Implementing contingency management into rural recovery housing: recommendations of a professional advisory expert panel.

Background: Rural areas in the United States have been severely impacted by recent rises in substance use related mortality and psychosocial consequences. There is a dearth of treatment resources to address substance use disorder (SUD). Rural recovery houses (RRH) are important services that provide individuals with SUD with an environment where they can engage in recovery-oriented activities, but dropout rates are unacceptably high, and evidence-based interventions such as contingency management (CM) may reduce dropout and improve outcomes for RRH residents. In this paper, we describe the results of a national convening of experts that addressed important issues concerning the implementation of CM within the context of RRHs.Methods: Twelve experts (five female) in the areas of CM, RRH and rural health participated in a one-day facilitated meeting that used nominal group technique to identify expert consensus in three areas as they pertain to RRH: (a) facilitators and barriers to CM implementation, (b) elements necessary for successful program building based on group feedback, and (c) recommendations for future implementation of CM.Results: Several RRH- and system-level barriers and facilitators to implementing CM were identified by the panel, and these were categorized based on the level of importance for and ease of implementation. CM funding, staff and resident buy-in, set policies, education on CM, and consistent fidelity to CM procedures and tracking were identified as important requirements for implementing CM in RRH.Conclusions: We provide recommendations for the implementation of CM in RRH that may be useful in this context, as well as more broadly.

Lessons learned from statewide contingency management rollouts addressing stimulant use in the Northwestern United States.

Increases in stimulant drug use (such as methamphetamine) and related deaths creates an imperative for community settings to adopt evidence-based practices to help people who use stimulants. Contingency management (CM) is a behavioral intervention with decades of research demonstrating efficacy for the treatment of stimulant use disorder, but real-world adoption has been slow, due to well-known implementation barriers, including difficulty funding reinforcers, and stigma. This paper describes the training and technical assistance (TTA) efforts and lessons learned for two state-wide stimulant-focused CM implementation projects in the Northwestern United States (Montana and Washington). A total of 154 providers from 35 community-based service sites received didactic training in CM beginning in 2021. Seventeen of these sites, ten of eleven in Montana (90.9%) and seven of 24 in Washington (29.2%), went on to implement contingency management programs adherent to their state's established CM protocol and received ongoing TTA in the form of implementation coaching calls. These findings illustrate that site-specific barriers such as logistical fit precluded implementation in more than 50% of the trained sites; however, strategies for site-specific tailoring within the required protocol aided implementation, resulting in successful CM program launch in a diverse cross-section of service sites across the states. The lessons learned add to the body of literature describing CM implementation barriers and solutions.

Expanding access to treatment for stimulant use disorder in a frontier state: A qualitative study of contingency management and TRUST program implementation in Montana.

BACKGROUND: The client population eligible for treatment services supported by State Opioid Response (SOR) grant funding, administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), was expanded to include individuals with a stimulant use disorder (stimUD) in 2020. Due to a significant need to improve services for individuals with stimUD in Montana, the Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities Division (BHDD) of the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services used the grant opportunity to work with experts in the field of stimUD to pilot contingency management (CM) and the Treatment for Individuals who Use Stimulants (TRUST) treatment model. The CM protocol included twice weekly visits for twelve weeks, using an escalating schedule of gift card incentives contingent upon stimulant-negative urine samples. TRUST is a multi-component treatment program, incorporating exercise, group therapy, and individual therapy with content guided by cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and clinical research associate (CRA) materials. In addition to SOR dollars, BHDD used additional funding for CM reinforcers provided by state tax dollars to meet research-supported target incentive totals. METHODS: In this pilot project, TRUST/CM was implemented by four state-approved treatment providers and three Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), all of which had little prior experience with CM as a component of their treatment programs for stimUD. This article examines the processes of training staff, the experiences among staff with initial implementation of the treatment model, and the client characteristics of initial pilot treatment cohorts. Data for this study include primary qualitative data collected from providers, as well as client characteristics collected on the SAMHSA Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) data collection form. RESULTS: Seven sites were trained in TRUST/CM, and these sites enrolled a total of 70 patients in the program. Qualitative data collected through interviews with site staff revealed the following themes: the value of intensive technical assistance being integrated in the program, concerns about staff retention and loss of expertise, adjustments of target client populations, and the importance of creative strategies for the provision of evidence-informed incentive totals. CONCLUSIONS: TRUST/CM was implemented throughout Montana, including rural and urban communities. Qualitative and quantitative data support that providers viewed the CM component as beneficial for treatment retention and improved outcomes for people with stimUD. These implementation study results provide insight into challenges and solutions for providers who are considering the implementation of CM within either a state-approved substance use treatment clinic or FQHC.