4.2 Article

What is usual about treatment-as-usual? Data from two multisite effectiveness trials

Journal

JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT
Volume 35, Issue 4, Pages 369-379

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2008.01.003

Keywords

Empirically supported therapies; Standard treatment; Effectiveness trials; Motivational interviewing; Clinical trials network

Funding

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [K05 DA000457-09, U10 DA013045-03, K05 DA000457, U10 DA013045-05, U10 DA013045-06, U10 DA013043-04, U10 DA013045-04, U10 DA013043-07, U10 DA013043-08, DA1025273, U10 DA013038-07, K05-DA00457, U10 DA013043-06, K05 DA000457-08, U10 DA013043-09, U10 DA013038-05, U10 DA013038-06, U10 DA013043, U10 DA13038, U10 DA013045-02, U10 DA013038-08, U10 DA013038-09, U10 DA013038, K05 DA000457-07, U10 DA013045, P50 DA009241, U10 DA013043-05] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite increased emphasis on broadening the implementation of empirically Supported therapies (ESTs) to improve standard clinical practice and patient outcomes. objective descriptions of what actually constitutes standard practice in community-based drug abuse treatment do not exist. We present data from independent ratings of 379 audiotapes drawn from the treatment-as-usual arm Of two multisite randomized effectiveness trials in the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network. As expected, the most frequently Occurring strategies involved assessing the participant's substance use and social functioning, asking open-ended questions, discussing problems and feedback, and giving advice and direction. However, a number of interventions associated with ESTs were very rarely implemented in these early sessions. These data suggest missed opportunities for optimally engaging patients in the early stages of treatment and enhancing substance use outcomes and only moderate Success to date of efforts to bridge the gap between research and practice. (C) 2008 published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available