Natural Recovery from Alcohol and Drug Problems: A Methodological Review of the Literature from 1999 through 2005

Crespo, José Luís Carballo; Fernández-Hermida, José Ramón; Villa, Roberto Secades; Sobell, Linda C.; Dum, Mariam; García–Rodríguez, Olaya

doi:10.1007/978-0-387-71287-1_5

Cited by 39 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most natural recovery studies to date have focused on recovery from alcohol dependence, followed by heroin dependence, but other addictive disorders have also been studied (Carballo et al, 2007;Sobell, Ellingstad, & Sobell, 2000).…”

Section: Natural Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a comment on the current state-ofthe-art in natural recovery research, Klingemann et al (2010) With respect to cannabis use disorders, very little natural recovery research has been conducted. In the two major systematic reviews of the natural recovery literature that have been conducted thus far (i.e., Carballo et al, 2007;, a total of 8 studies have involved cannabis (i.e., Boyd et al, 2005;Copeland, 1997;Cunningham, 1999;Cunningham, Koski-Jannes, & Toneatto, 1999;Cunningham, 2000;Ellingstad et al, 2006;Koski-Jannes & Turner, 1999;Price, Risk, & Spitznagel, 2001). …”

Section: Natural Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Recovery from cannabis use disorders: Abstinence versus moderation and treatment-assisted recovery versus natural recovery.

Stea

Yakovenko

Hodgins

2015

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recovery process from cannabis use disorders has received little empirical attention. Understanding how and the ways in which individuals with cannabis use disorders recover may help to improve formal treatments and facilitate recovery for those who wish to not seek treatment. The present study was undertaken with two primary objectives in mind. The first primary objective was to provide an exploratory portrait of the recovery process from cannabis use disorders from the perspective of individuals who have recovered. The second primary objective was to explore and systematically describe the similarities and differences between abstinence-and moderation-oriented recoveries, as well as the similarities and differences between treatment-assisted and natural recoveries. The methodology was largely borrowed from the natural recovery literature insofar as recovery was first inferred via the remission of diagnostic symptoms, and then explored predominantly via several interview domains (e.g., reasons for resolution, actions taken to recover, maintenance factors, barriers to treatment seeking).Several interesting and important findings emerged at the level of the total sample (N = 119), as well as at the level of group comparisons between the different recovery pathways. Notably, the findings lend further support to the effectiveness of cognitive, motivational, and behavioural strategies as helpful actions and maintenance factors

show abstract

Section: Natural Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Natural Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery from cannabis use disorders: Abstinence versus moderation and treatment-assisted recovery versus natural recovery.

Stea

Yakovenko

Hodgins

2015

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such individuals, often referred to as 'problem drinkers', view themselves neither as fitting the stereotypes of inveterate 'alcoholics' [7] nor as candidates for the 12-Step treatment offered in most conventional alcohol programs. In fact, there is evidence that the orientation of traditional alcohol treatment programs has been the rationale for many not severely dependent drinkers not seeking treatment or delaying treatment entry [6,8]. In this regard, it is also important to recognize that we currently have no idea how many people might seek treatment or enter treatment earlier if alternative treatment goals such as low-risk drinking and harm reduction were promoted in treatment and supported in the community.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

It is time for low‐risk drinking goals to come out of the closet

Sobell¹,

Sobell²

2011

Addiction

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is time for low-risk drinking goals to come out of the closeta dd_3509 1715..1717 Recovery from alcohol problems includes low-risk drinking outcomes, especially for those not severely dependent. We suggest the failure by alcohol counselors in the United States to offer low-risk drinking goals is due to their being trained through an apprenticeship model rather than an evidence-based academic model, as used to train other health professionals.When we were invited to write an editorial on the topic 'Should we still be aiming for abstinence only', we found it ironic that this topic is still an issue for the field. Sixteen years ago, in an invited editorial for this journal, we summarized the literature on low-risk drinking as a route to recovery from alcohol problems [1]. That editorial had three main conclusions: The journal published eight commentaries responding to our editorial, and while there was some debate about whether low-risk drinking should be a goal of treatment [2], there was broad recognition that lowrisk drinking outcomes are an important element of a public health approach to reducing alcohol problems [3]. Furthermore, none of the commentaries took exception to our main three conclusions.Since the publication of that editorial, the evidence base has strengthened further. Empirically sound epidemiological studies in both the United States [4] and Canada [5] have demonstrated that when one considers the full spectrum of alcohol disorders and includes people who were not in treatment (i.e. self-change recoveries) low-risk drinking outcomes occur and are common. Considering the full spectrum of people with alcohol problems is important, because as far back as the 1970s, epidemiological studies revealed that there was a large population of individuals whose alcohol problems were not severe. For example, the Institute of Medicine in the United States estimated that the ratio of not severely dependent drinkers to severely dependent was about four to one [6]. More recently, results from the National Epidemiologic Study on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) suggest that over the long term low-risk drinking outcomes are as prevalent as abstinence outcomes, and that such outcomes are more prevalent among individuals whose alcohol problems are less severe [4].Despite decades of mounting scientific evidence showing that low-risk drinking outcomes occur and are common, low-risk drinking is still a closet treatment goal, at least in the United States, the reason is that clinicians largely ignore the evidence. In the remainder of this editorial, we discuss why this state of affairs continues and why low-risk drinking should be offered as a treatment goal by health and mental health professionals and by alcohol treatment programs.While there are several important benefits to recognizing low-risk drinking as a legitimate treatment goal, the most important is that it would lead to targeted efforts to impact individuals whose alcohol problems are not severe and who are not physiologically dependent on alco...

show abstract

“…Este bajo porcentaje de bebedores problemáticos que recibe tratamiento parece estar asociado a diferentes barreras como la ausencia de conciencia de enfermedad o problemas asociados o la resistencia al cambio (Dols et al, 2007;Wells, Horwood, & Fergusson, 2007 (Carballo et al, 2007;Klingemann & Sobell, 2007;Sobell et al, 2002) . En este sentido, la creencia de que el tratamiento persigue la abstinencia total o el deseo de solucionar los problemas con el alcohol por cuenta propia (Wallhed Finn et al, 2014;Wells et al, 2007) es otra de las principales barreras para el acceso al tratamiento.…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

“…Además, se halló el tamaño del efecto de Cohen para las comparaciones entre grupos, considerando un valor de 0,20 como un tamaño del efecto pequeño, 0,50 medio y 0,80 grande (Cohen, 1988). Además, el hecho de que sea mayor la intención de cambio que la de búsqueda de ayuda podría deberse a que, como señalan estudios previos, el deseo de realizar cambios por cuenta propia, el miedo a ser etiquetados como "alcohólicos", las bajas expectativas sobre la efectividad del tratamiento o la creencia de que la búsqueda del mismo requiere la total abstinencia del consumo de alcohol, el cual no quiere abandonarse de manera definitiva, actúan como barreras en la búsqueda de tratamiento (Carballo et al, 2007;Cunningham, Sobell, Sobell, Agrawal, & Toneatto, 1993;Grant, 1997;Tucker et al, 2004;Wallhed Finn et al, 2014).…”

Section: Análisis De Datosunclassified

Número Completo/Full Number

Rodríguez¹

2015

HAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Natural Recovery from Alcohol and Drug Problems: A Methodological Review of the Literature from 1999 through 2005

Cited by 39 publications

References 26 publications

Recovery from cannabis use disorders: Abstinence versus moderation and treatment-assisted recovery versus natural recovery.

Recovery from cannabis use disorders: Abstinence versus moderation and treatment-assisted recovery versus natural recovery.

It is time for low‐risk drinking goals to come out of the closet

Número Completo/Full Number

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About