Motivational Tools to Improve Probationer Treatment Outcomes

Overview

Journal Contemp Clin Trials

Publisher Elsevier

Date 2015 May 27

PMID 26009023

Citations 11

Authors

Faye S Taxman

Scott T Walters

Lincoln B Sloas

Jennifer Lerch

Mayra Rodriguez

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Motivational interviewing (MI) is a promising practice to increase motivation, treatment retention, and reducing recidivism among offender populations. Computer-delivered interventions have grown in popularity as a way to change behaviors associated with drug and alcohol use.

Methods/design: Motivational Assistance Program to Initiate Treatment (MAPIT) is a three arm, multisite, randomized controlled trial, which examines the impact of Motivational interviewing (MI), a motivational computer program (MC), and supervision as usual (SAU) on addiction treatment initiation, engagement, and retention. Secondary outcomes include drug/alcohol use, probation progress, recidivism (i.e., criminal behavior) and HIV/AIDS testing and treatment among probationers. Participant characteristics are measured at baseline, 2, and 6 months after assignment. The entire study will include 600 offenders, with each site recruiting 300 offenders (Baltimore City, Maryland and Dallas, Texas). All participants will go through standard intake procedures for probation and participate in probation requirements as usual. After standard intake, participants will be recruited and screened for eligibility.

Discussion: The results of this clinical trial will fill a gap in knowledge about ways to motivate probationers to participate in addiction treatment and HIV care. This randomized clinical trial is innovative in the way it examines the use of in-person vs. technological approaches to improve probationer success.

Trial Registration: NCT01891656.

Citing Articles

Use of Digital Health and Digital Therapeutics to Treat SUD in Criminal Justice Settings: a Review.

Sawyer-Morris G, Wilde J, Molfenter T, Taxman F Curr Addict Rep. 2024; 11(1):149-162.

PMID: 39676893 PMC: 11643629. DOI: 10.1007/s40429-023-00523-1.

Use of an mHealth Intervention to Improve Engagement in HIV Community-Based Care Among Persons Recently Released from a Correctional Facility in Washington, DC: A Pilot Study.

Kuo I, Liu T, Patrick R, Trezza C, Bazerman L, Uhrig Castonguay B AIDS Behav. 2019; 23(4):1016-1031.

PMID: 30627850 PMC: 6459706. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-018-02389-1.

Serious mental illness and negative substance use consequences among adults on probation.

Rossheim M, Livingston M, Lerch J, Taxman F, Walters S Health Justice. 2018; 6(1):6.

PMID: 29569076 PMC: 5864578. DOI: 10.1186/s40352-018-0064-7.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of computerized vs. in-person motivational interventions in the criminal justice system.

Cowell A, Zarkin G, Wedehase B, Lerch J, Walters S, Taxman F J Subst Abuse Treat. 2018; 87:42-49.

PMID: 29471925 PMC: 5831724. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2018.01.013.

The language of change among criminal justice clients: Counselor language, client language, and client substance use outcomes.

Rodriguez M, Walters S, Houck J, Ortiz J, Taxman F J Clin Psychol. 2017; 74(4):626-636.

PMID: 28940435 PMC: 5862754. DOI: 10.1002/jclp.22534.

References

Binswanger I, Kral A, Bluthenthal R, Rybold D, Edlin B . High prevalence of abscesses and cellulitis among community-recruited injection drug users in San Francisco. Clin Infect Dis. 2000; 30(3):579-81. DOI: 10.1086/313703. View

Zarkin G, Dunlap L, Wedehase B, Cowell A . The effect of alternative staff time data collection methods on drug treatment service cost estimates. Eval Program Plann. 2008; 31(4):427-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.06.001. View

Zarkin G, Bray J, Aldridge A, Mitra D, Mills M, Couper D . Cost and cost-effectiveness of the COMBINE study in alcohol-dependent patients. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2008; 65(10):1214-21. PMC: 3095105. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.65.10.1214. View

Walker D, Roffman R, Picciano J, Stephens R . The check-up: in-person, computerized, and telephone adaptations of motivational enhancement treatment to elicit voluntary participation by the contemplator. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2007; 2:2. PMC: 1781441. DOI: 10.1186/1747-597X-2-2. View

Prendergast M, Pearson F, Podus D, Hamilton Z, Greenwell L . The Andrews' Principles of Risk, Need, and Responsivity as Applied in Drug Abuse Treatment Programs: Meta-Analysis of Crime and Drug Use Outcomes. J Exp Criminol. 2013; 9(3):275-300. PMC: 3775377. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-013-9178-z. View

Carroll K, Ball S, Martino S, Nich C, Babuscio T, Rounsaville B . Enduring effects of a computer-assisted training program for cognitive behavioral therapy: a 6-month follow-up of CBT4CBT. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008; 100(1-2):178-81. PMC: 2742309. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.09.015. View

Thanner M, Taxman F . Responsivity: the value of providing intensive services to high-risk offenders. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2003; 24(2):137-47. DOI: 10.1016/s0740-5472(02)00352-5. View

Revere D, Dunbar P . Review of computer-generated outpatient health behavior interventions: clinical encounters "in absentia". J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001; 8(1):62-79. PMC: 134592. DOI: 10.1136/jamia.2001.0080062. View

Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M . Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ. 2001; 10(8):779-87. DOI: 10.1002/hec.635. View

10.

Rubak S, Sandbaek A, Lauritzen T, Christensen B . Motivational interviewing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Gen Pract. 2005; 55(513):305-12. PMC: 1463134. View

11.

Walters S, Neighbors C . Feedback interventions for college alcohol misuse: what, why and for whom?. Addict Behav. 2005; 30(6):1168-82. PMC: 2459313. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2004.12.005. View

12.

Myung S, McDonnell D, Kazinets G, Seo H, Moskowitz J . Effects of Web- and computer-based smoking cessation programs: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(10):929-37. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.109. View

13.

Hester R, Squires D, Delaney H . The Drinker's Check-up: 12-month outcomes of a controlled clinical trial of a stand-alone software program for problem drinkers. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2005; 28(2):159-69. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2004.12.002. View

14.

Carroll K, Ball S, Nich C, Martino S, Frankforter T, Farentinos C . Motivational interviewing to improve treatment engagement and outcome in individuals seeking treatment for substance abuse: a multisite effectiveness study. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005; 81(3):301-12. PMC: 2386852. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.08.002. View

15.

Carey K, Scott-Sheldon L, Elliott J, Garey L, Carey M . Face-to-face versus computer-delivered alcohol interventions for college drinkers: a meta-analytic review, 1998 to 2010. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012; 32(8):690-703. PMC: 3511828. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2012.08.001. View

16.

Stotts A, Schmitz J, Rhoades H, Grabowski J . Motivational interviewing with cocaine-dependent patients: a pilot study. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2001; 69(5):858-62. DOI: 10.1037//0022-006x.69.5.858. View

17.

Walters S, Vader A, Harris T . A controlled trial of web-based feedback for heavy drinking college students. Prev Sci. 2006; 8(1):83-8. DOI: 10.1007/s11121-006-0059-9. View

18.

Wechsberg W, Zule W, Riehman K, Luseno W, Lam W . African-American crack abusers and drug treatment initiation: barriers and effects of a pretreatment intervention. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2007; 2:10. PMC: 1847815. DOI: 10.1186/1747-597X-2-10. View

19.

Walters S, Vader A, Harris T, Field C, Jouriles E . Dismantling motivational interviewing and feedback for college drinkers: a randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009; 77(1):64-73. PMC: 2704891. DOI: 10.1037/a0014472. View

20.

Ondersma S, Svikis D, Schuster C . Computer-based brief intervention a randomized trial with postpartum women. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 32(3):231-8. PMC: 1858656. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2006.11.003. View