Alcohol Research Group, Public Health Institute, 6001 Shellmound Street, Suite 450, Emeryville, CA 94608, USA.
Alcohol Research Group, Public Health Institute, 6001 Shellmound Street, Suite 450, Emeryville, CA 94608, USA; Behavioral Health and Recovery Studies, Public Health Institute, 936 Dewing Avenue, Suite C, Lafayette, CA 94549, USA.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019 Jul 1;200:124-132. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.03.017. Epub 2019 May 15.
This secondary analysis uses data from a recent clinical trial conducted with probationers and parolees with substance use disorders (N = 330) residing in Sober Living Houses (SLHs). The treatment condition received Motivational Interviewing Case Management (MICM), while controls received usual care SLH residency. Both conditions improved on multiple domains, though residents randomized to MICM improved significantly more than usual care controls on criminal justice outcomes. Because MICM is designed to help ex-offenders attain more recovery capital (RC) in multiple domains, we hypothesized MICM participants that already possessed higher RC would show significantly greater improvement at follow-up than usual SLH residents with higher RC. Moreover, MICM and usual SLH residents with low RC would show no differences at 1-year follow-up.
A latent class analysis (LCA) grouped participants into two patterns of RC: those with low RC and those with high RC. These classes were interacted with study condition to predict change on six Addiction Severity Indices (ASI) at follow-up.
MICM was more effective for the higher RC class, with greater improvement in drug, legal, and psychiatric outcomes for those who attended at least three MICM sessions. MICM was no more beneficial than usual care for those in a low RC class.
SLH operators should consider implementation of MICM for residents with more RC resources. Those with fewer recovery resources, such as a history of psychiatric problems or physical/sexual abuse, would benefit from a more intensive intervention to assist them with improving the amount and quality of their RC.
本二次分析使用了最近一项针对有物质使用障碍的缓刑犯和假释犯(N=330)进行的临床试验数据,这些人居住在戒酒互助宿舍(SLH)中。治疗组接受动机访谈案例管理(MICM),而对照组接受常规 SLH 住宿。两种情况都在多个领域得到改善,尽管接受 MICM 的居民在刑事司法结果方面的改善明显优于常规护理对照组。因为 MICM 旨在帮助前罪犯在多个领域获得更多的恢复资本(RC),我们假设已经拥有更高 RC 的 MICM 参与者在随访时会比具有更高 RC 的常规 SLH 居民表现出更显著的改善。此外,MICM 和 RC 较低的常规 SLH 居民在 1 年随访时不会出现差异。
潜在类别分析(LCA)将参与者分为两类 RC:低 RC 和高 RC。这些类别与研究条件相互作用,以预测在随访时六个成瘾严重程度指数(ASI)的变化。
MICM 对更高 RC 类别更有效,对于参加至少三次 MICM 会议的参与者,在药物、法律和精神科方面的改善更大。对于 RC 较低的类别,MICM 并不比常规护理更有益。
SLH 经营者应考虑为 RC 资源较多的居民实施 MICM。那些资源较少的人,如精神病史或身体/性虐待史,将受益于更强化的干预措施,以帮助他们提高 RC 的数量和质量。