Improving Initial Session Attendance of Substance Abusing and Conduct Disordered Adolescents: A Controlled Study

Donohue, Brad; Azrin, Nathan H.; Lawson, Heather; Friedlander, Josh; Teichner, Gordon; Rindsberg, Jeff

doi:10.1300/j029v08n01_01

Cited by 48 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The CRAFT intervention was associated with a success rate for engaging resistant adolescents into treatment (i.e., 71%) that was similar to rates for CRAFT implemented with adult CSOs (Kirby et al, 1999;Meyers et al, 1999) and to rates for other adolescent engagement programs (Donohue et al, 1998). Once engaged, youth were retained in individual CBT, attending an average of two-thirds of the treatment sessions offered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Engaging resistant adolescents in drug abuse treatment

Waldron

Kern-Jones

Turner

et al. 2007

Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the first phase of a two-part treatment development study, families with a treatment-resistant, drugabusing adolescent (n=42) were offered 12 sessions of Community Reinforcement and Family Training (CRAFT). This parent-focused intervention was designed to help parents facilitate their adolescents' entry in treatment and support adolescents' subsequent behavior change and to improve parent and family functioning. In the second phase, successfully engaged adolescents (n=30) were offered 12 sessions of a multicomponent individual cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) targeting substance use and related problem behaviors. Measures were collected at pre-and post-treatment for parents and adolescents, with an additional follow-up assessment for parents at 3-months posttreatment. Parents in the CRAFT intervention experienced a significant reduction in negative symptoms and 71% of parents were successful in engaging their resistant youth in treatment. The CBT intervention for the engaged youth was associated with a statistically significant, but not clinically significant, reduction in marijuana use.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Engaging resistant adolescents in drug abuse treatment

Waldron

Kern-Jones

Turner

et al. 2007

Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the Health Belief Model (HBM, Rosenstock 1974) informed the interventions developed in a number of studies (e.g. Sawyer et al 2002;Watt et al, 2007;Donohue et al 1998;and McKay et al 1996a). The HBM proposes that health behavior depends on both an individual's perceptions of his/her vulnerability to an illness and his/her judgment of the perceived potential risk, barriers, or effectiveness of treatment (Elder et al 1999).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, small effect sizes reveal that both interventions were not related to the perhaps more important ongoing use of services. Donohue et al (1998) compared two attendance interventions (Parent-focused attendance intervention vs. Intensive parent and youth attendance intervention) in a population of adolescents who were dually diagnosed with conduct disorder and substance abuse.…”

Section: Family Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Engagement in Mental Health Treatment Among Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review

Kim

Munson

McKay

2012

Child Adolesc Soc Work J

119

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study is to review empirical evidence of the effects of interventions designed to improve engagement in mental health services among adolescents, young adults and their families. Investigators searched relevant databases, prior reviews, and conducted hand searches for intervention studies that met the following criteria: (1) examined engagement in mental health services; (2) included a comparison condition; and (3) focused on adolescents and/or young adults. Effect sizes for all reported outcomes were calculated. Thirteen studies met inclusion criteria. Conceptualizations of engagement and measurement approaches varied throughout studies. Approaches to improving engagement varied in effectiveness based on level of intervention. Individual level approaches improved attendance during the initial stage of treatment. While family level engagement interventions increased initial attendance rates, the impact did not extend to the ongoing use of services, whereas service delivery level interventions were more effective at improving ongoing engagement. The review illuminated that engagement interventions framed in an ecological model may be most effective at facilitating engagement. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

show abstract

“…Housing assistance, case management, regular phone contact, motivational interviewing and parental involvement for youth cases all decrease waiting list attrition. 2,20,21 In contrast, research also suggests that too many demands or requirements of patients during the waiting period is a deterrent for waiting. 8 In a pre-treatment survey, 16% of patients indicated that "I will have to go through too many steps to get into treatment" was a large barrier to entering treatment, along with the fact that they would have to be on a waiting list in the first place (34.3%).…”

Section: Why Patience Is Not Enoughmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When patients are called by the facility every week, they are 30-40% more likely to enter treatment when compared to situations where the patient is responsible for maintaining contact. 21 In a study of 654 patients waiting for publicly funded drug treatment in Washington, D.C., 70% of patients successfully entered treatment when they were regularly contacted by telephone. 2 Donohue 21 suggests that reminder phone calls 2-3 days prior to patient's first appointment also produce 30-40% higher attendance rates when compared with patients who did not receive reminder phone calls.…”

Section: Initiate Weekly Phone Contactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why can’t patients last the wait?

Guitar¹

2017

UWOMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One million people in North America are currently waiting for publicly funded substance use treatment. Unfortunately, long waiting times have been listed as the number one reason for not seeking treatment for substance use problems. While it is possible that successful abstinence during the waiting period convinces patients that they do not need treatment at all, more emphasis must be placed on interventions that can bridge the gap between initial contact by patients for substance use treatment and treatment intake. Recommendations in this review include: (1) decreasing the length of time between a patient's initial contact for treatment and the pre-intake interview, (2) initiating regular phone contact with patients, and (3) decreasing resentful demoralization in patients who are ready for change but who are forced to wait for treatment.

show abstract

Improving Initial Session Attendance of Substance Abusing and Conduct Disordered Adolescents: A Controlled Study

Cited by 48 publications

References 40 publications

Engaging resistant adolescents in drug abuse treatment

Engaging resistant adolescents in drug abuse treatment

Engagement in Mental Health Treatment Among Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review

Why can’t patients last the wait?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About