Contingency management promotes smoking reductions in residential substance abuse patients

History and current status of contingency management programs in the Department of Veterans Affairs

OBJECTIVE

This article describes the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) national implementation of contingency management within VA substance use disorder (SUD) treatment programs.

METHODS

The rationale for implementing CM, role of VA leadership, and training and supervision procedures are detailed. The role of the Veterans Canteen Service (VCS) in sustaining the CM implementation through the donation of incentives is outlined. Updated outcomes from the primary program, CM to incentivize stimulant abstinence, are provided. Data presented were gathered from June 2011 to January 2023, from VA facilities across the country.

RESULTS

More than 6000 Veterans from 119 VA facilities have received CM in a 12-week program in which two urine samples are obtained per week, with 92% of the samples negative for the targeted substance. Two other CM pilot projects are described. The first incentivizes adherence to injectable medications for opioid and alcohol use disorders, with over 580 veterans from 27 VA sites participating to date. The second incentivized smoking cessation in 312 patients from four sites. A new initiative in which CM is implemented in smaller community-based VA facilities through use of onsite prize cabinets is presented and the possibility of providing CM remotely in VA is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

It has proved feasible to implement abstinence CM and several other CM pilot programs at many VA facilities. Factors that contributed to the success of the VA CM rollout, challenges that were encountered along the way, and lessons learned that may facilitate wider use of CM outside VA are discussed.

A Systematic Review of Treatment Maintenance Strategies in Token Economies: Implications for Contingency Management

Contingency management (CM) interventions are based on operant principles and are effective in promoting health behaviors. Despite their success, a common criticism of CM is that its effects to not persist after the intervention is withdrawn. Many CM studies evaluate posttreatment effects, but few investigate procedures for promoting maintenance. Token economy interventions and CM interventions are procedurally and conceptually similar. The token economy literature includes many studies in which procedures for promoting postintervention maintenance are evaluated. A systematic literature review was conducted to synthesize the literature on treatment maintenance in token economies. Search procedures yielded 697 articles, and application of inclusion/exclusion criteria resulted in 37 articles for review. The most successful strategy is to combine procedures. In most cases, thinning or fading was combined with programmed transfer of control via social reinforcement or self-management. Social reinforcement and self-monitoring procedures appear to be especially important, and were included in 70% of studies involving combined approaches. Thus, our primary recommendation is to incorporate multiple maintenance strategies, at least one of which should facilitate transfer of control of the target behavior to other reinforcers. In addition, graded removal of the intervention, which has also been evaluated to a limited extent in CM, is a reasonable candidate for further development and evaluation. Direct comparisons of maintenance procedures are lacking, and should be considered a research priority in both domains. Researchers and clinicians interested in either type of intervention will likely benefit from ongoing attention to developments in both areas.

They have a Voice; are we Listening?

The field of applied behavior analysis (ABA) has produced powerful changes and improvements to the lives of many. However, the field is not immune from criticism. One criticism from those outside the field is that the goal of ABA therapy is to make Autistic people appear "indistinguishable" from their peers. This paper examines "indistinguishability" and its implications by defining "indistinguishable" in behavior analytic terms, exploring how the term was used in two notable studies in the field (Lovaas, 1987, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55[1], 3-9; Rekers & Lovaas, 1974, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7[2], 173-190), and providing a review of the social validity and ethical implications of having "indistinguishability" as an explicit or implied goal. This is partially accomplished by incorporating concerns from the Autistic self-advocate community. We argue that the Autistic self-advocate community's concerns surrounding "indistinguishability" as a goal have a degree of legitimacy and need to be given due consideration. Suggestions for addressing these concerns in ABA degree programs and research are discussed, emphasizing the importance of considering stakeholder values, taking criticisms seriously, and making changes when necessary.

Effects of episodic future thinking on reinforcement pathology during smoking cessation treatment among individuals with substance use disorders

RATIONALE

Reinforcer pathology (RP) is a theoretical model based on two processes: delay discounting (DD) and drug demand. Given that RP has been shown to have a predictive value on smoking behaviors, several studies have explored which interventions can reduce RP. Consistent with the RP framework, episodic future thinking (EFT) has shown effects on treatment outcomes and RP processes. The vast majority of studies that assess the effects of EFT on RP consist of experimental studies, and no previous research has tested these effects in a clinical sample of smokers.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this study was to assess the effects of EFT on RP throughout the course of a smoking cessation intervention in smokers with substance use disorders (SUDs).

METHODS

Participants were randomized to cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) + EFT (n = 39) or CBT + EFT + contingency management (n = 33). Cotinine, frequency of EFT practices, cigarette purchase task (CPT), and DD were evaluated in treatment sessions. Mixed-effects model repeated measures analysis was used to explore DD and CPT in-treatment changes as a function of EFT practices and cotinine levels.

RESULTS

Greater practice of the EFT component significantly reduced cigarette demand (p < .020) as well as DD (p = .003). Additionally, a greater reduction in cotinine levels coupled with greater EFT practice led to a greater decrease in cigarette demand (p < .014).

CONCLUSIONS

EFT reduced the two facets of RP in treatment-seeking smokers with SUDs.

What are the ethical implications of using prize-based contingency management in substance use? A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The area of substance use is notable for its early uptake of incentives and wealth of research on the topic. This is particularly true for prize-based contingency management (PB-CM), a particular type of incentive that uses a fishbowl prize-draw design. Given that PB-CM interventions are gaining momentum to address the dual public health crises of opiate and stimulant use in North America and beyond, it is imperative that we better understand and critically analyze their implications.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this scoping review paper is to identify the characteristics of PB-CM interventions for people who use substances and explore ethical implications documented in the literature as well as emerging ethical implications that merit further consideration.

METHODS

The PRISMA-ScR checklist was used in conjunction with Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework to guide this scoping review. We completed a two-pronged analysis of 52 research articles retrieved through a comprehensive search across three key scholarly databases. After extracting descriptive data from each article, we used 9 key domains to identify characteristics of the interventions followed by an analysis of ethical implications.

RESULTS

We analyzed the characteristics of PB-CM interventions which were predominantly quantitative studies aimed at studying the efficacy of PB-CM interventions. All of the interventions used a prize-draw format with a classic magnitude of 50%. Most of the interventions combined both negative and positive direction to reward processes, behaviors, and/or outcomes. One ethical implication was identified in the literature: the risk of gambling relapse. We also found three emerging ethical implications by further analyzing participant characteristics, intervention designs, and potential impact on the patient-provider relationship. These implications include the potential deceptive nature of PB-CM, the emphasis placed on the individual behaviors to the detriment of social and structural determinants of health, and failures to address vulnerability and power dynamics.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review offers important insights into the ethics on PB-CM and its implications for research ethics, clinical ethics, and public health ethics. Additionally, it raises important questions that can inform future research and dialogues to further tease out the ethical issues associated with PB-CM.

Automated Mobile Delivery of Financial Incentives for Smoking Cessation Among Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Adults: Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with a reduced likelihood of smoking cessation. Smartphone ownership is increasing rapidly, including among low-income adults, and smartphone interventions for smoking cessation may increase access to smoking cessation treatment among socioeconomically disadvantaged adults.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of an automated smartphone-based approach to delivering financial incentives for smoking cessation.

METHODS

Socioeconomically disadvantaged adults initiating tobacco cessation treatment were followed from 1 week before a scheduled quit attempt through 26 weeks after the quit date. Participants received telephone counseling and nicotine replacement therapy. Smoking cessation was verified 5 times per week via smartphone prompts to self-report smoking status and submit a breath sample via a portable carbon monoxide (CO) monitor that was connected with participants' smartphones. Identity was verified during smoking status assessments using smartphone-based facial recognition software. When smoking abstinence and identity were verified, an automated credit card payment was triggered. Participants were incentivized for abstinence on the quit date and up to five days per week during the first 4 weeks after the scheduled quit date, with additional incentives offered during postquit weeks 8 and 12. In total, participants had the opportunity to earn up to US $250 in abstinence-contingent incentives over the first 12 weeks of the quit attempt.

RESULTS

Participants (N=16) were predominantly female (12/16, 75%) and non-Hispanic white (11/16, 69%), black (4/16, 25%), or Hispanic of any race (1/16, 6%). Most participants (9/16, 56%) reported an annual household income of <US $11,000. During the first 4 weeks after the scheduled quit date, participants completed a median of 16 (out of 21; range 1-21) mobile smoking status assessments, and they earned a median of US $28 in abstinence-contingent incentives (out of a possible US $150; range US $0-US $135). Median earnings did not change during the 8- and 12-week incentivized follow-up periods (total median earnings over 12 weeks=US $28; range US $0-US $167). During the first 4 weeks after the scheduled quit date, participants abstained from smoking on a median of 5 (out of 21) assessment days (range 0-20). At the in-person follow-up visits, the expired CO-confirmed 7-day point prevalence abstinence rates were 19% (3/16) and 13% (2/16) at 12 and 26 weeks postquit, respectively. Overall, most participants reported that the system was easy to use and that they would recommend this treatment to their friends and family.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary data suggest that this smartphone-based approach to verifying identity and smoking status and automating the delivery of abstinence-contingent incentives to a credit card is feasible for use among socioeconomically disadvantaged adults. However, continued refinement is warranted.

Smoking cessation in inpatient psychiatry treatment facilities: A review

•

Smoking rates are high among people with psychiatric illness.

•

Smoking cessation interventions are rarely available in inpatient psychiatry settings.

•

Smokers with psychiatric illness are just as interested in quitting smoking.

Background

Tobacco-related diseases are a leading cause of death among individuals with severe mental illness (SMI), yet interventions to address tobacco cessation are rare in inpatient settings where persons with SMI are hospitalized. While cigarette smoking rates have declined in the general population, they remain high in persons with SMI. Inpatient settings would be a prime location to intervene on tobacco consumption among persons with SMI. The objective of this review was to examine evidence of smoking cessation interventions in psychiatric inpatient facilities.

Method

Using narrative overview guidelines, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for smoking cessation RCT studies published between 1950 and 2018. Studies included had to have at least started in inpatient psychiatry settings. Examples of search terms included: smoking cessation in inpatient psychiatry, smoking cessation in inpatient mental health treatment facilities, and smoking cessation and mental health.

Results

Following the inclusion criteria, eight RCT studies were reviewed. One study was among adolescent psychiatric inpatient smokers ages 13–17, and 7 were among adult psychiatric inpatients with mean age 41 years. Treatment periods lasting 8 to 12 weeks started in inpatient settings and continued post discharge. A combination of behavioral and pharmacological interventions were used. Pharmacological interventions were nicotine replacement therapies, and at least one study used varenicline. At baseline, participants smoked an average of 18.1 cigarettes per day.

Conclusion

Smoking cessation in inpatient psychiatry settings is rare or delayed. There is a need for more tailored treatments among this population to help them quit smoking.

Como a Análise do Comportamento tem Contribuído para Área da Saúde?

Resumo A Psicologia da Saúde tem investigado variáveis e proposto estratégias de prevenção e promoção de problemas de saúde. Especificamente na Análise do Comportamento Aplicada o foco tem sido a alteração e manutenção de comportamentos relacionados à saúde. Por meio de uma revisão de literatura, o objetivo deste trabalho foi identificar estudos, pautados na Análise do Comportamento Aplicada, que apresentassem contribuições à área de Saúde. Para tanto, foram revisadas todas as edições do Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, publicadas entre 2000 e 2015. Os artigos que continham em seus títulos ou resumos, termos relacionados à saúde foram selecionados. Ao todo 160 artigos foram encontrados e após análise dos mesmos, considerando, o objetivo, métodos e os resultados, 11 temas relacionados à saúde foram definidos (adesão, diabetes, problemas alimentares, uso de drogas, procedimentos hospitalares, saúde ocupacional, saúde bucal, atividade física, comportamento autolesivo, problemas de sono e segurança no trânsito). Os estudos baseados nos pressupostos analíticos comportamentais demonstram a aplicabilidade dos conceitos na área de saúde. Além disto, foi também possível identificar e analisar as principais características metodológicas utilizadas e sua eficácia para a alteração de padrões de comportamentos de saúde.

Incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Financial incentives, monetary or vouchers, are widely used in an attempt to precipitate, reinforce and sustain behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been used in workplaces, in clinics and hospitals, and within community programmes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term effect of incentives and contingency management programmes for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The most recent searches were conducted in July 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to smoking cessation incentive schemes or control conditions. We included studies in a mixed-population setting (e.g. community, work-, clinic- or institution-based), and also studies in pregnant smokers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The primary outcome measure in the mixed-population studies was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up (at least six months from the start of the intervention). In the trials of pregnant women we used abstinence measured at the longest follow-up, and at least to the end of the pregnancy. Where available, we pooled outcome data using a Mantel-Haenzel random-effects model, with results reported as risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using adjusted estimates for cluster-randomised trials. We analysed studies carried out in mixed populations separately from those carried out in pregnant populations.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three mixed-population studies met our inclusion criteria, covering more than 21,600 participants; 16 of these are new to this version of the review. Studies were set in varying locations, including community settings, clinics or health centres, workplaces, and outpatient drug clinics. We judged eight studies to be at low risk of bias, and 10 to be at high risk of bias, with the rest at unclear risk. Twenty-four of the trials were run in the USA, two in Thailand and one in the Phillipines. The rest were European. Incentives offered included cash payments or vouchers for goods and groceries, offered directly or collected and redeemable online. The pooled RR for quitting with incentives at longest follow-up (six months or more) compared with controls was 1.49 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.73; 31 RCTs, adjusted N = 20,097; I² = 33%). Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of six studies where an incentive for cessation was offered at long-term follow up (result excluding those studies: RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.69; 25 RCTs; adjusted N = 17,058; I² = 36%), suggesting the impact of incentives continues for at least some time after incentives cease.Although not always clearly reported, the total financial amount of incentives varied considerably between trials, from zero (self-deposits), to a range of between USD 45 and USD 1185. There was no clear direction of effect between trials offering low or high total value of incentives, nor those encouraging redeemable self-deposits.We included 10 studies of 2571 pregnant women. We judged two studies to be at low risk of bias, one at high risk of bias, and seven at unclear risk. When pooled, the nine trials with usable data (eight conducted in the USA and one in the UK), delivered an RR at longest follow-up (up to 24 weeks post-partum) of 2.38 (95% CI 1.54 to 3.69; N = 2273; I² = 41%), in favour of incentives.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall there is high-certainty evidence that incentives improve smoking cessation rates at long-term follow-up in mixed population studies. The effectiveness of incentives appears to be sustained even when the last follow-up occurs after the withdrawal of incentives. There is also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by some concerns about risks of bias, that incentive schemes conducted among pregnant smokers improve smoking cessation rates, both at the end of pregnancy and post-partum. Current and future research might explore more precisely differences between trials offering low or high cash incentives and self-incentives (deposits), within a variety of smoking populations.

Contingency management and cognitive behavioral therapy for trauma-exposed smokers with and without posttraumatic stress disorder

INTRODUCTION

Trauma-exposed individuals with and without posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are more likely to smoke and less successful in quit attempts than individuals without psychopathology. Contingency management (CM) techniques (i.e., incentives for abstinence) have demonstrable efficacy for smoking cessation in some populations with psychopathology, but have not been well tested in PTSD. This pilot study examined the feasibility of CM plus brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in promoting smoking cessation among trauma-exposed individuals with and without PTSD.

METHODS

Fifty trauma-exposed smokers (18 with PTSD) were asked to abstain from tobacco and nicotine replacement therapy for one month. During week one of cessation, CBT was provided daily and increasing CM stipends were paid for each continuous day of biochemically-verified abstinence; CM stipends were withheld in response to smoking lapses and reset to the initial payment level upon abstinence resumption. CBT and fixed payments for study visits were provided during the subsequent three weeks.

RESULTS

Of the 50 eligible participants who attended at least one pre-quit visit (49% female, 35% current PTSD), 43 (86%) attended the first post-quit study visit, 32 (64%) completed the first week of CM/CBT treatment, and 26 (52%) completed the study. Post-quit seven-day point prevalence abstinence rates for participants with and without PTSD, respectively, were similar: 39% vs. 38% (1 week), 33% vs. 28% (2 weeks), 22% vs. 19% (3 weeks), and 22% vs. 13% (4 weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of CM + CBT to support tobacco abstinence is a promising intervention for trauma-exposed smokers with and without PTSD.

Dimensions of impulsive behavior: Predicting contingency management treatment outcomes for adolescent smokers

BACKGROUND

Behavioral measures of impulsive behavior include the dimensions of behavioral disinhibition, decision-making, and lapses of attention. These behaviors are associated with a range of risky activities during adolescence, including cigarette smoking; however, few studies have evaluated their associations with tobacco treatment outcomes. The current study examined the relationship between impulsive behavior and contingency management treatment outcomes for adolescent smokers.

METHODS

Data from two contingency management smoking cessation trials were combined (N = 189 adolescents). Participants provided breath carbon monoxide (CO) samples with incentives delivered contingent (i.e., active treatment [AT] condition) or non-contingent (i.e., control treatment [CT] condition) on CO level. Dimensions of impulsive behavior were assessed pre- and post-treatment using the Go/Stop Task, a measure of delay discounting, a continuous performance task, while self-reported impulsivity was assessed with the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Adolescent. Relationships between impulsive behavior and treatment outcomes (efficacy and adherence) were assessed using linear mixed effects models.

RESULTS

Participants in the AT condition had significantly lower program CO levels at each treatment phase. Delay discounting in the AT condition predicted CO levels, with those discounting the most lowering their breath CO levels the least. Delay discounting also predicted program adherence across both conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Delay discounting may be the most relevant dimension of impulsive behavior to predict outcomes for adolescent smokers completing CM programs, both in terms of successful reductions in smoking and program adherence. Suggestions are made to reduce the effects of delay discounting for adolescent smokers using this treatment approach.

Smoking Cessation for Those Pursuing Recovery from Substance Use Disorders

This article summarizes the literature regarding the similar biopsychosocial mechanisms of tobacco use and alcohol and substance use disorders, and the evidence for and against the provision of tobacco cessation for those in treatment for alcohol and substance use disorders. The practicality of treatment, focusing on methods, timing, and breadth of intervention strategies, are also presented. Common methodologies that may be used across tobacco use and alcohol and substance use disorder to prevent lapse and relapse are discussed. Physicians can and should adhere to the policy that tobacco use is a common and dangerous comorbid condition that demands concomitant treatment.

Contingency Management: New Directions and Remaining Challenges for An Evidence-Based Intervention

This article introduces the special issue on contingency management (CM), an efficacious intervention for the treatment of substance use disorders with low uptake in clinical settings that is not commensurate with evidence for efficacy. In this special issue of the Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, we present 16 articles representing the latest research in efficacy, implementation, and technological advances related to CM. Combined, this collection of articles highlights the diverse populations, settings, and applications of CM in the treatment of substance use disorders. We conclude by highlighting directions for future research, particularly those that may increase CM's appeal and uptake in routine clinical care.

Interventions for tobacco use cessation in people in treatment for or recovery from substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

Smoking rates in people with alcohol and other drug dependencies are two to four times those of the general population. Concurrent treatment of tobacco dependence has been limited due to concern that these interventions are not successful in this population or that recovery from other addictions could be compromised if tobacco cessation was combined with other drug dependency treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether interventions for tobacco cessation are associated with tobacco abstinence for people in concurrent treatment for or in recovery from alcohol and other drug dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases, with the most recent search completed in August 2016. A grey literature search of conference abstracts from the Society on Nicotine Research and Treatment and the ProQuest database of digital dissertations yielded one additional study, which was excluded.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions among people in concurrent treatment for alcohol or other drug dependence or in outpatient recovery programmes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from tobacco use at the longest period of follow-up, and the secondary outcome was abstinence from alcohol or other drugs, or both. We reported the strictest definition of abstinence. We summarised effects as risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Two clustered studies did not provide intraclass correlation coefficients, and were excluded from the sensitivity analysis. We used the I² statistic to assess heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five randomised controlled trials, one ongoing, involving 5796 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Included studies assessed the efficacy of tobacco cessation interventions, including counselling, and pharmacotherapy consisting of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or non-NRT, or the two combined, in both inpatient and outpatient settings for participants in treatment and in recovery. Most studies did not report information to assess the risk of allocation, selection, and attrition bias, and were classified as unclear.Analyses considered the nature of the intervention, whether participants were in treatment or recovery and the type of dependency. Of the 34 studies included in the meta-analysis, 11 assessed counselling, 11 assessed pharmacotherapy, and 12 assessed counselling in combination with pharmacotherapy, compared to usual care or no intervention. Tobacco cessation interventions were significantly associated with tobacco abstinence for two types of interventions. Pharmacotherapy appeared to increase tobacco abstinence (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.12, 11 studies, 1808 participants, low quality evidence), as did combined counselling and pharmacotherapy (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.18, 12 studies, 2229 participants, low quality evidence) at the period of longest follow-up, which ranged from six weeks to 18 months. There was moderate evidence of heterogeneity (I² = 56% with pharmacotherapy and 43% with counselling plus pharmacotherapy). Counselling interventions did not significantly increase tobacco abstinence (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.95).Interventions were significantly associated with tobacco abstinence for both people in treatment (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.50) and people in recovery (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.67), and for people with alcohol dependence (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.81) and people with other drug dependencies (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.40).Offering tobacco cessation therapy to people in treatment or recovery for other drug dependence was not associated with a difference in abstinence rates from alcohol and other drugs (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03, 11 studies, 2231 participants, moderate evidence of heterogeneity (I² = 66%)).Data on adverse effect of the interventions were limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies included in this review suggest that providing tobacco cessation interventions targeted to smokers in treatment and recovery for alcohol and other drug dependencies increases tobacco abstinence. There was no evidence that providing interventions for tobacco cessation affected abstinence from alcohol and other drugs. The association between tobacco cessation interventions and tobacco abstinence was consistent for both pharmacotherapy and combined counselling and pharmacotherapy, for participants both in treatment and in recovery, and for people with alcohol dependency or other drug dependency. The evidence for the interventions was low quality due primarily to incomplete reporting of the risks of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the nature of treatment. Certain results were sensitive to the length of follow-up or the type of pharmacotherapy, suggesting that further research is warranted regarding whether tobacco cessation interventions are associated with tobacco abstinence for people in recovery, and the outcomes associated with NRT versus non-NRT or combined pharmacotherapy. Overall, the results suggest that tobacco cessation interventions incorporating pharmacotherapy should be incorporated into clinical practice to reduce tobacco addiction among people in treatment for or recovery from alcohol and other drug dependence.

Treating Smokers in Substance Treatment With Contingent Vouchers, Nicotine Replacement and Brief Advice Adapted for Sobriety Settings

Treatment for substance use disorders (SUD) provides an opportunity to use voucher-based treatment for smoking. Nicotine replacement (NRT) could improve outcomes previously observed with vouchers without NRT.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial compared contingent vouchers (CV) for smoking abstinence to noncontingent vouchers (NV), when all received counseling and NRT. Smokers who had not sought smoking treatment (n=340) in residential SUD treatment were provided 14days of vouchers for complete smoking abstinence per exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) after a 5-day smoking reduction period, or vouchers only for breath samples, plus brief advice (four sessions) and 8weeks of NRT.

RESULTS

Within treatment, 20% had complete abstinence with CV, 5% with NV (p<.001), and participants showed 50% of days abstinent in CV compared to 22% in NV (p<.001). Across 1, 3, 6 and 12months after randomization, CV resulted in significantly fewer cigarettes per day (p<.01) and fewer days smoking (p<.01), but with small effects. Point-prevalence abstinence differences across follow-up (e.g., 4% CV, 2% in NV at 6 and 12months) were not significant. No differences in substance use were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Within-treatment effects on abstinence are stronger than in a prior study of the same CV with BA but without NRT, but NRT does not improve abstinence after vouchers end. Implications for voucher-based treatment include investigating effects when combined with stronger smoking medications and using motivational interviewing. Smoking treatment does not harm SUD recovery.

A Pilot Study of a Readiness Group to Increase Initiation of Smoking Cessation Services among Women in Residential Addiction Treatment

This study implemented a smoking cessation readiness group (RG) in two women-focused residential substance abuse treatment programs, with the aim of engaging women in smoking cessation services. The primary outcome was defined as attending at least one cessation group after the RG ended. The RG combined features of the Expert Systems (ES) approach with a practice quit attempt. ES is an interactive system which tailors intervention to the smokers' stage of change, while the practice quit attempt rehearses the process of quitting smoking. As a secondary aim we tested whether incentives, used to promote participation and engagement in the RG, would increase initiation of smoking cessation services. Participants (N=75) were women smokers enrolled in two residential programs, and intention to quit smoking was not required for participation. Twelve participant cohorts were randomly assigned to receive the RG with or without incentives. Following the RG intervention, 38.7% of participants (n=29) attended at least one smoking cessation session. Both the number of RG sessions attended and a successful practice quit attempt predicted the later use of cessation services, while incentives did not. From pre- to post-RG, participants reported decreased cigarettes per day (CPD: 11.8 vs. 7.6, p<.0001) and decreased nicotine dependence as measured by the Heaviness Smoking Index (HSI: 2.3 vs. 1.8, p<.001). The 3-session group-format RG intervention was associated with initiation of smoking cessation services and with changes in smoking behavior.

Voucher-based contingency management and in-treatment behaviors in smoking cessation treatment

A high percentage of patients relapse within months following an attempt to quit smoking. For this reason, greater understanding of the determinants of successful smoking cessation is needed. The present study assessed the effect of Contingency Management (CM) combined with Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment (CBT) on certain in-treatment behaviors (treatment retention, in-treatment smoking abstinence, and weekly decrease of cotinine levels) and examined the effects of these in-treatment behaviors on smoking status at a 6-month follow-up. A total of 154 treatment-seeking patients in a community setting were randomly assigned to a CBT, CBT plus CM for Abstinence (CMA) or to a CBT plus CM for Shaping cessation (CMS) group. Both CBT + CM procedures improved the in-treatment behaviors compared to CBT alone. These in-treatment behaviors (particularly in-treatment smoking abstinence) were associated with long-term abstinence. The effect of CM on in-treatment behaviors may partially explain the positive long-term outcomes of this procedure. Our findings extend previous knowledge about the effect of CM on smoking behavior.

Cost-effectiveness of a voucher-based intervention for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Contingency management (CM) has been shown to be effective in reducing smoking consumption, but has traditionally been criticized for its costs.

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of using a voucher-based CM protocol added to a cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) for smoking cessation among treatment-seeking patients from the general population.

METHODS

A total of 92 patients were randomly assigned to CBT or CBT plus CM for abstinence. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated by dividing the increase in costs by the increase in effects (continuous abstinence, longest duration of abstinence at 6-month follow-up and cotinine results during the treatment). An acceptability curve illustrated the statistical uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness estimate. We also determined the optimum cost per participant for predicting the smoking status at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The average cost per participant in the CBT condition was €138.73 (US$ 150.23) as opposed to €411.61 (US$ 445.73) in the CBT plus CM condition (p < 0.01). The incremental cost of using voucher-based CM to increase the number of participants that maintained abstinence at 6-month follow-up by one extra participant was €68.22 (US$ 73.88), and to lengthen the longest duration of abstinence by 1 week was €53.92 (US$ 58.39). The incremental cost to obtain an extra cotinine-negative result was €181.90 (US$ 196.98).

CONCLUSION

Compared with CBT alone, the voucher-based protocol required additional costs but achieved significantly better outcomes. These results will allow stakeholders to make policy decisions about CM implementation for smoking cessation in the broader community.

Contingent vouchers and motivational interviewing for cigarette smokers in residential substance abuse treatment

Residential drug treatment provides an opportunity to intervene with smokers with substance use disorders (SUD). A randomized controlled clinical trial compared: (1) contingent vouchers (CV) for smoking abstinence to noncontingent vouchers (NCV), crossed with (2) motivational interviewing (MI) or brief advice (BA), for 184 smokers in SUD treatment. During the voucher period, 36% of carbon monoxide readings indicated smoking abstinence for those receiving CV versus 13% with NCV (p < .001). Post-treatment (3-9 months) point-prevalence abstinence rates were low (3-4% at each follow up), with more abstinence when CV was combined with MI (6.6% on average) than with BA (0% on average). No differential effects on drug use or motivation to quit smoking occurred. Thus, CV had limited effects on long-term smoking abstinence in this population but effects were improved when CV was combined with MI. More effective methods are needed to increase motivation to quit smoking and quit rates in this high-risk population.

Financial incentives for abstinence among socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals in smoking cessation treatment

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the effectiveness of offering adjunctive financial incentives for abstinence (contingency management [CM]) within a safety net hospital smoking cessation program.

METHODS

We randomized participants (n = 146) from a Dallas County, Texas, Tobacco Cessation Clinic from 2011 to 2013 to usual care (UC; cessation program; n = 71) or CM (UC + 4 weeks of financial incentives; n = 75), and followed from 1 week before the quit date through 4 weeks after the quit date. A subset (n = 128) was asked to attend a visit 12 weeks after the scheduled quit date.

RESULTS

Participants were primarily Black (62.3%) or White (28.1%) and female (57.5%). Most participants were uninsured (52.1%) and had an annual household income of less than $12 000 (55.5%). Abstinence rates were significantly higher for those assigned to CM than UC at all visits following the quit date (all Ps < .05). Point prevalence abstinence rates in the CM and UC groups were 49.3% versus 25.4% at 4 weeks after the quit date and 32.8% versus 14.1% at 12 weeks after the quit date. CM participants earned an average of $63.40 ($150 possible) for abstinence during the first 4 weeks after the scheduled quit date.

CONCLUSIONS

Offering small financial incentives for abstinence might be an effective means to improve abstinence rates among socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals participating in smoking cessation treatment.

Incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Material or financial incentives are widely used in an attempt to precipitate or reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They operate in workplaces, in clinics and hospitals, and to a lesser extent within community programmes. In this third update of our review we now include trials conducted in pregnant women, to reflect the increasing activity and resources now targeting this high-risk group of smokers.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether incentives and contingency management programmes lead to higher long-term quit rates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. The most recent searches were in December 2014, although we also include two trials published in 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures. We include studies in a mixed-population setting (e.g. community-, work-, institution-based), and also, for this update, trials in pregnant smokers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author (KC) extracted data and a second (JH-B) checked them. We contacted study authors for additional data where necessary. The main outcome measure in the mixed-population studies was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up, and at least six months from the start of the intervention. In the trials of pregnant smokers abstinence was measured at the longest follow-up, and at least to the end of the pregnancy.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one mixed-population studies met our inclusion criteria, covering more than 8400 participants. Ten studies were set in clinics or health centres, one in Thai villages served by community health workers, two in academic institutions, and the rest in worksites. All but six of the trials were run in the USA. The incentives included lottery tickets or prize draws, cash payments, vouchers for goods and groceries, and in six trials the recovery of money deposited by those taking part. The odds ratio (OR) for quitting with incentives at longest follow-up (six months or more) compared with controls was 1.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.69; 17 trials, [20 comparisons], 7715 participants). Only three studies demonstrated significantly higher quit rates for the incentives group than for the control group at or beyond the six-month assessment: One five-arm USA trial compared rewards- and deposit-based interventions at individual and group level, with incentives available up to USD 800 per quitter, and demonstrated a quit rate in the rewards groups of 8.1% at 12 months, compared with 4.7% in the deposits groups. A direct comparison between the rewards-based and the deposit-based groups found a benefit for the rewards arms, with an OR at 12 months of 1.76 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.53; 2070 participants). Although more people in this trial accepted the rewards programmes than the deposit programmes, the proportion of quitters in each group favoured the deposit-refund programme. Another USA study rewarded both participation and quitting up to USD 750, and achieved sustained quit rates of 9.4% in the incentives group compared with 3.6% for the controls. A deposit-refund trial in Thailand also achieved significantly higher quit rates in the intervention group (44.2%) compared with the control group (18.8%), but uptake was relatively low, at 10.5%. In the remaining trials, there was no clear evidence that participants who committed their own money to the programme did better than those who did not, or that contingent rewards enhanced success rates over fixed payment schedules. We rated the overall quality of the older studies as low, but with later trials (post-2000) more likely to meet current standards of methodology and reporting.Eight of nine trials with usable data in pregnant smokers (seven conducted in the USA and one in the UK) delivered an adjusted OR at longest follow-up (up to 24 weeks post-partum) of 3.60 (95% CI 2.39 to 5.43; 1295 participants, moderate-quality studies) in favour of incentives. Three of the trials demonstrated a clear benefit for contingent rewards; one delivered monthly vouchers to confirmed quitters and to their designated 'significant other supporter', achieving a quit rate in the intervention group of 21.4% at two months post-partum, compared with 5.9% among the controls. Another trial offered a scaled programme of rewards for the percentage of smoking reduction achieved over the course of the 12-week intervention, and achieved an intervention quit rate of 31% at six weeks post-partum, compared with no quitters in the control group. The largest (UK-based) trial provided intervention quitters with up to GBP 400-worth of vouchers, and achieved a quit rate of 15.4% at longest follow-up, compared to the control quit rate of 4%. Four trials confirmed that payments made to reward a successful quit attempt (i.e. contingent), compared to fixed payments for attending the antenatal appointment (non-contingent), resulted in higher quit rates. Front-loading of rewards to counteract early withdrawal symptoms made little difference to quit rates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Incentives appear to boost cessation rates while they are in place. The two trials recruiting from work sites that achieved sustained success rates beyond the reward schedule concentrated their resources into substantial cash payments for abstinence. Such an approach may only be feasible where independently-funded smoking cessation programmes are already available, and within a relatively affluent and educated population. Deposit-refund trials can suffer from relatively low rates of uptake, but those who do sign up and contribute their own money may achieve higher quit rates than reward-only participants. Incentive schemes conducted among pregnant smokers improved the cessation rates, both at the end-of-pregnancy and post-partum assessments. Current and future research might continue to explore the scale, loading and longevity of possible cash or voucher reward schedules, within a variety of smoking populations.

Smoking reductions and increased self-efficacy in a randomized controlled trial of smoking abstinence-contingent incentives in residential substance abuse treatment patients

INTRODUCTION

Individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) experience increased smoking-related morbidity and mortality but severely compromised smoking treatment benefits. Residential SUD treatment settings may be particularly positioned to target smoking, with ever-increasing smoking bans and culture shifts, but most smokers continue smoking. This study examined the effects of contingency management (CM) for increasing smoking abstinence in residential patients.

METHODS

Smokers interested in quitting were recruited from a residential SUD program for men and were randomized to frequent smoking monitoring with behavioral support (monitoring; n = 21) or that plus smoking abstinence-contingent (expired carbon monoxide [CO] ≤ 6 ppm; urinary cotinine ≤ 30ng/ml) incentives (CM, n = 24) for 4 weeks. After setting a quit date, procedures included daily behavioral support and smoking self-reports, 2 CO samples (a.m./p.m.) Monday through Friday, and cotinine tests on Mondays. CM participants received escalating draws for prizes ($1, $20, and $100 values) for negative tests; positive and missed samples reset draws. Follow-ups involved samples, self-reported smoking, and self-efficacy (weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24).

RESULTS

Percent days CO-negative was higher with CM (median [interquartile range] 51.7% [62.8%]) compared to monitoring (0% [32.1%]) (p = .002). Cigarettes per day declined and point-prevalence abstinence increased through follow-up (p < .01), without significant group by time effects (p > .05). Abstinence self-efficacy increased overall during the intervention and more with CM compared to monitoring and was associated with abstinence across conditions through follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

CM improved some measures of response to smoking treatment in residential SUD patients.

Prize-based contingency management for the treatment of substance abusers: a meta-analysis

AIM

To review randomized controlled trials to assess efficacy of a prize-based contingency management procedure in reducing substance use (where a drug-free breath or urine sample provides a chance of winning a prize).

METHODS

A meta-analysis was conducted on papers published from January 2000 to February 2013 to determine the effect size of studies comparing prize-based contingency management to a treatment-as-usual control condition (k = 19 studies). Parallel analyses evaluated the efficacy of both short- (k = nine studies) and long-term outcomes (k = six studies) of prize-based contingency management.

RESULTS

The average end-of-treatment effect size (Cohen's d) was 0.46 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.37, 0.54]. This effect size decreased at the short-term (≤3-month) post-intervention follow-up to 0.33 (95% CI = 0.12, 0.54) and at the 6-month follow-up time-point there was no detectable effect [d = -0.09 (95% CI = -0.28, 0.10)].

CONCLUSION

Adding prize-based contingency management to behavioral support for substance use disorders can increase short-term abstinence, but the effect does not appear to persist to 6 months.

A randomized study of contingency management and spirometric lung age for motivating smoking cessation among injection drug users

Background

Even after quitting illicit drugs, tobacco abuse remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in former injection drug users. An important unmet need in this population is to have effective interventions that can be used in the context of community based care. Contingency management, where a patient receives a monetary incentive for healthy behavior choices, and incorporation of individual counseling regarding spirometric “lung age” (the age of an average healthy individual with similar spirometry) have been shown to improve cessation rates in some populations. The efficacy of these interventions on improving smoking cessation rates has not been studied among current and former injection drug users.

Methods

In a randomized, factorial design study, we recruited 100 active smokers from an ongoing cohort study of current and former injection drug users to assess the impact of contingency management and spirometric lung age on smoking cessation. The primary outcome was 6-month biologically-confirmed smoking cessation comparing contingency management, spirometric lung age or both to usual care. Secondary outcomes included differences in self-reported and biologically-confirmed cessation at interim visits, number of visits attended and quit attempts, smoking rates at interim visits, and changes in Fagerstrom score and self-efficacy.

Results

Six-month biologically-confirmed smoking cessations rates were 4% usual care, 0% lung age, 14% contingency management and 0% for combined lung age and contingency management (p = 0.13). There were no differences in secondary endpoints comparing the four interventions or when pooling the lung age groups. Comparing contingency management to non-contingency management, 6-month cessation rates were not different (7% vs. 2%; p = 0.36), but total number of visits with exhaled carbon monoxide-confirmed abstinence were higher for contingency management than non-contingency management participants (0.38 vs. 0.06; p = 0.03), and more contingency management participants showed reduction in their Fagerstrom score from baseline to follow-up (39% vs. 18%; p = 0.03).

Conclusions

While lung age appeared ineffective, contingency management was associated with more short-term abstinence and lowered nicotine addiction. Contingency management may be a useful tool in development of effective tobacco cessation strategies among current and former injection drug users.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01334736 (April 12, 2011).

Prize contingency management for smoking cessation: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Adjunctive behavioral smoking cessation treatments have the potential to improve outcomes beyond standard care. The present study had two aims: (1) compare standard care (SC) for smoking (four weeks of brief counseling and monitoring) to SC plus prize-based contingency management (CM), involving the chance to earn prizes on days with demonstrated smoking abstinence (carbon monoxide (CO) ≤6 ppm); and (2) compare the relative efficacy of two prize reinforcement schedules-one a traditional CM schedule, and the second an early enhanced CM schedule providing greater reinforcement magnitude in the initial week of treatment but equal overall reinforcement.

METHODS

Participants (N=81 nicotine-dependent cigarette smokers) were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions.

RESULTS

Prize CM resulted in significant reductions in cigarette smoking relative to SC. These reductions were not apparent at follow-up. We found no meaningful differences between the traditional and enhanced CM conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings reveal that prize CM leads to significant reductions in smoking during treatment relative to a control intervention, but the benefits did not extend long-term.

EPA Guidance on Tobacco Dependence and Strategies for Smoking Cessation in People with Mental Illness

Tobacco dependence is the most common substance use disorder in adults with mental illness. The prevalence rates for tobacco dependence are two to four times higher in these patients than in the general population. Smoking has a strong, negative influence on the life expectancy and quality of life of mental health patients, and remains the leading preventable cause of death in this group. Despite these statistics, in some countries smokers with mental illness are disadvantaged in receiving intervention and support for their tobacco dependence, which is often overlooked or even tolerated. This statement from the European Psychiatric Association (EPA) systematically reviews the current evidence on tobacco dependence and withdrawal in patients with mental illness and their treatment. It provides seven recommendations for the core components of diagnostics and treatment in this patient group. These recommendations concern: (1) the recording process, (2) the timing of the intervention, (3) counselling specificities, (4) proposed treatments, (5) frequency of contact after stopping, (6) follow-up visits and (7) relapse prevention. They aim to help clinicians improve the care, health and well-being of patients suffering from mental illness.

[Tobacco use and illicit substance use disorders: what should we have to do?]

Tobacco use is a commonplace phenomenon in our society. Its use is responsible for more death and disease than any other noninfectious cause. More deaths are caused each year by tobacco use than by all deaths from HIV, illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, suicides, and murders combined. Tobacco remains responsible for greater morbidity than alcohol and all other drugs combined. Tobacco dependence is highly prevalent among drug-dependent patients. Substance abuse patients smoke more and are more vulnerable to the effects of smoking than general populations. Traditional substance abuse therapeutic programs too frequently focus only on treatment of alcohol or other drugs rather than including treatment for tobacco dependence. Currently, there are no official medical recommendations for the treatment of tobacco addiction in illicit polysubstance users.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search from a range of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Google Scholar) was conducted for the period from 1988 to September 2012, using the following keywords alone or in combination: tobacco, nicotine, cocaine, cannabis, amphetamines, opiates, substance abuse, substance dependence, addiction, treatment. There were no restrictions on the identification or inclusion of studies in terms of publication status, language and design type.

RESULTS

Our literature review will focus on epidemiological, neurobiological, clinical interactions between tobacco, alcohol and other illicit drugs. It will also focus on therapeutic programs in this dual addictive disorder. The aim of this literature review is to make proposals for the treatment of tobacco addiction in polysubstance users entering in specific therapeutic programs.

The use of financial incentives in promoting smoking cessation

OBJECTIVE

Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States and world. Despite the availability of numerous therapies for smoking cessation, additional efficacious interventions are greatly needed. We provide a narrative review of published studies evaluating financial incentives for smoking cessation and discuss the parameters important for ensuring the efficacy of incentive interventions for smoking cessation.

METHODS

Published studies that evaluated the impact of incentives to promote smoking cessation and included an appropriate control or comparison condition were identified and reviewed.

RESULTS

Incentives are efficacious for promoting smoking abstinence across the general population of smokers as well as substance abusers, adolescents, patients with pulmonary disease, patients with serious mental illness and other challenging subgroups. To develop and implement an effective incentive treatment for smoking, special attention should be paid to biochemical verification of smoking status, incentive magnitude and the schedule of incentive delivery.

CONCLUSION

Consistent with the extensive literature showing that incentives are effective in reducing illicit drug use, a large body of evidence supports their effectiveness in reducing smoking. Continued efforts are warranted to further develop and disseminate incentive-based treatments for smoking cessation across clinical settings and populations.

Competitions and incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Background Material or financial incentives may be used in an attempt to reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been widely used in workplace smoking cessation programmes, and to a lesser extent within community programmes. Public health initiatives in the UK are currently planning to deploy incentive schemes to change unhealthy behaviours. Quit and Win contests are the subject of a companion review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether competitions and incentives lead to higher long-term quit rates. We also set out to examine the relationship between incentives and participation rates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Search terms included incentive*, competition*, contest*, reward*, prize*, contingent payment*, deposit contract*. The most recent searches were in November 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one author (KC) and checked by the second (RP). We contacted study authors for additional data where necessary. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking at least six months from the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. Where possible we performed meta-analysis using a generic inverse variance model, grouped by timed endpoints, but not pooled across the subgroups.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen studies met our inclusion criteria, covering >4500 participants. Only one study, the largest in our review and covering 878 smokers, demonstrated significantly higher quit rates for the incentives group than for the control group beyond the six-month assessment. This trial referred its participants to local smoking cessation services, and offered substantial cash payments (up to US$750) for prolonged abstinence. In the remaining trials, there was no clear evidence that participants who committed their own money to the programme did better than those who did not, or that contingent rewards enhanced success rates over fixed payment schedules. There is some evidence that recruitment rates can be improved by rewarding participation, which may be expected to deliver higher absolute numbers of successful quitters. Cost effectiveness analysis was not appropriate to this review, since the efficacy of most of the interventions was not demonstrated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of one recent trial, incentives and competitions have not been shown to enhance long-term cessation rates. Early success tended to dissipate when the rewards were no longer offered. Rewarding participation and compliance in contests and cessation programmes may have potential to deliver higher absolute numbers of quitters. The one trial that achieved sustained success rates beyond the reward schedule concentrated its resources into substantial cash payments for abstinence rather than into running its own smoking cessation programme. Such an approach may only be feasible where independently-funded smoking cessation programmes are already available. Future research might explore the scale and longevity of possible cash reward schedules, within a variety of smoking populations.

Clinical management of smoking cessation: patient factors affecting a reward-based approach

Although the majority of current smokers indicate they would like to quit, only about half of smokers make a quit attempt each year. Of those who attempt to quit, only about 5% are successful. Many effective products and programs are available to assist in smoking cessation; however those interested in quitting often do not make use of these resources. To increase use of cessation products in order to improve successful cessation rates, the Consumer Demand Roundtable has argued that smokers need to be viewed as consumers of cessation products rather than as patients needing treatment. With this consumer-based approach in mind, the current review examines how participant characteristics, perceptions, and behavior influence, and are influenced by, contingency management (CM) paradigms in various settings. Findings suggest that participant factors associated with success in these programs include demographic characteristics (eg, gender, marital status), self-efficacy, motivation to quit, and impulsivity. Overall, participants perceive incentives for successful cessation as motivating. However, such programs may involve greater withdrawal symptoms (eg, craving for cigarettes) initially, but these symptoms tend to decrease at a greater rate over time compared with nonincentive group participants. CM programs have also been shown to be successful across a number of settings (eg, communities, schools), including settings in which smokers are often considered difficult to treat (eg, substance abuse treatment centers). Overall, CM programs are perceived positively by participants and can increase rates of successful cessation. Furthermore, CM interventions have the flexibility to adapt to individual preferences and needs, leading to greater participation and likelihood of successful cessation. Thus, CM provides an important framework for addressing the need for consumer-focused smoking cessation interventions.

Prize-based contingency management is efficacious in cocaine-abusing patients with and without recent gambling participation

Prize-based contingency management (CM) is efficacious in treating cocaine abuse, and the chance-based procedures of prize CM may be appealing to those who gamble. Using data from three randomized trials, we evaluated whether cocaine-abusing patients who had wagered in the month before treatment (n = 62) responded more favorably to prize CM than those who had not (n = 278). Participants were randomized to standard care (SC) or SC plus prize CM. Although prize CM was related to better outcomes overall, recent gambling was not associated with outcomes across or within treatment conditions. Gambling participation before treatment entry was associated with reductions in gambling over time, and this effect was more pronounced among those assigned to CM. These data suggest that prize CM is equally efficacious for substance-abusing patients who do and do not gamble, and they extend prior studies indicating that prize CM does not increase gambling.

Introduction to the special issue on the behavior analysis and treatment of drug addiction

Extensive evidence from the laboratory and the clinic suggests that drug addiction can be viewed as operant behavior and effectively treated through the application of principles of operant conditioning. Contingency management interventions that arrange for the direct reinforcement of drug abstinence or of other therapeutically important target behaviors (e.g., regular use of drug abuse treatment medications) are among the most studied type of operant treatments. Behavior analysts have contributed to the substantial and rapidly growing literature on operant treatments for drug addiction, but the publications of this work usually appear in medical, clinical psychology, or drug abuse journals. This special issue of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis represents an effort to bring this important work to the attention of the behavior-analytic community. The articles in this special issue illustrate both the enormous potential of contingency management interventions to address the serious and seemingly intractable problem of drug addiction as well as the real challenges involved in attempting to develop and disseminate treatments that will produce substantial and lasting changes in the lives of individuals plagued by the chronic problem of drug addiction.