at nine months (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.57; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), and number of subsequent arrests at 12 months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.49; 1 study, 113 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study (36 participants) comparing buprenorphine to placebo showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at end of treatment (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.20) and three months (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35); very low-certainty evidence. No adverse events were reported. One study (38 participants) comparing interpersonal psychotherapy to a psychoeducational intervention did not find reduction in drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50; low-certainty evidence). One study (31 participants) comparing acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) to a waiting list showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use using the Addiction Severity Index (mean difference (MD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and abstinence from drug use at six months (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43); low-certainty evidence. One study (314 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills to a therapeutic community programme and aftercare showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.27), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03); criminal activity (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03), or drug-related crime (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.32). A significant reduction for arrested (not for parole) violations at six months follow-up was significantly in favour of cognitive behavioural skills (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.77; very low-certainty evidence). A second study with 115 participants comparing cognitive behavioural skills to an alternative substance abuse treatment showed no significant reduction in reincarceration at 12 months (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.12; low certainty-evidence. One study (44 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills and standard therapy versus treatment as usual showed no significant reduction in Addiction Severity Index (ASI) drug score at three months (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09) and six months (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.05), and incarceration at three months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.68) and six months (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.27); very low-certainty evidence. One study (171 participants) comparing a single computerised intervention versus case management showed no significant reduction in the number of days not using drugs at three months (MD -0.89, 95% CI -4.83 to 3.05; low certainty-evidence). One study (116 participants) comparing dialectic behavioural therapy and case management (DBT-CM) versus a health promotion intervention showed no significant reduction at six months follow-up in positive drug testing (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.03), number of people not using marijuana (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.59), crack (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.14), cocaine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12), heroin (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.13), methamphetamine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20), and self-reported drug use for any drug (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.56); very low-certainty evidence. One study (211 participants) comparing a therapeutic community programme versus work release showed no significant reduction in marijuana use at six months (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.19 to 5.65), nor 18 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.45), heroin use at six months (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14), nor 18 months (RR 1.92, 95% CI 0.24 to 15.37), crack use at six months (RR 2.07, 95% CI 0.41 to 10.41), nor 18 months (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.19 to 14.06), cocaine use at six months (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.50), nor 18 months (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.35). It also showed no significant reduction in incarceration for drug offences at 18 months (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.42); with overall very low- to low-certainty evidence. One study (511 participants) comparing intensive discharge planning and case management versus prison only showed no significant reduction in use of marijuana (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.16), hard drugs (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.43), crack cocaine (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.54), nor positive hair testing for marijuana (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.03); it found a significant reduction in arrests (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.87), but no significant reduction in drug charges (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.53) nor incarceration (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.39); moderate-certainty evidence. One narrative study summary (211 participants) comparing buprenorphine pre- and post-release from prison showed no significant reduction in drug use at 12 months post-release; low certainty-evidence. No adverse effects were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies showed a high degree of heterogeneity for types of comparisons, outcome measures and small samples. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required. On one outcome of arrest (no parole violations), we identified a significant reduction when cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was compared to a therapeutic community programme. But for all other outcomes, none of the interventions were effective. Larger trials are required to increase the precision of confidence about the certainty of evidence.

Interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems

BACKGROUND

This review represents one from a family of three reviews focusing on interventions for drug-using offenders. Many people under the care of the criminal justice system have co-occurring mental health problems and drug misuse problems; it is important to identify the most effective treatments for this vulnerable population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.This review addresses the following questions.• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce drug use?• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce criminal activity?• Does the treatment setting (court, community, prison/secure establishment) affect intervention outcome(s)?• Does the type of treatment affect treatment outcome(s)?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 databases up to February 2019 and checked the reference lists of included studies. We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials designed to prevent relapse of drug use and/or criminal activity among drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane .

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 studies with a total of 2606 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (eight studies; 61%), in court (two studies; 15%), in the community (two studies; 15%), or at a medium secure hospital (one study; 8%). Main sources of bias were unclear risk of selection bias and high risk of detection bias.Four studies compared a therapeutic community intervention versus (1) treatment as usual (two studies; 266 participants), providing moderate-certainty evidence that participants who received the intervention were less likely to be involved in subsequent criminal activity (risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.84) or returned to prison (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.67); (2) a cognitive-behavioural therapy (one study; 314 participants), reporting no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.32), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09), criminal activity (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.05), or drug-related crime (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.36), yielding low-certainty evidence; and (3) a waiting list control (one study; 478 participants), showing a significant reduction in return to prison for those people engaging in the therapeutic community (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79), providing moderate-certainty evidence.One study (235 participants) compared a mental health treatment court with an assertive case management model versus treatment as usual, showing no significant reduction at 12 months' follow-up on an Addictive Severity Index (ASI) self-report of drug use (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), conviction for a new crime (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.22), or re-incarceration to jail (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.01), providing low-certainty evidence.Four studies compared motivational interviewing/mindfulness and cognitive skills with relaxation therapy (one study), a waiting list control (one study), or treatment as usual (two studies). In comparison to relaxation training, one study reported narrative information on marijuana use at three-month follow-up assessment. Researchers reported a main effect < .007 with participants in the motivational interviewing group, showing fewer problems than participants in the relaxation training group, with moderate-certainty evidence. In comparison to a waiting list control, one study reported no significant reduction in self-reported drug use based on the ASI (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and on abstinence from drug use (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43), presenting low-certainty evidence at six months (31 participants). In comparison to treatment as usual, two studies (with 40 participants) found no significant reduction in frequency of marijuana use at three months post release (MD -1.05, 95% CI -2.39 to 0.29) nor time to first arrest (MD 0.87, 95% CI -0.12 to 1.86), along with a small reduction in frequency of re-arrest (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.01) up to 36 months, yielding low-certainty evidence; the other study with 80 participants found no significant reduction in positive drug screens at 12 months (MD -0.7, 95% CI -3.5 to 2.1), providing very low-certainty evidence.Two studies reported on the use of multi-systemic therapy involving juveniles and families versus treatment as usual and adolescent substance abuse therapy. In comparing treatment as usual, researchers found no significant reduction up to seven months in drug dependence on the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test (DUDIT) score (MD -0.22, 95% CI -2.51 to 2.07) nor in arrests (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36), providing low-certainty evidence (156 participants). In comparison to an adolescent substance abuse therapy, one study (112 participants) found significant reduction in re-arrests up to 24 months (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.28), based on low-certainty evidence.One study (38 participants) reported on the use of interpersonal psychotherapy in comparison to a psychoeducational intervention. Investigators found no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50), providing very low-certainty evidence. The final study (29 participants) compared legal defence service and wrap-around social work services versus legal defence service only and found no significant reductions in the number of new offences committed at 12 months (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.07 to 6.01), yielding very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic community interventions and mental health treatment courts may help people to reduce subsequent drug use and/or criminal activity. For other interventions such as interpersonal psychotherapy, multi-systemic therapy, legal defence wrap-around services, and motivational interviewing, the evidence is more uncertain. Studies showed a high degree of variation, warranting a degree of caution in interpreting the magnitude of effect and the direction of benefit for treatment outcomes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Examining the efficacy of a computer facilitated HIV prevention tool in drug court

BACKGROUND

Although they have demonstrated efficacy in reducing substance use and criminal recidivism, competing priorities and limited resources may preclude drug court programs from formally addressing HIV risk. This study examined the efficacy of a brief, three-session, computer-facilitated HIV prevention intervention in reducing HIV risk among adult felony drug court participants.

METHODS

Two hundred participants were randomly assigned to an HIV intervention (n=101) or attention control (n=99) group. All clients attended judicial status hearings approximately every six weeks. At the first three status hearings following study entry, clients in the intervention group completed the computerized, interactive HIV risk reduction sessions while those in the control group viewed a series of educational life-skill videos of matched length. Outcomes included the rate of independently obtained HIV testing, engagement in high risk HIV-related behaviors, and rate of condom procurement from the research site at each session.

RESULTS

Results indicated that participants who received the HIV intervention were significantly more likely to report having obtained HIV testing at some point during the study period than those in the control condition, although the effect was marginally significant when examined in a longitudinal model. In addition, they had higher rates of condom procurement. No group differences were found on rates of high-risk sexual behavior, and the low rate of injection drug reported precluded examination of high-risk drug-related behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides support for the feasibility and utility of delivering HIV prevention services to drug court clients using an efficient computer-facilitated program.

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

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

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Implementation of contingency management in probation agencies using a case controlled longitudinal design: a PDSA study protocol

Background

Moving evidence-based practices (EBPs) from clinical research settings to real world work environments is challenging. Grounded in the work of Proctor and colleagues on “bench-trench” partnerships, quality improvement studies use a bench (academic)-trench (practitioner) model that incorporates “practice knowledge” while building a feedback process throughout the various change phases (Social Work Research, 27, 67-69). Yet, few implementation studies give adequate attention to longitudinal collection of key organizational and individual level-information.

Method/Design

The Justice Steps (JSTEPS) project uses a PDSA (Plan-Do-Study-Act) quasi-experimental design that combines active and engaged researcher and practitioner learning collaborations about EBP adoption and implementation. The academic researchers and practitioners (Federal probation and judicial staff) work together to implement contingency management (CM) into routine practice. Each site participates in two learning collaborative meetings, receives six feedback reports, and accesses telephone consultation on the design and implementation of the CM procedure. The study protocol allows examination of the implementation of CM over 24 months in five settings. Each setting proceeds based on the sites’ own pace of adopting CM. This study uses a case controlled pre-post design to measure individual level data and a pre-post design for staff level outcomes. The outcomes of interest are reduced substance use and increased time on probation. The project data collection includes individual-level client data and organizational and staff data to assess the implementation of the CM in five probation agencies through three periods: inception, implementation and sustainability. Qualitative methods include observations and interviews combined with data gathering during learning sessions. Individual level client data includes attendance, status at required events, and arrests.

Discussion

This project contributes to the current understanding of how contextual factors affect implementation decisions. The protocol allows each site to develop their own tailored CM protocol and a process for implementing CM, compatible with the local socio-political environment. Feedback loops are important for fostering attention to CM implementation issues.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/2194-7899-1-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Criminal justice referral and incentives in outpatient substance abuse treatment

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

Delay discounting in adults receiving treatment for marijuana dependence

Delay discounting is an index of impulsive decision-making and reflects an individual's preference for smaller immediate rewards relative to larger delayed rewards. Multiple studies have indicated comparatively high rates of discounting among tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, and other types of drug users, but few studies have examined discounting among marijuana users. This report is a secondary analysis of data from a clinical trial that randomized adults with marijuana dependence to receive one of four treatments that involved contingency management (CM) and cognitive-behavioral therapy interventions. Delay discounting was assessed with the Experiential Discounting Task (Reynolds & Schiffbauer, 2004) at pretreatment in 93 participants and at 12 weeks posttreatment in 61 participants. Results indicated that higher pretreatment delay discounting (i.e., more impulsive decision-making) significantly correlated with lower readiness to change marijuana use (r = -0.22, p = .03) and greater number of days of cigarette use (r = .21, p = .04). Pretreatment discounting was not associated with any marijuana treatment outcomes. CM treatment significantly interacted with time to predict change in delay discounting from pre- to posttreatment; participants who received CM did not change their discounting over time, whereas those who did not receive CM significantly increased their discounting from pre- to posttreatment. In this sample of court-referred young adults receiving treatment for marijuana dependence, delay discounting was not strongly related to treatment outcomes, but there was some evidence that CM may protect against time-related increases in discounting.

Moderating effects of race in clinical trial participation and outcomes among marijuana-dependent young adults

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined clinical trial participation rates and treatment outcomes among underserved young adults who are dependent on marijuana, the most commonly abused illicit drug.

METHOD

The present study was a secondary analysis of a trial of court-referred marijuana-dependent young adults (ages 18-25) randomized to one of four treatment conditions: Motivational Enhancement Therapy/Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (MET/CBT), MET/CBT+Contingency Management (CM), Drug Counseling (DC) or DC+CM. African American (N=81) participants were compared to White (N=31) participants with respect to rates of participation in phases of treatment and substance use outcomes. In addition, the interaction of race and treatment condition was examined to ascertain if the interventions yielded different effects based on race.

RESULTS

Among those who started treatment, African American young adults were significantly less likely to complete the treatment and posttreatment phases of the clinical trial than their White counterparts. Irrespective of treatment type, substance use outcomes (i.e., percentage of marijuana-negative specimens and longest duration of continuous abstinence) did not vary by race. However, there was a significant interaction effect between treatment type and race; African American young adults did not benefit differentially from any specific type of treatment, but CM was effective in reducing proportion of marijuana positive samples among White young adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that clinical trial treatment and posttreatment completion rates vary by race in this population, as does response to specific treatment types. More treatment research focusing specifically on African American marijuana-dependent young adults is warranted.

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

PROBLEM

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

FINDINGS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The Prevalence of HIV Risk Behaviors among Felony Drug Court Participants

15 HIV RISK BEHAVIORS IN DRUG COURT

A small percentage of participants in a large metropolitan felony Drug Court engaged in high-risk injection drug use, but a large percentage engaged in high-risk sexual behaviors.

16 HIV RISK FACTORS IN DRUG COURT

HIV risk behaviors were associated with being male, African-American, and younger.

17 GEOGRAPHIC RISK FOR HIV

A large proportion of Drug Court participants resided in areas of the city with a high prevalence of persons living with HIV/AIDS, thus heightening the probability of exposure to the virus.

Paying substance abusers in research studies: where does the money go?

BACKGROUND

Research involving substance-abusing participants is often hindered by low rates of recruitment and retention. Research suggests that monetary payment or remuneration can be an effective strategy to overcome these obstacles.

OBJECTIVES

This article provides a brief overview of these issues and provides data reflecting how substance-abusing participants in several of our studies used their baseline and follow-up payments. We also present research findings related to how the mode of payment (i.e., cash, check, gift card) may affect how payments are used.

CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE

Overall, our findings suggest that participants use their research payments in a responsible and safe manner. Limitations and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Adaptability of contingency management in justice settings: survey findings on attitudes toward using rewards

Contingency management (CM) is widely recognized as an evidence-based practice, but it is not widely used in either treatment settings or justice settings. CM is perceived as adaptable in justice settings given the natural inclination to use contingencies to improve compliance to desired behaviors. In the Justice Steps implementation study, 5 federal district court jurisdictions agreed to consider implementing CM in specialized problem-solving courts or probation settings. A baseline survey (N = 186) examined the acceptance and feasibility of using rewards as a tool to manage offender compliance. The results of the survey revealed that most of the respondents believe that rewards are acceptable, with little difference between social and material rewards. Survey findings also showed that female justice workers and those who were not probation officers were more accepting of material rewards than their counterparts. Findings are consistent with prior research in drug treatment settings where there is little concern about using rewards.

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

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

Adding positive reinforcement in justice settings: acceptability and feasibility

Although contingency management (CM) approaches are among the most promising methods for initiating drug abstinence (S. T. Higgins, S. M. Alessi, & R. L. Dantona, 2002; S. T. Higgins, S. H. Heil, & J. P. Lussier, 2004), adoption and implementation of CM protocols into treatment programs are both challenging and infrequent. In criminal justice agencies, where roughly 70% of clients report substance abuse issues (F. S. Taxman, K. L. Cropsey, D. W. Young, & H. Wexler, 2007), CM interventions are virtually nonexistent. The Justice Steps (JSTEPS) study uses a longitudinal, mixed-method design to examine the implementation of a CM-based protocol in five justice settings. This article presents qualitative data collected during Phase 1 of the JSTEPS project regarding the acceptability and feasibility of CM in these justice settings. The study finds a level of acceptability (find CM tolerable) and feasibility (find CM suitable) within justice agencies, but with some challenges. These challenges are reflected in the following: (a) incorporating too many desired target behaviors into CM models; (b) facing intraorganizational challenges when designing CM systems; and (c) emphasizing sanctions over rewards despite the evidence-base for positive reinforcers. These findings have implications for advancing the dissemination, adoption, and implementation of evidence-based treatments (and CM in particular) in criminal justice settings.

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

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

Introduction to the special issue on the behavior analysis and treatment of drug addiction

Extensive evidence from the laboratory and the clinic suggests that drug addiction can be viewed as operant behavior and effectively treated through the application of principles of operant conditioning. Contingency management interventions that arrange for the direct reinforcement of drug abstinence or of other therapeutically important target behaviors (e.g., regular use of drug abuse treatment medications) are among the most studied type of operant treatments. Behavior analysts have contributed to the substantial and rapidly growing literature on operant treatments for drug addiction, but the publications of this work usually appear in medical, clinical psychology, or drug abuse journals. This special issue of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis represents an effort to bring this important work to the attention of the behavior-analytic community. The articles in this special issue illustrate both the enormous potential of contingency management interventions to address the serious and seemingly intractable problem of drug addiction as well as the real challenges involved in attempting to develop and disseminate treatments that will produce substantial and lasting changes in the lives of individuals plagued by the chronic problem of drug addiction.