Article

The first decade of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network: bridging the gap between research and practice to improve drug abuse treatment.

Center for the Clinical Trials Network, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD 20892, USA.
Journal of substance abuse treatment (Impact Factor: 2.9). 06/2010; 38 Suppl 1:S4-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2010.01.011
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The National Institute on Drug Abuse established the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) in 1999 to improve the quality of addiction treatment using science as the vehicle. The network brings providers from community-based drug abuse treatment programs and scientists from university-based research centers together in an alliance that fosters bidirectional communication and collaboration. Collaboration enhanced the relevance of research to practice and facilitated the development and implementation of evidence-based treatments in community practice settings. The CTN's 20 completed trials tested pharmacological, behavioral, and integrated treatment interventions for adolescents and adults; more than 11,000 individuals participated in the trials. This article reviews the rationale for the CTN, describes the translation of its guiding principles into research endeavors, and anticipates the future evolution of clinical research within the Network.

Full-text

Available from: Dennis Mccarty, Apr 17, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
89 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the treatment of addictions, the gap between the availability of evidence-based therapies and their limited implementation in practice has not yet been bridged. Two empirically validated behavioral therapies, contingency management (CM) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), exemplify this challenge. Both have a relatively strong level of empirical support but each has weak and uneven adoption in clinical practice. This review highlights examples of how barriers to their implementation in practice have been addressed systematically, using the Stage Model of Behavioral Therapies Development as an organizing framework. For CM, barriers such as cost and ideology have been addressed through the development of lower-cost and other adaptations to make it more community friendly. For CBT, barriers such as relative complexity, lack of trained providers, and need for supervision have been addressed via conversion to standardized computer-assisted versions that can serve as clinician extenders. Although these and other modifications have rendered both interventions more disseminable, diffusion of innovation remains a complex, often unpredictable process. The existing specialty addiction-treatment system may require significant reforms to fully implement CBT and CM, particularly greater focus on definable treatment goals and performance-based outcomes.
    Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 09/2014; 1327. DOI:10.1111/nyas.12501 · 4.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment fidelity and the stage model.
    Clinical Psychology Science and Practice 03/2013; 20(1). DOI:10.1111/cpsp.12025 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Drawing on diffusion theory to further knowledge about evidence-based practices (EBPs) in the treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs), this study describes the perceived importance of innovation attributes in adoption decisions within a national sample of SUD treatment organizations. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with leaders of 307 organizations. A typology differentiated organizations reporting: (1) adoption of a treatment innovation in the past year (“recent adoption”), (2) plans to adopt an innovation in the upcoming year (“planned adoption”), or (3) no actual or planned adoption (“non-adoption”). About 30.7% of organizations reported recent adoption, 20.5% indicated planned adoption, and 48.8% were non-adopters. Leaders of organizations reporting recent adoption (n = 93) or planned adoption (n = 62) rated the importance of innovation attributes, including relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, and observability, on these adoption decisions using a Likert scale that ranged from 0 to 5. Innovation attributes most strongly endorsed were consistency with the program’s treatment philosophy (mean = 4.47, SD = 1.03), improvement in the program’s reputation with referral sources (mean = 4.00, SD = 1.33), reputational improvement with clients and their families (mean = 3.98, SD = 1.31), and reductions in treatment dropout (mean = 3.75, SD = 1.54). Innovation characteristics reflecting organizational growth and implementation costs were less strongly endorsed. Adopters and planners were generally similar in their importance ratings. There were modest differences in importance ratings when pharmacological innovations were compared to psychosocial interventions. These findings are consistent with diffusion theory and suggest that efforts to link EBPs with client satisfaction and potential reputational benefits may enhance the diffusion of EBPs. Attention to these attributes when developing and evaluating SUD treatment interventions may enhance efforts to increase subsequent adoption.
    Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 08/2014; 49. DOI:10.1016/j.jsat.2014.08.003 · 3.14 Impact Factor