Adding voucher-based incentives to community reinforcement approach improves outcomes during treatment for cocaine dependence

Psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder

BACKGROUND

Stimulant use disorder is a continuously growing medical and social burden without approved medications available for its treatment. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help people reduce or cease stimulant consumption. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in September 2023. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched the references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU), or a different intervention in adults with stimulant use disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 64 RCTs (8241 participants). Seventy-three percent of studies included participants with cocaine or crack cocaine use disorder; 3.1% included participants with amphetamine use disorder; 10.9% included participants with methamphetamine use disorder; and 12.5% included participants with any stimulant use disorder. In 18 studies, all participants were in methadone maintenance treatment. In our primary comparison of any psychosocial treatment to no intervention, we included studies which compared a psychosocial intervention plus TAU to TAU alone. In this comparison, 12 studies evaluated cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), 27 contingency management, three motivational interviewing, one study looked at psychodynamic therapy, and one study evaluated CBT plus contingency management. We also compared any psychosocial intervention to TAU. In this comparison, seven studies evaluated CBT, two contingency management, two motivational interviewing, and one evaluated a combination of CBT plus motivational interviewing. Seven studies compared contingency management reinforcement related to abstinence versus contingency management not related to abstinence. Finally, seven studies compared two different psychosocial approaches. We judged 65.6% of the studies to be at low risk of bias for random sequence generation and 19% at low risk for allocation concealment. Blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so we judged all the studies to be at high risk of performance bias for subjective outcomes but at low risk for objective outcomes. We judged 22% of the studies to be at low risk of detection bias for subjective outcomes. We judged most of the studies (69%) to be at low risk of attrition bias. When compared to no intervention, we found that psychosocial treatments: reduce the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.91; 30 studies, 4078 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.41; 12 studies, 1293 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.62; 9 studies, 1187 participants; high-certainty evidence); probably increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.97; 12 studies, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.46; 4 studies, 295 participants; low-certainty evidence); reduce the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.19; 10 studies, 1215 participants; high-certainty evidence); and increase the longest period of abstinence (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; 17 studies, 2118 participants; high-certainty evidence). When compared to TAU, we found that psychosocial treatments reduce the dropout rate (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; 9 studies, 735 participants; high-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.64 to 4.31; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether they make any difference in point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.99; 2 studies, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to TAU, psychosocial treatments may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.53; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence); probably make little to no difference in the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (SMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.81 to 0.47, 4 studies, 479 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); and may make little to no difference in the longest period of abstinence (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.21; 1 study, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies for this comparison assessed continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up. Only five studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions; four of them stated that no adverse events occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review's findings indicate that psychosocial treatments can help people with stimulant use disorder by reducing dropout rates. This conclusion is based on high-certainty evidence from comparisons of psychosocial interventions with both no treatment and TAU. This is an important finding because many people with stimulant use disorders leave treatment prematurely. Stimulant use disorders are chronic, lifelong, relapsing mental disorders, which require substantial therapeutic efforts to achieve abstinence. For those who are not yet able to achieve complete abstinence, retention in treatment may help to reduce the risks associated with stimulant use. In addition, psychosocial interventions reduce stimulant use compared to no treatment, but they may make little to no difference to stimulant use when compared to TAU. The most studied and promising psychosocial approach is contingency management. Relatively few studies explored the other approaches, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were imprecise due to small sample sizes.

Effectiveness of incorporating contingency management into a public treatment program for people who use crack cocaine in Brazil. A single-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Smoked cocaine (i.e., crack use) is a severe health problem in Brazil, with the country being reported as having the largest crack market in the world. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of incorporating Contingency Management targeting cocaine abstinence into a public treatment program in Brazil.

METHODS

Single-blind randomized controlled trial conducted at Unidade Recomeço Helvétia (URH), a public ambulatory treatment program for persons who use crack and live in the "Crackland" region in downtown São Paulo, Brazil. In total, 98 treatment-seeking individuals who use crack were randomized to one of two treatment conditions. Participants allocated to the control condition (n = 48) received 12 weeks of the standard treatment provided at URH. Participants allocated to the experimental condition (n = 50) received the same treatment in combination with Contingency Management (URH+CM). In URH+CM, participants were provided with vouchers with monetary value for submission of negative cocaine urinalysis twice weekly.

RESULTS

Compared to the URH group, the URH+CM group was significantly more likely to submit a negative cocaine urinalysis during treatment, with odds ratios ranging from 4.17 to 6.78, depending on how missing data was accounted for (p<0.01). Participants receiving Contingency Management also had higher odds of achieving three or more weeks of continuous abstinence (OR= 8.07; 95% CI [2.48, 26.24]), achieved longer durations of abstinence (B = 2.14; 95% CI [0.67, 3.61]), submitted a higher percentage of negative urinalysis (B = 19.85; 95% CI [6.89, 32.82]), and were retained in treatment for a longer period (B = 3.00; 95% CI [1.04, 4.97]), compared to those receiving URH alone (p<0.01 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

The incorporation of Contingency Management was effective in promoting cocaine abstinence and treatment retention. The large-scale dissemination of Contingency Management may be an effective strategy to treat Brazilians with cocaine use disorders.

Comparison of Treatments for Cocaine Use Disorder Among Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

In the US and the United Kingdom, cocaine use is the second leading cause of illicit drug overdose death. Psychosocial treatments for cocaine use disorder are limited, and no pharmacotherapy is approved for use in the US or Europe.

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatments for active cocaine use among adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for clinical trials published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

This meta-analysis was registered on Covidence.org (study 8731) on December 31, 2015. Clinical trials were included if they (1) had the term cocaine in the article title; (2) were published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017; (3) were written in English; (4) enrolled outpatients 18 years or older with active cocaine use at baseline; and (5) reported treatment group size, treatment duration, retention rates, and urinalysis results for the presence of cocaine metabolites. A study was excluded if (1) more than 25% of participants were not active cocaine users or more than 80% of participants had negative test results for the presence of cocaine metabolites at baseline and (2) it reported only pooled urinalysis results indicating the presence of multiple substances and did not report the specific proportion of positive test results for cocaine metabolites. Multiple reviewers reached criteria consensus. Of 831 records screened, 157 studies (18.9%) met selection criteria and were included in the analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Search results were imported from PubMed XML into Covidence.org then Microsoft Excel. Data extraction was completed in 2 iterations to ensure fidelity. Analyses included a multilevel random-effects model, a multilevel mixed-effects meta-regression model, and sensitivity analyses. Treatments were clustered into 11 categories (psychotherapy, contingency management programs, placebo, opioids, psychostimulants, anticonvulsants, dopamine agonists, antidepressants, antipsychotics, miscellaneous medications, and other therapies). Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations. The significance threshold for all analyses was P = .05. Data were analyzed using the metafor and mice packages in R software, version 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Data were analyzed from January 1, 2018, to February 28, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the intention-to-treat logarithm of the odds ratio (OR) of having a negative urinalysis result for the presence of cocaine metabolites at the end of each treatment period compared with baseline. The hypothesis, which was formulated after data collection, was that no treatment category would have a significant association with objective reductions in cocaine use.

RESULTS

A total of 157 studies comprising 402 treatment groups and 15 842 participants were included. Excluding other therapies, the largest treatment groups across all studies were psychotherapy (mean [SD] number of participants, 40.04 [36.88]) and contingency management programs (mean [SD] number of participants, 37.51 [25.51]). Only contingency management programs were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of having a negative test result for the presence of cocaine (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.62-2.80), and this association remained significant in all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis, contingency management programs were associated with reductions in cocaine use among adults. Research efforts and policies that align with this treatment modality may benefit those who actively use cocaine and attenuate societal burdens.

Resurgence of punishment-suppressed cocaine seeking in rats

Alternative reinforcement-based treatments are among the most effective for reducing substance abuse. However, relapse often occurs when alternative reinforcement ends. Relapse following the loss of alternative reinforcement is called resurgence. An animal model has been used to study basic factors that may ultimately reduce resurgence but uses drug unavailability (i.e., extinction) to reduce drug seeking. In humans, drug abstinence is thought to be a product of aversive consequences associated with drug use rather than extinction. This discrepancy is important because the environmental and neurobiological factors involved in relapse may differ between punished and extinguished behavior. Experiment 1 evaluated resurgence of previously punished cocaine seeking. In Phase 1, rats earned cocaine for pressing levers. In Phase 2, cocaine remained available, but lever pressing also produced mild foot shocks while an alternative response produced food pellets for 1 group but not for another group. In Phase 3, alternative reinforcement and punishment were removed and resurgence of cocaine seeking occurred only in rats previously exposed to alternative reinforcement. In Experiment 2, resurgence was evaluated similarly, except that consequences of cocaine seeking (i.e., punishment and cocaine) remained available during Phase 3. Resurgence did not occur in either group during Experiment 2. The animal models of resurgence developed herein could increase translational utility and improve examination of the environmental and neurobiological factors underlying resurgence of drug seeking. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Contingency management is effective in promoting abstinence and retention in treatment among crack cocaine users with a previous history of poor treatment response: a crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Crack use has become a severe health problem in Brazil. Contingency management has shown robust evidence of efficacy in the treatment of cocaine use disorder (CUD) in high-income countries; however, it is still unclear how this intervention can impact treatment in low-income countries.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of contingency management in the treatment of CUD among individuals with a previous history of poor treatment response in Brazil.

METHODS

Six months after the end of treatment, 32 participants previously allocated to the usual care condition (UCC) were invited to receive an additional 12 weeks of treatment in a contingency management condition (CMC), and 16 accepted the invitation. We compared data obtained from only the 16 participants (14 male) exposed to both treatment conditions.

RESULTS

Participants attended more treatment sessions and were retained in treatment for a longer period during the CMC than during the UCC (p < .01 for both). The proportion of negative cocaine samples submitted, the mean longest duration of cocaine abstinence, and the odds of being abstinent from cocaine during the 12 weeks of treatment were significantly higher during treatment in the CMC when compared to the UCC (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides further evidence that contingency management is effective in promoting abstinence and retention in treatment among individuals with CUD with a history of poor treatment response. Our findings argue for the incorporation of CM among public treatment services for CUD in Brazil.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01815645 on March 21, 2013.

Social functioning outcomes among individuals with substance use disorders receiving internet-delivered community reinforcement approach

BACKGROUND

The community reinforcement approach (CRA) is an evidence-based practice for the treatment of substance use disorders and achieving and maintaining abstinence, but few studies have systematically explored the effect of CRA on secondary, yet also important outcomes, such as social functioning.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine whether an internet-based version of the CRA plus contingency management is associated with improved social functioning of individuals seeking substance use disorder treatment in a multi-site clinical effectiveness trial.

METHODS

Social functioning was measured using the 54-item Social Adjustment Scale assessing role performance in six domains (work, social and leisure activities, extended family relationships, marital relationship, parenting, and immediate family). Generalized linear mixed models tested the effects of treatment, time, sex, baseline abstinence, baseline social functioning and baseline psychological distress on overall social functioning and across social functioning subscales at the end of the 12-week treatment phase and 3 and 6 months post treatment.

RESULTS

Results showed no significant association between treatment and total social functioning score or any subscale scores. Being male was significantly associated with better social functioning overall at the end of treatment (p = .024). Higher levels of psychological distress at baseline predicted significantly worse social functioning at the end of treatment overall (p = .037).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of an internet-based version of the CRA was not associated with greater improvements in social functioning compared to standard outpatient care after 12 weeks of treatment. Implications for internet-delivered CRA are discussed.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial interventions for individuals with cocaine and amphetamine addiction: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend psychosocial interventions for cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction as first-line treatment, but it is still unclear which intervention, if any, should be offered first. We aimed to estimate the comparative effectiveness of all available psychosocial interventions (alone or in combination) for the short- and long-term treatment of people with cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We searched published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any structured psychosocial intervention against an active control or treatment as usual (TAU) for the treatment of cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction in adults. Primary outcome measures were efficacy (proportion of patients in abstinence, assessed by urinalysis) and acceptability (proportion of patients who dropped out due to any cause) at the end of treatment, but we also measured the acute (12 weeks) and long-term (longest duration of study follow-up) effects of the interventions and the longest duration of abstinence. Odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed with the Cochrane tool, and the strength of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We followed the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-NMA) guidelines, and the protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42017042900). We included 50 RCTs evaluating 12 psychosocial interventions or TAU in 6,942 participants. The strength of evidence ranged from high to very low. Compared to TAU, contingency management (CM) plus community reinforcement approach was the only intervention that increased the number of abstinent patients at the end of treatment (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.24-6.51, P = 0.013), and also at 12 weeks (OR 7.60, 95% CI 2.03-28.37, P = 0.002) and at longest follow-up (OR 3.08, 95% CI 1.33-7.17, P = 0.008). At the end of treatment, CM plus community reinforcement approach had the highest number of statistically significant results in head-to-head comparisons, being more efficacious than cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.02-5.88, P = 0.045), non-contingent rewards (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.32-8.28, P = 0.010), and 12-step programme plus non-contingent rewards (OR 4.07, 95% CI 1.13-14.69, P = 0.031). CM plus community reinforcement approach was also associated with fewer dropouts than TAU, both at 12 weeks and the end of treatment (OR 3.92, P < 0.001, and 3.63, P < 0.001, respectively). At the longest follow-up, community reinforcement approach was more effective than non-contingent rewards, supportive-expressive psychodynamic therapy, TAU, and 12-step programme (OR ranging between 2.71, P = 0.026, and 4.58, P = 0.001), but the combination of community reinforcement approach with CM was superior also to CBT alone, CM alone, CM plus CBT, and 12-step programme plus non-contingent rewards (ORs between 2.50, P = 0.039, and 5.22, P < 0.001). The main limitations of our study were the quality of included studies and the lack of blinding, which may have increased the risk of performance bias. However, our analyses were based on objective outcomes, which are less likely to be biased.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this network meta-analysis is the most comprehensive synthesis of data for psychosocial interventions in individuals with cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction. Our findings provide the best evidence base currently available to guide decision-making about psychosocial interventions for individuals with cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction and should inform patients, clinicians, and policy-makers.

Crack cocaine users views regarding treatment with contingency management in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Contingency management (CM) has recently shown efficacy in promoting abstinence and retention in treatment among crack cocaine users in Brazil. However, partially because of unawareness and resistance among health care providers, CM has not been widely employed. The objective of this study was to conduct a secondary analysis in order to evaluate how CM participants perceive their treatment experience.

METHODS

Twenty-seven crack cocaine users, previously assigned to 12 weeks of CM treatment, were assessed with a structured questionnaire designed to assess their personal opinion of, difficulty in understanding, and acceptance of the CM intervention, as well as their opinion regarding its impact on their treatment responses.

RESULTS

Descriptive analyses showed that 92.6% of the participants found it very easy to understand the CM protocol. All participants reported liking their CM experience quite a bit. For the perceived effects of CM on their treatment response, 81.5% of the participants stated that CM helped them considerably, the mean score for the impact of CM on treatment response (out of a maximum of 10) being 9 (SD = 1.5). When asked if they believed CM could help other people with crack cocaine dependence, 92.6% of the participants stated that CM could help such people a lot and 7.4% stated that it could help them a little.

CONCLUSIONS

From the perspective of the patients, CM was easily assimilated, easily accepted, and had a direct positive effect on treatment response. These findings provide additional support for the incorporation of CM into substance abuse treatment services in Brazil.

Racial/ethnic subgroup differences in outcomes and acceptability of an Internet-delivered intervention for substance use disorders

The Therapeutic Education System (TES), an Internet version of the Community Reinforcement Approach plus prize-based motivational incentives, is one of few empirically supported technology-based interventions. To date, however, there has not been a study exploring differences in substance use outcomes or acceptability of TES among racial/ethnic subgroups. This study uses data from a multisite (N = 10) effectiveness study of TES to explore whether race/ethnicity subgroups (White [n = 267], Black/African American [n = 112], and Hispanic/Latino [n = 55])moderate the effect of TES. Generalized linear mixed models were used to test whether abstinence, retention, social functioning, coping, craving, or acceptability differed by racial/ethnic subgroup. Findings demonstrated that race/ethnicity did not moderate the effect of TES versus TAU on abstinence, retention, social functioning, or craving. A three-way interaction (treatment, race/ethnicity, and abstinence status at study entry) showed that TES was associated with greater coping scores among nonabstinent White participants (p = .008) and among abstinent Black participants (p < .001). Acceptability of the TES intervention, although high overall, was significantly different by race/ethnicity subgroup with White participants reporting lower acceptability of TES compared to Black (p = .006) and Hispanic/Latino (p = .008) participants. TES appears to be a good candidate treatment among a diverse population of treatment-seeking individuals with substance use disorders.

A review of the literature on contingency management in the treatment of substance use disorders, 2009-2014

This report describes a systematic literature review of voucher and related monetary-based contingency management (CM) interventions for substance use disorders (SUDs) over 5.2years (November 2009 through December 2014). Reports were identified using the search engine PubMed, expert consultations, and published bibliographies. For inclusion, reports had to (a) involve monetary-based CM; (b) appear in a peer-reviewed journal; (c) include an experimental comparison condition; (d) describe an original study; (e) assess efficacy using inferential statistics; (f) use a research design allowing treatment effects to be attributed to CM. Sixty-nine reports met inclusion criteria and were categorized into 7 research trends: (1) extending CM to special populations, (2) parametric studies, (3) extending CM to community clinics, (4) combining CM with pharmacotherapies, (5) incorporating technology into CM, (6) investigating longer-term outcomes, (7) using CM as a research tool. The vast majority (59/69, 86%) of studies reported significant (p<0.05) during-treatment effects. Twenty-eight (28/59, 47%) of those studies included at least one follow-up visit after CM was discontinued, with eight (8/28, 29%) reporting significant (p<0.05) effects. Average effect size (Cohen's d) during treatment was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.54, 0.70) and post-treatment it was 0.26 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.41). Overall, the literature on voucher-based CM over the past 5years documents sustained growth, high treatment efficacy, moderate to large effect sizes during treatment that weaken but remain evident following treatment termination, and breadth across a diverse set of SUDs, populations, and settings consistent with and extending results from prior reviews.

Psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse

BACKGROUND

Psychostimulant misuse is a continuously growing medical and social burden. There is no evidence proving the efficacy of pharmacotherapy. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help patients in reducing or ceasing drug consumption.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register (via CRSLive); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science and PsycINFO, from inception to November 2015. We also searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (apps.who.int/trialsearch/).All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU) or a different intervention in adults with psychostimulant misuse or dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 trials (6923 participants).The psychosocial interventions considered in the studies were: cognitive behavioural therapy (19 studies), contingency management (25 studies), motivational interviewing (5 studies), interpersonal therapy (3 studies), psychodynamic therapy (1 study), 12-step facilitation (4 studies).We judged most of the studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias; blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so all the studies were at high risk of performance bias with regard to subjective outcomes; the majority of studies did not specify whether the outcome assessors were blind. We did not consider it likely that the objective outcomes were influenced by lack of blinding.The comparisons made were: any psychosocial intervention versus no intervention (32 studies), any psychosocial intervention versus TAU (6 studies), and one psychosocial intervention versus an alternative psychosocial intervention (13 studies). Five of included studies did not provide any useful data for inclusion in statistical synthesis.We found that, when compared to no intervention, any psychosocial treatment: reduced the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR): 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to -0.91, 24 studies, 3393 participants, moderate quality evidence); increased continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 2.14, 95% CI 1.27 to -3.59, 8 studies, 1241 participants, low quality evidence); did not significantly increase continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR: 2.12, 95% CI 0.77 to -5.86, 4 studies, 324 participants, low quality evidence); significantly increased the longest period of abstinence: (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.63, 10 studies, 1354 participants, high quality evidence). However, it should be noted that the in the vast majority of the studies in this comparison the specific psychosocial treatment assessed in the experimental arm was given in add on to treatment as usual or to another specific psychosocial or pharmacological treatment which was received by both groups. So, many of the control groups in this comparison were not really untreated. Receiving some amount of treatment is not the same as not receiving any intervention, so we could argue that the overall effect of the experimental psychosocial treatment could be smaller if given in add on to TAU or to another intervention than if given to participants not receiving any intervention; this could translate to a smaller magnitude of the effect of the psychosocial intervention when it is given in add on.When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment reduced dropout rate (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.89, 6 studies, 516 participants, moderate quality evidence), did not increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.72, 2 studies, 224 participants, low quality evidence), did not increase longest period of abstinence (MD -3.15 days, 95% CI -10.35 to 4.05, 1 study, 110 participants, low quality evidence). No studies in this comparison assessed the outcome of continuous abstinence at longest follow-up.There were few studies comparing two or more psychosocial interventions, with small sample sizes and considerable heterogeneity in terms of the types of interventions assessed. None reported significant results.None of the studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of any psychosocial treatment to treatment as usual (usually characterised by group counselling or case management) probably reduces the dropout rate and increases the longest period of abstinence. It may increase the number of people achieving continuous abstinence at the end of treatment, although this might not be maintained at longest follow-up. The most studied and the most promising psychosocial approach to be added to treatment as usual is probably contingency management. However, the other approaches were only analysed in a few small studies, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were not significant because of imprecision. When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment may improve adherence, but it may not improve abstinence at the end of treatment or the longest period of abstinence.The majority of the studies took place in the United States, and this could limit the generalisability of the findings, because the effects of psychosocial treatments could be strongly influenced by the social context and ethnicity. The results of our review do not answer the most relevant clinical question, demonstrating which is the most effective type of psychosocial approach.Further studies should directly compare contingency management with the other psychosocial approaches.

Contingency management is effective in promoting abstinence and retention in treatment among crack cocaine users in Brazil: A randomized controlled trial

Crack cocaine dependence has become a severe public health problem in Brazil, and current psychosocial approaches to this problem have shown little or no effectiveness. Although contingency management is among the most effective behavioral treatments for substance use disorders, it has never been applied in the treatment of crack cocaine-dependent individuals in Brazil. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of incorporating contingency management into standard outpatient treatment for crack cocaine dependence, as well as the impact that doing so has on treatment attendance, retention in treatment, maintenance of abstinence, and the frequency of substance use. We evaluated 65 treatment-seeking, crack cocaine-dependent individuals, randomized to receive 12 weeks of standard treatment plus contingency management (STCM; n = 33) or 12 weeks of standard treatment alone (STA; n = 32). Those in the STCM group received monetary incentives for being abstinent, earning up to US$235.50 if they remained abstinent throughout the entire treatment period. The STCM group participants attended a mean of 19.5 (SD = 14.9) treatment sessions, compared with 3.7 (SD = 5.9) for the STA group participants (p < .01). Those in the STCM group were 3.8, 4.6, and 68.9 times more likely to be retained in treatment at weeks 4, 8, and 12 than were those in the STA group. The likelihood of detecting 4, 8, and 12 weeks of continuous abstinence was 17.7, 9.9, and 18.6 times higher in the STCM group than in the STA group (p < .05). Compared to the STA group, the STCM group submitted a significantly higher proportion of negative samples for crack cocaine, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, and alcohol (p < .001) when all expected samples were included in the denominator but not when only submitted samples were considered. The average monthly cost/participant for incentives was $29.00. Contingency management showed efficacy in a sample of Brazilian crack cocaine users. The intervention holds promise for broader application in international settings. (PsycINFO Database Record

Contingency management for substance use disorders in Spain: Implications for research and practice

OBJECTIVE

We provide a narrative review of published studies evaluating voucher-based contingency management (CM) treatment for cocaine, nicotine and cannabis use disorders in Spain and discuss the concerns and future challenges.

METHOD

Published studies between 2008 and 2015 that evaluated the impact of incentives for SUD in Spain and included an appropriate control or comparison condition were identified and reviewed.

RESULTS

Adding voucher-based CM to standard treatments obtained better treatment retention and cocaine abstinence than standard care alone. CM also improved psychosocial functioning. Economic status or depressive symptoms did not affect the results of CM treatment for cocaine dependence. The addition of a CM protocol to cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) also improved treatment effectiveness for smoking cessation. Available data on the effect of CM on cannabis use disorders (CUD) with young people did not allow confirmation of its superiority to date.

CONCLUSION

The research conducted to date in Spain confirms and expands the findings of studies conducted in the US supporting the effectiveness of CM in the context of community settings with cocaine- and nicotine-dependents. However, CM has not yet been readily adopted into general clinical practice in Spain or the rest of Europe. The limited effectiveness of CM for CUD is likely due to the scarcity of data and may change with more studies, taking into account recent research on this topic in the US. Continued efforts are warranted to further develop and disseminate incentive-based treatments for SUD across clinical settings and populations in Spain.