Article

The Cannabis Youth Treatment (CYT) Study: main findings from two randomized trials.

Chestnut Health Systems, Bloomington, IL 61701, USA.
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (Impact Factor: 3.14). 11/2004; 27(3):197-213. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2003.09.005
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This article presents the main outcome findings from two inter-related randomized trials conducted at four sites to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of five short-term outpatient interventions for adolescents with cannabis use disorders. Trial 1 compared five sessions of Motivational Enhancement Therapy plus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (MET/CBT) with a 12-session regimen of MET and CBT (MET/CBT12) and another that included family education and therapy components (Family Support Network [FSN]). Trial II compared the five-session MET/CBT with the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (ACRA) and Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT). The 600 cannabis users were predominately white males, aged 15-16. All five CYT interventions demonstrated significant pre-post treatment during the 12 months after random assignment to a treatment intervention in the two main outcomes: days of abstinence and the percent of adolescents in recovery (no use or abuse/dependence problems and living in the community). Overall, the clinical outcomes were very similar across sites and conditions; however, after controlling for initial severity, the most cost-effective interventions were MET/CBT5 and MET/CBT12 in Trial 1 and ACRA and MET/CBT5 in Trial 2. It is possible that the similar results occurred because outcomes were driven more by general factors beyond the treatment approaches tested in this study; or because of shared, general helping factors across therapies that help these teens attend to and decrease their connection to cannabis and alcohol.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Janet C Titus, Jun 21, 2015
2 Followers
 · 
198 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this article is to examine the effectiveness of 2 theoretically different treatments delivered in juvenile drug court-family therapy represented by multidimensional family therapy (MDFT) and group-based treatment represented by adolescent group therapy (AGT)-on offending and substance use. Intent-to-treat sample included 112 youth enrolled in juvenile drug court (primarily male [88%], and Hispanic [59%] or African American [35%]), average age 16.1 years, randomly assigned to either family therapy (n = 55) or group therapy (n = 57). Participants were assessed at baseline and 6, 12, 18 and 24 months following baseline. During the drug court phase, youth in both treatments showed significant reduction in delinquency (average d = .51), externalizing symptoms (average d = 2.32), rearrests (average d = 1.22), and substance use (average d = 4.42). During the 24-month follow-up, family therapy evidenced greater maintenance of treatment gains than group-based treatment for externalizing symptoms (d = 0.39), commission of serious crimes (d = .38), and felony arrests (d = .96). There was no significant difference between the treatments with respect to substance use or misdemeanor arrests. The results suggest that family therapy enhances juvenile drug court outcomes beyond what can be achieved with a nonfamily based treatment, especially with respect to what is arguably the primary objective of juvenile drug courts: reducing criminal behavior and rearrests. More research is needed on the effectiveness of juvenile drug courts generally and on whether treatment type and family involvement influence outcomes. Trial Registry Name: Clinical Trials.gov, Identified NCT01668303. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
    Journal of Family Psychology 01/2015; 29(2). DOI:10.1037/fam0000053 · 1.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined the relationship between Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA) participation with treatment engagement, retention, and satisfaction, and with substance use and emotional problem outcomes. Participants had substance use disorders (SUD) only or co-occurring substance use and psychiatric problems. Those with co-occurring problems reported more days of substance use and emotional problems at intake to treatment than those with SUD only. All groups received equivalent exposure to A-CRA during treatment implementation. At the 12-month follow-up, adolescents classified as externalizers (n = 468) or those with both externalizing and internalizing problems (n = 674) had significantly greater improvement in their days of abstinence and substance problems relative to adolescents with substance use disorders only (n = 666). Additionally, adolescents reporting symptoms of internalizing (n = 154), externalizing, or both externalizing and internalizing disorders had significantly greater improvements in days of emotional problems relative to adolescents with SUD only. ©
    Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 10/2014; Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 46 (2014) 463–471(46 (2014) 463–471). · 3.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: El objetivo de este estudio era describir la implementación en el Sistema Público de Salud de dos programas basados en la evidencia (PBE) para adolescentes con trastornos por consumo de cannabis, y sus principales resultados. La Aproximación de Reforzamiento Comunitario para Adolescentes (A-CRA) y el Control de Contingencias (MC) fueron elegidos como los programas de intervención más eficaces para esta población. Un total de 26 adolescentes participaron en el estudio (91.7% chicos; edad media = 16.50 años) en dos centros de carácter ambulatorio en España. Se utilizó un diseño cuasi-experimental, donde un grupo recibió A-CRA y el otro A-CRA + MC. La implementación de ambos programas resultó factible, con resultados clínicos positivos. El A-CRA ofreció buenas tasas de retención (81.3%) y abstinencia (68.6%). Los resultados del grupo A-CRA + MC no fueron significativamente mejores que los del A-CRA en retención (100%) o abstinencia (75.5%), aunque el limitado tamaño muestral no permite establecer conclusiones firmes. Los problemas asociados al cannabis y la sintomatología depresiva se redujeron durante el tratamiento. Varias limitaciones nos impiden determinar la eficacia clínica del A-CRA en este estudio. El proceso de traslación de los PBE al contexto clínico presentó múltiples dificultades que deben ser abordadas. Se discuten recomendaciones para futuros intentos de implementación de PBE en estos contextos.
    International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology 09/2014; 14(3). DOI:10.1016/j.ijchp.2014.04.001 · 2.79 Impact Factor