Treatment for Drug Abuse

Implications of family and peer relations for treatment engagement and follow-up outcomes: An integrative model.

“…The model demonstrated that higher levels of engagement were associated with less deviance at follow-up. The importance of engagement in predicting treatment success is consistent with previous studies (e.g., Simpson, 1981; Simpson & Sells, 1982). In addition, the model confirmed that perceived peer deviance and perceived family dysfunction were not directly associated with either engagement or deviance.…”

The Continuing Care Model of Substance Use Treatment: What Works, and When Is “Enough,” “Enough?”

“…Results also indicated that nearly three-fourths of the physicians followed were still licensed and resumed practice under supervision and monitoring with no indications of substance use or malpractice 5 to 7 years after signing their contract. Comparable findings have also been observed in previous research with physicians treated within the PHP framework (e.g., [27, 28, 67]); although these studies included smaller sample sizes and/or shorter follow-up intervals.…”

Treatment retention and follow-up outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS).

“…In OMT, half of all clients stayed 365 days or more (and median stays ranged from 117 to 583 days among individual programs). Thus, the median splits for client retention in all three modalities were virtually identical to the minimum length of treatment participation found in previous national studies to be associated with significant improvements in follow-up outcomes, that is, 3 months in therapeutic community and ODF programs and 1 year in OMT (see Condelli & Hubbard, 1994; Hubbard et al, 1989; Simpson, 1979, 1981). The combination of these findings on distributions of average treatment duration and evidence from previous studies on their clinical effectiveness resulted in retention thresholds being set at 90 days for LTR and ODF and 360 days for OMT.…”