Campbell Barbara K, Fuller Bret E, Lee Eun Sul, Tillotson Carrie, Woelfel Tiffany, Jenkins Lindsay, Robinson James, Booth Robert E, McCarty Dennis
Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97209, USA.
Psychol Addict Behav. 2009 Jun;23(2):260-70. doi: 10.1037/a0014205.
A multisite, randomized trial within the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) was conducted to test 3 interventions to enhance treatment initiation following detoxification: (a) a single session, therapeutic alliance intervention (TA) added to usual treatment; (b) a 2-session, counseling and education, HIV/HCV risk reduction intervention (C&E), added to usual treatment; and (c) treatment as usual (TAU) only. Injection drug users (n=632) enrolled in residential detoxification at 8 community treatment programs were randomized to 1 of the 3 study conditions. TA participants reported entering outpatient treatment sooner and in greater numbers than TAU participants. Reported treatment entry for C&E fell between TA and TAU with no significant differences between C&E and the other conditions. There were no differences among the interventions in retention, as measured by weeks of outpatient treatment for all participants who reported treatment entry. Alliance building interventions appear to be effective in facilitating transfer from detoxification to outpatient treatment, but additional treatment engagement interventions may be necessary to improve retention.
在美国国家药物滥用治疗临床试验网络（CTN）内进行了一项多地点随机试验，以测试三种干预措施，以提高戒毒后的治疗启动率：（a）在常规治疗基础上增加一次治疗性联盟干预（TA）；（b）在常规治疗基础上增加为期两次的咨询与教育、降低艾滋病毒/丙型肝炎病毒风险干预（C&E）；（c）仅进行常规治疗（TAU）。在8个社区治疗项目中参加住院戒毒的注射吸毒者（n = 632）被随机分配到3种研究条件中的一种。TA组参与者报告称，进入门诊治疗的时间比TAU组参与者更早，人数也更多。C&E组报告的治疗进入情况介于TA组和TAU组之间，C&E组与其他条件之间无显著差异。在留存率方面，各干预措施之间没有差异，留存率通过所有报告进入治疗的参与者的门诊治疗周数来衡量。建立联盟干预措施似乎在促进从戒毒到门诊治疗的过渡方面有效，但可能需要额外的治疗参与干预措施来提高留存率。
