Treatment Guidelines for Substance Use Disorders and Serious Mental Illnesses: Do They Address Co-Occurring Disorders?

University of Michigan, School of Social Work, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Substance Use &amp Misuse (Impact Factor: 1.23). 06/2010; 45(7-8):1262-78. DOI: 10.3109/10826080903442836
Source: PubMed


Practice guidelines are important tools for improving the delivery of evidence-based practices and reducing inappropriate variation in current treatment approaches. This study examined the degree to which guidelines targeted to the treatment of substance use disorders or serious mental illness address treatment of co-occurring disorders. Guidelines archived by the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) were retrieved in December 2007 and content analyzed. Nineteen pertinent guidelines were identified, and 11 included recommendations regarding the assessment and/or treatment of co-occurring disorders. None of the guidelines making recommendations for treatment of co-occurring disorders included outcomes that clearly targeted both substance use and mental health disorders. Limitations and implications of this study are noted.

Download full-text


Available from: Michael G Vaughn,
26 Reads
  • Source
    • "The evidence was summarized and categorized to refl ect its susceptibility to bias (Shekelle et al. 1999). In addition, a number of national and international guidelines were reviewed (Lingford- Huhges et al. 2004; van den Brink and Haasen 2006, Connock et al. 2007; Kleber et al. 2007; NHS NICE Clinical Guidelines Nos 51, 52, NICE 2007a,b; Meili et al. 2008; Chou et al. 2009; Fareed et al. 2010; Nicholis et al. 2010; Perron et al. 2010). To achieve uniform and – in the opinion of the Task Force – appropriate ranking of evidence, we adopted the same hierarchy of evidence-based rigor and level of recommendation as was recently "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To develop evidence-based practice guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of opioid abuse and dependence. An international task force of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) developed these practice guidelines after a systematic review of the available evidence pertaining to the treatment of opioid dependence. On the basis of the evidence, the Task Force reached a consensus on practice recommendations, which are intended to be clinically and scientifically meaningful for physicians who treat adults with opioid dependence. The data used to develop these guidelines were extracted primarily from national treatment guidelines for opioid use disorders, as well as from meta-analyses, reviews, and publications of randomized clinical trials on the efficacy of pharmacological and other biological treatments for these disorders. Publications were identified by searching the MEDLINE database and the Cochrane Library. The literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for efficacy, which was categorized into one of six levels (A-F). There is an excellent evidence base supporting the efficacy of methadone and buprenorphine or the combination of buprenorphine and naloxone for the treatment of opioid withdrawal, with clonidine and lofexidine as secondary or adjunctive medications. Opioid maintenance with methadone and buprenorphine is the best-studied and most effective treatment for opioid dependence, with heroin and naltrexone as second-line medications. There is enough high quality data to formulate evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of opioid abuse and dependence. This task force report provides evidence for the efficacy of a number of medications to treat opioid abuse and dependence, particularly the opioid agonists methadone or buprenorphine. These medications have great relevance for clinical practice.
    The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry 04/2011; 12(3):160-87. DOI:10.3109/15622975.2011.561872 · 4.18 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Colleges with or without recovery programs can benefit from having students organize groups to promote recovery. These student-run groups build awareness of recovery-related issues, reduce stigma of recovery on campus, and encourage university administrators to increase support of this unique population (Perron et al., 2010). Participation in these groups motivates and prepares future professionals for working within a team (Anderson & Lennox, 2009). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the significant attention that drugs and alcohol receive on college campuses, few resources and supports are available to students who are recovering from an addiction. Student affairs professionals are uniquely positioned to support these students with a variety of strategies. This article summarizes what is currently known about college students in recovery and ways that student affairs professionals can help build an infrastructure of formal and informal supports for this underserved and at-risk student population.
    Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 01/2011; 48(1):47-64. DOI:10.2202/1949-6605.622
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To address fragmentation, social workers are encouraged to "coordinate." This pilot study explores the meaning of, and factors that facilitate or prevent "coordination" and is intended as a first step toward future conceptual refinement, theory development, and system interventions. Using data from treatment guidelines archived by the National Guideline Clearinghouse (n=9) and semi-structured interviews with social workers (n=4), themes related to the definition, indicators, and perceptions of coordination were explored using a grounded theory approach. Data suggest the need for coordination is driven by complex client needs, but the quality of providers' personal relationships influence coordination. Future research might examine the impact of standardization of roles, referral procedures, and treatment philosophies.
    Journal of Social Service Research 10/2010; 36(5):385-401. DOI:10.1080/01488376.2010.510931 · 0.44 Impact Factor
Show more