A qualitative examination of the positive and negative consequences associated with going tobacco-free in substance abuse treatment: the NY State experience.

INTRODUCTION: In 2008, the New York State (NYS) Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS) required all state-funded or state-certified addiction treatment programs to be 100% tobacco-free. The regulation prohibits the use or possession of all tobacco products by patients, employees, volunteers, and visitors. This includes exterior grounds and vehicles owned, leased, or operated by the facility. Addiction treatment centers are also required to screen patients for tobacco use and incorporate tobacco cessation into treatment programming. This study examined the perceived effectiveness of this regulation from the perspective of counselors and clinical supervisors. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected from 261 counselors and 80 clinical supervisors working in 50 free-standing substance abuse treatment programs throughout NYS. Questions asked about the perceived positive and negative consequences of the OASAS regulation approximately 1 year after its implementation. RESULTS: The findings indicate mixed reactions to the regulation. A wide range of positive and negative consequences were identified, which were generally consistent across counselor and clinical supervisor reports. The most commonly reported positive outcomes were positive behavior change (e.g., less smoking, increased intentions to quit) and increased awareness about smoking (e.g., dangers, available assistance to quit). The most commonly reported negative consequences were reinforcing addict behaviors among patients (e.g., lying, "dealing" cigarettes) and enforcement problems (e.g., difficulty enforcing, policing for compliance). CONCLUSION: Findings have implications for the implementation of tobacco-free regulations in substance abuse treatment programs.

Primary outcome indices in illicit drug dependence treatment research: systematic approach to selection and measurement of drug use end-points in clinical trials.

AIMS: Clinical trials test the safety and efficacy of behavioral and pharmacological interventions in drug-dependent individuals. However, there is no consensus about the most appropriate outcome(s) to consider in determining treatment efficacy or on the most appropriate methods for assessing selected outcome(s). We summarize the discussion and recommendations of treatment and research experts, convened by the US National Institute on Drug Abuse, to select appropriate primary outcomes for drug dependence treatment clinical trials, and in particular the feasibility of selecting a common outcome to be included in all or most trials. METHODS: A brief history of outcomes employed in prior drug dependence treatment research, incorporating perspectives from tobacco and alcohol research, is included. The relative merits and limitations of focusing on drug-taking behavior, as measured by self-report and qualitative or quantitative biological markers, are evaluated. RESULTS: Drug-taking behavior, measured ideally by a combination of self-report and biological indicators, is seen as the most appropriate proximal primary outcome in drug dependence treatment clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the most appropriate outcome will vary as a function of salient variables inherent in the clinical trial, such as the type of intervention, its target, treatment goals (e.g. abstinence or reduction of use) and the perspective being taken (e.g. researcher, clinical program, patient, society). It is recommended that a decision process, based on such trial variables, be developed to guide the selection of primary and secondary outcomes as well as the methods to assess them.

Disseminating evidence-based practices in substance abuse treatment: a review with suggestions.

Although substance abuse professionals are generally open to new and better therapeutic methods, most evidence-based treatments do not easily find their way into practice. Natural diffusion processes for innovations in substance abuse treatments are relatively informal and have yielded a widely acknowledged gap between science and community practice. This review focuses on methods for effectively disseminating new treatment methods into practice. Therapist manuals and one-time workshops are in themselves relatively ineffective in helping practitioners gain proficiency in new clinical approaches. Individual performance feedback and coaching improve the acquisition of clinical skills. Specific incentives for implementation may also be needed to encourage treatment providers, programs, and systems to adopt new approaches.