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.

Mentoring support from clinical supervisors: mentor motives and associations with counselor work-to-nonwork conflict.

Based on mentoring theory, social exchange theory, and theories of stress and coping, this study examined antecedents and consequences of the provision of mentoring support by clinical supervisors. Of particular interest is how the provision of mentoring support is further linked to counselor's experience of work-to-nonwork conflict. Survey data were collected in person in 2008 from 418 matched clinical supervisor-counselor dyads who worked in substance use disorder treatment programs across the U.S. Path analysis showed that clinical supervisors' evaluation of relational costs, relational benefits, and overall relationship quality with a particular counselor was related to the counselor's perception of the amount of mentoring support provided. In turn, perceived mentoring support was negatively related to both strain-based and time-based work-to-nonwork conflict among counselors. These findings suggest that counselors and clinical supervisors should be encouraged to build positive social exchanges to help reduce perceptions of counselor work-to-nonwork conflict.

Effective Clinical Supervision in Substance Use Disorder Treatment Programs and Counselor Job Performance.

When mental health counselors have limited and/or inadequate training in substance use disorders (SUDs), effective clinical supervision (ECS) may advance their professional development. The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether ECS is related to the job performance of SUD counselors. Data were obtained in person via paper-and-pencil surveys from 392 matched SUD counselor-clinical supervisor dyads working in 27 SUD treatment organizations across the United States. ECS was rated by counselors and measured with five multi-item scales (i.e., sponsoring counselors' careers, providing challenging assignments, role modeling, accepting/confirming counselors' competence, overall supervisor task proficiency). Clinical supervisors rated counselors' job performance, which was measured with two multi-item scales (i.e., task performance, performance within supervisory relationship). Using mixed-effects models, we found that most aspects of ECS are related to SUD counselor job performance. Thus, ECS may indeed enhance counselors' task performance and performance within the supervisory relationship, and, as a consequence, offset limited formal SUD training.

An interdisciplinary meta-analysis of the potential antecedents, correlates, and consequences of protégé perceptions of mentoring.

This meta-analysis summarized youth, academic, and workplace research on the potential antecedents (demographics, human capital, and relationship attributes), correlates (interaction frequency, relationship length, performance, motivation, and social capital), and consequences (attitudinal, behavioral, career-related, and health-related outcomes) of protégé perceptions of instrumental support, psychosocial support, and relationship quality to the mentor or to the relationship. A total of 173 meta-analytic correlations were computed based on data from 173 samples and a combined N of 40,737. Among antecedents, positive protégé perceptions were most strongly associated with greater similarity in attitudes, values, beliefs, and personality with their mentors (ρ ranged from .38 to .59). Among correlates, protégé perceptions of greater instrumental support (ρ = .35) and relationship quality (ρ = .54) were most strongly associated with social capital while protégé perceptions of greater psychosocial support were most strongly associated with interaction frequency (ρ = .25). Among consequences, protégé perceptions of greater instrumental support (ρ = .36) and relationship quality (ρ = .38) were most strongly associated with situational satisfaction while protégé perceptions of psychosocial support were most highly associated with sense of affiliation (ρ = .41). Comparisons between academic and workplace mentoring generally revealed differences in magnitude, rather than direction, of the obtained effects. The results should be interpreted in light of the methodological limitations (primarily cross-sectional designs and single-source data) and, in some instances, a small number of primary studies.