Four Models of Telephone Support for Stimulant Recovery

This study has been completed.

Sponsor:

Collaborator:

National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

Information provided by (Responsible Party):

David Farabee, University of California, Los Angeles

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:

NCT00744068

First received: August 28, 2008

Last updated: May 3, 2013

Last verified: May 2013

History of Changes

Purpose

The overall objective of this research is to develop and refine empirically supported continuing care interventions that promote healthy behavior and sustained abstinence from illicit drug use.

Condition	Intervention
Drug Addiction	Behavioral: Continuing Care Telephone Support

Study Type:	Interventional
Study Design:	Allocation: Randomized Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment Masking: Single Blind (Outcomes Assessor) Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
Official Title:	Four Models of Telephone Support for Stimulant Recovery

Further study details as provided by University of California, Los Angeles:

Primary Outcome Measures:

Urinalyses [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Breathalyzer tests [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Self-report of drug or alcohol use [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Amount of Treatment Activities [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Length of Treatment Episode [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

Secondary Outcome Measures:

Addiction Severity Index (ASI) [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
HIV Risk-taking Behavior Scale [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Concurrent Psychosocial Treatments [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Drug Avoidance Activities (DAA) Survey [ Time Frame: At 3 months and 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

Enrollment:	302
Study Start Date:	April 2006
Study Completion Date:	September 2011
Primary Completion Date:	September 2010 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

Arms	Assigned Interventions
Experimental: 1 Structured Directive Telephone Support Calls	Behavioral: Continuing Care Telephone Support Counselor-provided telephone support as strategies to promote patient aftercare attendance and sustained abstinence from stimulant use. To this end, we will develop and compare the efficacy of four low-cost telephone support protocols for patients who have completed the intensive phase of a structured, outpatient stimulant abuse treatment program.
Experimental: 2 Structured Non-Directive Telephone Continuing Care Support	Behavioral: Continuing Care Telephone Support Counselor-provided telephone support as strategies to promote patient aftercare attendance and sustained abstinence from stimulant use. To this end, we will develop and compare the efficacy of four low-cost telephone support protocols for patients who have completed the intensive phase of a structured, outpatient stimulant abuse treatment program.
Experimental: 3 Unstructured Directive Telephone Support	Behavioral: Continuing Care Telephone Support Counselor-provided telephone support as strategies to promote patient aftercare attendance and sustained abstinence from stimulant use. To this end, we will develop and compare the efficacy of four low-cost telephone support protocols for patients who have completed the intensive phase of a structured, outpatient stimulant abuse treatment program.
Experimental: 4 Unstructured Non-Directive Telephone Support	Behavioral: Continuing Care Telephone Support Counselor-provided telephone support as strategies to promote patient aftercare attendance and sustained abstinence from stimulant use. To this end, we will develop and compare the efficacy of four low-cost telephone support protocols for patients who have completed the intensive phase of a structured, outpatient stimulant abuse treatment program.
No Intervention: 5

Detailed Description:

For treatment interventions to provide the desired result of long term abstinence, it is important to develop strategies to enhance the effectiveness of continued care approaches. We plan to conduct a prospective, randomized comparison of four models of counselor-provided telephone support as strategies to promote patient aftercare attendance and sustained abstinence from stimulant use. To this end, we will develop and compare the efficacy of four low-cost telephone support protocols for patients who have completed the intensive phase of a structured, outpatient stimulant abuse treatment program. Some 500 participants completing a 4-month Matrix Outpatient Model of stimulant abuse treatment will be randomly assigned to one of four counseling groups (n=100 per group): (1) unstructured/non-directive, (2) structured/non-directive, (3) unstructured/directive, or (4) structured/directive telephone counseling, or (5) a control group consisting of standard referral to Matrix aftercare, for a total sample size of 500. The two structured conditions will be based on the behavioral "prompts" identified by Farabee et al. (2002)* as being associated with drug avoidance. In the non-directive conditions, subjects will be allowed to state their own goals and how they intend to achieve them. In the directive conditions, the counselor will provide specific recommendations to help the subject adopt as many of the drug-avoidance activities as possible. Outcomes will be tracked for 12 months following completion of primary treatment (a total of 16 months after treatment admission) and will include measurement of participation in drug-avoidance activities (including aftercare participation) as well as self-reported and objective measures of substance use and related behavior change.

*Farabee, D., Rawson, R.A., & McCann, M. (2002). Adoption of drug avoidance activities among patients in contingency management and cognitive-behavioral treatments. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 23, 343-350.

Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study:	18 Years to 65 Years
Genders Eligible for Study:	Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:	No

Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

Males or females, 18-65 years of age.
Meet DSM-IV criteria (at the time of treatment admission) for cocaine or methamphetamine abuse/dependence.
Have completed the primary phase of treatment at a Matrix outpatient clinic.
Have telephone access throughout the study procedures.
Be able to understand and complete rating scales and to follow instructions.
Be willing to sign an informed consent form.

Exclusion Criteria:

Have participated in a treatment-related study conducted by the PI and colleagues during the previous 3 years and/or is currently enrolled in a treatment-related study.
Have any medical, legal, housing or transportation problem which would preclude either safe or consistent participation.
Have dropped out of the primary phase of treatment prior to completion.

Contacts and Locations

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00744068

Locations

United States, California
Twin Town Treatment Center
Los Alamitos, California, United States, 90720
UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs
Los Angeles, California, United States, 90025
Matrix Institute on Addictions
Los Angeles, California, United States, 90025
Matrix Institute on Addictions
Rancho Cucamonga, California, United States, 91730
Twin Town Treatment Center
West Hollywood, California, United States, 90069
Matrix Institute on Addicitions
Woodland Hills, California, United States, 91364

Sponsors and Collaborators

University of California, Los Angeles

National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

Investigators

Principal Investigator:

David Farabee, Ph.D.

UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs

More Information

Additional Information:

Related Info This link exits the ClinicalTrials.gov site

Publications:

Ahles TA, Schlundt DG, Prue DM, Rychtarik RG. Impact of aftercare arrangements on the maintenance of treatment success in abusive drinkers. Addict Behav. 1983;8(1):53-8.

Allen K. Barriers to treatment for addicted African-American women. J Natl Med Assoc. 1995 Oct;87(10):751-6.

Ashery RS, Carlson RG, Falck RS, Siegal HA. Injection drug users, crack-cocaine users, and human services utilization: an exploratory study. Soc Work. 1995 Jan;40(1):75-82.

Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986 Dec;51(6):1173-82.

Battjes RJ, Onken LS, Delany PJ. Drug abuse treatment entry and engagement: report of a meeting on treatment readiness. J Clin Psychol. 1999 May;55(5):643-57.

Brown BS, O'Grady KE, Battjes RJ, Farrell EE, Smith NP, Nurco DN. Effectiveness of a stand-alone aftercare program for drug-involved offenders. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2001 Dec;21(4):185-92.

Burton P, Gurrin L, Sly P. Extending the simple linear regression model to account for correlated responses: an introduction to generalized estimating equations and multi-level mixed modelling. Stat Med. 1998 Jun 15;17(11):1261-91.

De Leon G, Melnick G, Kressel D, Jainchill N. Circumstances, motivation, readiness, and suitability (the CMRS scales): predicting retention in therapeutic community treatment. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 1994 Nov;20(4):495-515.

De Leon G, Melnick G, Thomas G, Kressel D, Wexler HK. Motivation for treatment in a prison-based therapeutic community. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2000 Feb;26(1):33-46.

Dees SM, Dansereau DF, Peel JL, Boatler JG, Knight K. Using conceptual matrices, knowledge maps, and scripted cooperation to improve personal management strategies. J Drug Educ. 1991;21(3):211-30.

Diez-Roux AV. Multilevel analysis in public health research. Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:171-92. Review.

Farabee D, Rawson R, McCann M. Adoption of drug avoidance activities among patients in contingency management and cognitive-behavioral treatments. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2002 Dec;23(4):343-50.

Fischer B, Chin AT, Kuo I, Kirst M, Vlahov D. Canadian illicit opiate users' views on methadone and other opiate prescription treatment: an exploratory qualitative study. Subst Use Misuse. 2002 Mar;37(4):495-522.

Fitzgerald JL, Mulford HA. An experimental test of telephone aftercare contacts with alcoholics. J Stud Alcohol. 1985 Sep;46(5):418-24.

Fortney JC, Booth BM, Blow FC, Bunn JY. The effects of travel barriers and age on the utilization of alcoholism treatment aftercare. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 1995 Aug;21(3):391-406.

Haynes RB, McDonald HP, Garg AX. Helping patients follow prescribed treatment: clinical applications. JAMA. 2002 Dec 11;288(22):2880-3.

Huber A, Ling W, Shoptaw S, Gulati V, Brethen P, Rawson R. Integrating treatments for methamphetamine abuse: a psychosocial perspective. J Addict Dis. 1997;16(4):41-50.

Hunt WA, Barnett LW, Branch LG. Relapse rates in addiction programs. J Clin Psychol. 1971 Oct;27(4):455-6. No abstract available.

Hser YI, Anglin D, Powers K. A 24-year follow-up of California narcotics addicts. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1993 Jul;50(7):577-84.

Hser YI, Hoffman V, Grella CE, Anglin MD. A 33-year follow-up of narcotics addicts. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001 May;58(5):503-8.

Iguchi MY, Belding MA, Morral AR, Lamb RJ, Husband SD. Reinforcing operants other than abstinence in drug abuse treatment: an effective alternative for reducing drug use. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1997 Jun;65(3):421-8.

Intagliata J. A telephone follow-up procedure for increasing the effectiveness of a treatment program for alcoholics. J Stud Alcohol. 1976 Sep;37(9):1330-5.

Karno MP, Beutler LE, Harwood TM. Interactions between psychotherapy procedures and patient attributes that predict alcohol treatment effectiveness: a preliminary report. Addict Behav. 2002 Sep-Oct;27(5):779-97.

Koumans AJ, Muller JJ, Miller CF. Use of telephone calls to increase motivation for treatment in alcoholics. Psychol Rep. 1967 Aug;21(1):327-8. No abstract available.

Lash SJ, Blosser SL. Increasing adherence to substance abuse aftercare group therapy. J Subst Abuse Treat. 1999 Jan;16(1):55-60.

Lash SJ, Dillard W. Encouraging participation in aftercare group therapy among substance-dependent men. Psychol Rep. 1996 Oct;79(2):585-6.

Lovejoy M, Rosenblum A, Magura S, Foote J, Handelsman L, Stimmel B. Patients' perspective on the process of change in substance abuse treatment. J Subst Abuse Treat. 1995 Jul-Aug;12(4):269-82.

MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Hoffman JM, West SG, Sheets V. A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychol Methods. 2002 Mar;7(1):83-104.

McDonald HP, Garg AX, Haynes RB. Interventions to enhance patient adherence to medication prescriptions: scientific review. JAMA. 2002 Dec 11;288(22):2868-79. Review. Erratum in: JAMA. 2003 Jun 25;289(24):3242.

McKay JR. Effectiveness of continuing care interventions for substance abusers. Implications for the study of long-term treatment effects. Eval Rev. 2001 Apr;25(2):211-32. Review.

McKay JR, McLellan AT, Alterman AI, Cacciola JS, Rutherford MJ, O'Brien CP. Predictors of participation in aftercare sessions and self-help groups following completion of intensive outpatient treatment for substance abuse. J Stud Alcohol. 1998 Mar;59(2):152-62.

Pan W. Sample size and power calculations with correlated binary data. Control Clin Trials. 2001 Jun;22(3):211-27.

Peterson KA, Swindle RW, Phibbs CS, Recine B, Moos RH. Determinants of readmission following inpatient substance abuse treatment: a national study of VA programs. Med Care. 1994 Jun;32(6):535-50.

Ouimette PC, Moos RH, Finney JW. Influence of outpatient treatment and 12-step group involvement on one-year substance abuse treatment outcomes. J Stud Alcohol. 1998 Sep;59(5):513-22.

Rawson RA, Shoptaw SJ, Obert JL, McCann MJ, Hasson AL, Marinelli-Casey PJ, Brethen PR, Ling W. An intensive outpatient approach for cocaine abuse treatment. The Matrix model. J Subst Abuse Treat. 1995 Mar-Apr;12(2):117-27.

Rawson, Richard, A. and The Methamphetamine Treatment Project Corporate Authors (In press). A multi-site comparison of psychosocial approaches for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence. American Journal of Psychiatry.

Rawson RA, Obert JL, McCann MJ, Ling W. Neurobehavioral treatment for cocaine dependency: a preliminary evaluation. NIDA Res Monogr. 1993;135:92-115. Review.

Richter KP, Bammer G. A hierarchy of strategies heroin-using mothers employ to reduce harm to their children. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2000 Dec;19(4):403-13.

Rochon J. Application of GEE procedures for sample size calculations in repeated measures experiments. Stat Med. 1998 Jul 30;17(14):1643-58.

Shoptaw S, Rawson RA, McCann MJ, Obert JL. The Matrix model of outpatient stimulant abuse treatment: evidence of efficacy. J Addict Dis. 1994;13(4):129-41.

Shrout PE, Bolger N. Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. Psychol Methods. 2002 Dec;7(4):422-45.

Silverman K, Higgins ST, Brooner RK, Montoya ID, Cone EJ, Schuster CR, Preston KL. Sustained cocaine abstinence in methadone maintenance patients through voucher-based reinforcement therapy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1996 May;53(5):409-15.

Sobell LC, Maisto SA, Sobell MB, Cooper AM. Reliability of alcohol abusers' self-reports of drinking behavior. Behav Res Ther. 1979;17(2):157-60. No abstract available.

Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Gibbon M, First MB. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID). I: History, rationale, and description. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1992 Aug;49(8):624-9.

Stahler GJ, Cohen E. Using ethnographic methodology in substance abuse treatment outcome research. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2000 Jan;18(1):1-8.

Stout RL, Wirtz PW, Carbonari JP, Del Boca FK. Ensuring balanced distribution of prognostic factors in treatment outcome research. J Stud Alcohol Suppl. 1994 Dec;12:70-5.

Responsible Party:	David Farabee, Professor, University of California, Los Angeles
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:	NCT00744068 History of Changes
Other Study ID Numbers:	R01 DA18208-01A1, R01DA018208
Study First Received:	August 28, 2008
Last Updated:	May 3, 2013
Health Authority:	United States: Federal Government

Keywords provided by University of California, Los Angeles:

Stimulant
Drug treatment
Continuing care
Telephone support
Aftercare

Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Substance-Related Disorders
Behavior, Addictive
Mental Disorders
Compulsive Behavior
Impulsive Behavior

Central Nervous System Stimulants
Physiological Effects of Drugs
Pharmacologic Actions
Central Nervous System Agents
Therapeutic Uses

ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on May 16, 2013

To Top