Improving linkage with substance abuse treatment using brief case management and motivational interviewing

Center for Interventions, Treatment, and Addictions Research, Wright State University, Boonshoft School of Medicine, 3640 Colonel Glenn Highway, Dayton, OH 45435, USA.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence (Impact Factor: 3.42). 04/2008; 94(1-3):172-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.11.012
Source: PubMed


Poor linkage with substance abuse treatment remains a problem, negating the benefits that can accrue to both substance abusers and the larger society. Numerous behavioral interventions have been tested to determine their potential role in improving linkage.
A randomized clinical trial of 678 substance abusers compared the linkage effect of two brief interventions with the referral standard of care (SOC) at a centralized intake unit (CIU). Interventions included five sessions of strengths-based case management (SBCM) or one session of motivational interviewing (MI). A priori hypotheses predicted that both interventions would be better than the standard of care in predicting linkage and that SBCM would be more effective than MI. We analyzed the effect of the two interventions on overall treatment linkage rates and by treatment modality. Logistic regression analysis examined predictors of treatment linkage for the sample and each group.
Two hypotheses were confirmed in that SBCM (n=222) was effective in improving linkage compared to the SOC (n=230), 55.0% vs. 38.7% (p<.01). SBCM improved linkage more than MI (55.0% vs. 44.7%, p<.05). Motivational interviewing (n=226) was not significantly more effective in improving linkage than the standard of care (44.7% vs. 38.7%; p>.05). The three trial groups differed only slightly on the client characteristics that predicted linkage with treatment.
The results of this study confirm a body of literature that supports the effectiveness of case management in improving linkage with treatment. The role of motivational interviewing in improving linkage was not supported. Results are discussed in the context of other case management and motivational interviewing linkage studies.

Download full-text


Available from: Cristina Redko
  • Source
    • "Brief, strengths-based case management, which is a oneon-one social service intervention designed to reduce the barriers and time to treatment entry and improve overall client functioning, is an evidence-based treatment for adults with addiction-related disorders (Rapp et al., 2008). Effective case management strategies increase the likelihood for adhering to treatment recommendations and receiving appropriate treatment for addiction (Rapp et al., 2008). Case management is client driven (CSAT, 2012), such that the therapist engages in advocacy on behalf of him or her, helps develop resources, and ensures their acquisition, based on identifying barriers to recovery for that specific person. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This qualitative case study explored one client's recovery from borderline personality disorder, trauma, and problem gambling. The client attended 18 months of integrative treatment and was followed for 5 years. The study included 106 data points of both client and therapist data. We identified three phases to treatment. First, alliance formation and normalization appeared as mechanisms, and the client experienced dependence. Second, working alliance and countertransference appeared as mechanisms, and the client experienced reduced gambling and suicidal ideation. Third, external controls and increased opportunity appeared as mechanisms, and "moving into the world" was the client experience. The findings give preliminary support to a phase-based constructivist treatment including trauma assessment to normalize self-feelings, countertransference work to support motivation for restraint, and case management principles to support continuity of change efforts.
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2015 · Qualitative Health Research
  • Source
    • "Thus, the results of this study do not support the positive findings from the previous studies of case management in general (Coviello et al. 2006; Rapp et al. 2008; Siegal et al. 1996; Sorensen et al. 2005) and of strengths-based case management in particular (Hall et al. 1999; Siegal et al. 2002; Strathdee et al. 2006; Vaughan-Sarrazin et al. 2000). It should be noted, however, that earlier studies recruited their participants from a general substance-abusing population (although many clients did have a history of criminal justice involvement). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To test whether strengths-based case management provided during an inmate’s transition from incarceration to the community increases participation in community substance abuse treatment, enhances access to needed social services, and improves drug use, crime, and HIV risk outcomes. Methods In a multi-site trial, inmates (men and women) in four states (n = 812) were randomly assigned (within site) to receive either Transitional Case Management (TCM group), based on strengths-based principles, or standard parole services (SR group). Data were collected at baseline and at 3 and 9 months following release from prison. Analyses compared the two groups with respect to services received and to drug use, crime, and HIV risk behavior outcomes. Results There were no significant differences between parolees in the TCM group and the SR group on outcomes related to participation in drug abuse treatment, receipt of social services, or drug use, crime, and HIV risk behaviors. For specific services (e.g., residential treatment, mental health), although significant differences were found for length of participation or for number of visits, the number of participants in these services was small and the direction of effect was not consistent. Conclusion In contrast to positive findings in earlier studies of strengths-based case management with mental-health and drug-abuse clients, this study found that case management did not improve treatment participation or behavioral outcomes for parolees with drug problems. The discussion includes possible reasons for the findings and suggestions for modifications to the intervention that could be addressed in future research.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2011 · Journal of Experimental Criminology
  • Source
    • "Motivational interviewing (MI) is a non-confrontational process designed to improve willingness to consider behavior change [13]. Although MI has been applied to various areas of health behavior change, including obesity, HIV risk factor modification and eating disorders, the broadest application of this approach has been in the area of addiction [14]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This randomized, controlled study (n = 256) was conducted to compare three interventions designed to promote hepatitis A virus (HAV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination completion, among clients undergoing methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) in Los Angeles and Santa Monica. The participants were randomized into three groups: Motivational Interviewing-Single Session (MI-Single), Motivational Interviewing-Group (MI-Group), or Nurse-Led Hepatitis Health Promotion (HHP). All three treatment groups received the 3-series HAV/HBV vaccine. The MI sessions were provided by trained therapists, the Nurse-Led HHP sessions were delivered by a research nurse. The main outcome variable of interest was improvement in HBV and HCV knowledge, measured by a 6-item HBV and a 7-item HCV knowledge and attitude tool that was administered at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. The study results showed that there was a significant increase in HBV- and HCV-related knowledge across all three groups (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences found with respect to knowledge acquisition among the groups. Irrespective of treatment group, gender (P = 0.008), study site (P < 0.0001) and whether a participant was abused as a child (P = 0.017) were all found to be predictors of HCV knowledge improvement; only recruitment site (P < 0.0001) was found to be a predictor of HBV knowledge. The authors concluded that, although MI-Single, MI-Group and Nurse-Led HHP are all effective in promoting HBV and HCV knowledge acquisition among MMT clients, Nurse-Led HHP may be the method of choice for this population as it may be easier to integrate and with additional investigation may prove to be more cost efficient.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2010 · Journal of Community Health
Show more