This study examined whether a coping-skills-based treatment for marijuana dependence operated by encouraging the use of coping skills or via other mechanisms. Participants were 450 men and women treated in the multisite Marijuana Treatment Project who were randomly assigned to motivational enhancement therapy plus cognitive-behavioral (MET-CB) treatment, motivational enhancement therapy (MET), or a delayed treatment control group. Marijuana use and coping skills were measured at baseline and at follow-ups through 15 months. Results showed that marijuana outcomes were predicted by treatment type and by coping skills use, but that the coping-skills-oriented MET-CB treatment did not result in greater use of coping skills than did the MET treatment. The results suggest that mechanisms of coping skills treatment may need to be reconceptualized.
"In a study on self-efficacy and illegal substance use, subjects with lower self-efficacy were found to be using substances less often than subjects with high levels of self-efficacy (Bühringer et al., 2001). Many SUD treatments are based on a cognitive-behavioural relapse prevention model, with the goal of enhancing self-efficacy in order to forestall relapse (Litt et al., 2005). Since empirical research findings are not in agreement regarding the importance of self-efficacy, it may be preliminary to emphasize this concept in treatment. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Aim: This study aimed to test whether self-efficacy, interpersonal problems and psychological distress are significantly associated with substance use and if the factors associated with substance use are the same factors that are subject to change in treatment for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs).
Methods: The sample consisted of 346 respondents, sampled from 16 treatment facilities for SUD treatment in Norway.
Results and conclusions: Self-efficacy, interpersonal problems (sum-score and subscales) and psychological distress (sum-scale and subscales) were significantly associated with substance use.
Clinical implications: The results suggest a gap between factors associated with substance use problems and factors that are subject to change in treatment.
Journal of Substance Use 10/2013; 18(5). DOI:10.3109/14659891.2012.685122 · 0.48 Impact Factor
"Young, et al., 2007). Other subtypes of self-efficacy include the ability to avoid relapse (Litt, et al., 2005), coping self-efficacy (Sklar and Turner, 1999) and anticipatory efficacy to deal with relapse crisis situations (Sklar, et al., 1997). Additionally, judgments made generic to all drugs of abuse (Schell, et al., 2005), or a focus on self-efficacy for therapeutic goal attainment (Lozano, et al., 2006) have been described. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There are few valid clinical assessment instruments for cannabis. Self-efficacy, or the ability of users to resist temptation, is a central feature of social cognitive theory. This study outlines the development and validation of the Cannabis Refusal Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (CRSEQ), which measures the situational confidence to refuse cannabis.
One thousand two hundred and forty-six patients referred for cannabis assessment completed the CRSEQ including measures of cannabis consumption and dependence severity (Severity of Dependence Scale-Cannabis, SDS-C). The CRSEQ was subject to independent exploratory (n=621, mean age 26.88, 78.6% male) and confirmatory (n=625, mean age 27.51, 76.8% male) factor analysis.
Three factors: Emotional Relief, Opportunistic and Social Facilitation were identified. They provided a good statistical and conceptual fit for the data. Emotional Relief cannabis refusal self-efficacy was identified as most predictive of cannabis dependence, after controlling for cannabis consumption.
The CRSEQ is recommended as a psychometrically sound and clinically useful measure for cannabis misuse treatment planning and assessment.
Drug and alcohol dependence 03/2012; 125(3):244-51. DOI:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.02.018 · 3.42 Impact Factor
"Unexpectedly, frequent engagement in motivational enhancement techniques was associated with a greater chance of failing to quit. This finding is at odds with research that has found brief motivational interventions can produce positive outcomes among treatment seekers . Examination of the component scores suggests that individuals who relied upon motivational strategies may have done so to the detriment of using stimulus removal and coping techniques. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In order to improve treatments for cannabis use disorder, a better understanding of factors associated with successful quitting is required.
This study examined differences between successful (n=87) and unsuccessful (n=78) cannabis quitters. Participants completed a questionnaire addressing demographic, mental health, and cannabis-related variables, as well as quitting strategies during their most recent quit attempt.
Eighteen strategies derived from cognitive behavioral therapy were entered into a principal components analysis. The analysis yielded four components, representing (1) Stimulus Removal, (2) Motivation Enhancement, (3) (lack of) Distraction, and (4) (lack of) Coping. Between groups comparisons showed that unsuccessful quitters scored significantly higher on Motivation Enhancement and (lack of) Coping. This may indicate that unsuccessful quitters focus on the desire to quit, but do not sufficiently plan strategies for coping. Unsuccessful quitters also had significantly more symptoms of depression and stress; less education; lower exposure to formal treatment; higher day-to-day exposure to other cannabis users; and higher cannabis dependence scores.
The findings suggest that coping, environmental modification, and co-morbid mental health problems may be important factors to emphasize in treatments for cannabis use disorder.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.