Six-month length of stay associated with better recovery outcomes among residents of sober living houses.

Background: Sober living houses are designed for individuals in recovery to live with others in recovery, yet no guidelines exist for the time needed in a sober living house to significantly impact outcomes.Objectives: To examine how the length of stay in sober living houses is related to substance use and related outcomes, focusing on early discontinuation (length of stay less than six months) and stable residence (length of stay six months or longer).Methods: Baseline and 12-month data were collected from 455 sober living house residents (36% female). Longitudinal mixed models tested associations between early discontinuation vs. stable residence and abstinence, recovery capital, psychiatric, and legal outcomes. Final models were adjusted for resident demographics, treatment, 12-step attendance, use in social network, and psychiatric symptoms, with a random effect for house.Results: Both early discontinuers (n = 284) and stable residents (n = 171) improved significantly (Ps ≤ .05) between baseline and 12 months on all outcomes. Compared to early discontinuation, stable residence was related to 7.76% points more percent days abstinent (95% CI: 4.21, 11.31); 0.88 times fewer psychiatric symptoms (95% CI: 0.81, 0.94); 0.84 times fewer depression symptoms (95% CI: 0.76, 0.92); and lower odds of any DSM-SUD (OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.89) and any legal problems (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.40, 0.86).Conclusion: In this study of sober living houses in California, staying in a sober living house for at least six months was related to better outcomes than leaving before six months. Residents and providers should consider this in long-term recovery planning.

Measuring Architecture in Recovery Homes: Recovery Home Architecture Scale.

Background: The settings where we live shape our daily experiences and interactions. Social environment and physical setting characteristics may be particularly important in communal living services, such as recovery homes for alcohol and drug disorders. Objectives: This paper describes the measurement and mobilization of architectural characteristics in one type of recovery home, sober living houses (SLHs). The Recovery Home Architecture Scale (RHAS) is a 25-item measure comprised of six subscales designed to assess architecture in SLHs. Results: Using a sample of 528 individuals residing in 41 houses, we found the RHAS had good interrater reliability, factor structure, and internal consistency. The measure also showed modest construct validity. The RHAS was not associated with length of stay (LOS) but did interact with a measure of the social environment that predicted LOS, the Recovery Home Environment Scale (RHES). Conclusions: Future studies should include a more diverse sample of SLHs and assess how house management, recovery capital, and other factors work in concert with architecture.

Social Model Recovery and Recovery Housing.

Recovery housing is an important resource for many in their recovery from alcohol and other drug use disorders. Yet providers of recovery housing face a number of challenges. Many of these challenges are rooted in stigma and bias about recovery housing. The ability to describe the service and purported mechanisms of action vis-a-vis an overarching framework, approach, or orientation could also go a long way in adding credence to recovery housing as a service delivery mechanism. Several aspects of social model recovery are often explicitly built or organically reflected in how recovery housing operates, yet describing recovery housing in these terms often does little to demystify key features of recovery housing. To more fully cement social model recovery as the organizing framework for recovery housing this article aims to: review the history, current status, and evidence base for social model recovery; comment on challenges to implementing the social model in recovery housing; and delineate steps to overcome these challenges and establish an evidence base for social model recovery housing.

Characteristics of women with alcohol use disorders who benefit from intensive motivational interviewing.

BACKGROUND: Women with alcohol disorders have more severe problems related to their drinking than men. They have higher mortality from alcohol-related accidents and enter treatment with more serious medical, psychiatric, and social consequences.Objective: This study assessed the effects of Intensive Motivational Interviewing (IMI), a new, 9-session counseling intervention for women with drinking problems.Methods: A randomized clinical trial was conducted with 215 women. Most were white (83%), college educated (61%), and older (mean age 51). Half received IMI and half a standard single session of MI (SMI) along with an attention control (nutritional education).Results: Generalized estimating equations models showed women who were heavy drinkers at baseline in the IMI condition reduced heavy drinking more than those in the SMI condition at 2-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. Analyses of disaggregated subgroups showed IMI was most effective for women with low psychiatric severity, more severe physical and impulse control consequences associated with drinking, and higher motivation. However, formal 3-way interaction models (condition by moderator by time) showed significant effects primarily at 2 months.Conclusions: Improvements associated with IMI were limited to heavy drinking and varied among subgroups of women. Studies of women with more diverse characteristics are needed.

Psychometric Properties of the Recovery Home Environment Scale.

BACKGROUND: Recovery homes for persons with alcohol and drug problems provide an abstinent living environment and social support for recovery. Research shows residents in these homes make significant, sustained improvements. However, descriptions of recovery environments within the homes have been limited. PURPOSE: The current study assessed psychometric properties for the Recovery Home Environment Scale (RHES), which assessed social environments within one type of recovery home, sober living houses (SLHs). METHODS: 373 residents were interviewed at entry into the house, 1-month follow-up, and 6-month follow-up. Measures included the RHES, other measures of the social environment, days of substance use, and length of stay. RESULTS: Principal components analysis suggested the RHES was largely unidimensional. Exploratory factor analysis suggested items could be grouped into recovery support (3 items) and recovery skills (5 items). Cronbach's alphas for the full scale and the recovery support and recovery skills subscales were 0.91, 0.89, and 0.87, respectively. As hypothesized, construct validity of the RHES was supported by correlations with other measures of the social environment and predictive validity was supported by associations with length of stay and substance use. CONCLUSIONS: SLHs have been described as "the setting is the service." However, the field has lacked a way to capture characteristics of the social environment. The RHES represents a new way to measure the recovery environment by focusing on social interactions among residents within SLHs and shared activities in the community.

Resident and house manager perceptions of social environments in sober living houses: Associations with length of stay.

AIMS: Studies have shown persons living in recovery homes for drug and alcohol problems make significant, sustained improvements. However, there is limited information about factors associated with outcomes. This study examined how perceptions of social environment of one type of recovery home, sober living houses (SLHs), were associated with length of stay (LOS). METHODS: SLH residents and their house managers (N = 416) completed the recovery home environment scale (RHES) that assessed social model recovery characteristics and the community-oriented program evaluation scale (CPES) that evaluated perceptions of the program environment. RESULTS: Scales completed by residents predicted LOS, but those completed by house managers did not. Larger discrepancies between the two groups were associated with shorter LOS. The RHES was shown to be a stronger predictor of LOS than the CPES. CONCLUSION: Results highlight the importance of the social environment in SLHs, particularly those most closely aligned with social model recovery principles.

House Manager Roles in Sober Living Houses.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol and drug treatment providers are increasingly emphasizing the role of long-term, community-based systems of care. A good example is Sober Living Houses (SLHs), which are peer operated alcohol- and drug-free living environments. Studies show residents of SLHs make significant improvements in multiple areas. However, little attention has been devoted to describing the critically important role of SLH managers who oversee these homes. METHODS: Thirty-five SLH managers completed interviews about the characteristics and operations of their houses, their activities as managers, and ways their own recovery was affected by their work. RESULTS: Managers reported widespread use of some but not all principles of social model recovery. Manager roles varied dramatically in terms of time spent managing houses, activities related to their roles, and training they received. Some reported extensive amounts of time proving support to residents, while others viewed their role as primarily administrative. CONCLUSIONS: Research is needed to understand reasons for manager differences, optimal manager functioning, and manager training needs. Research is also needed to assess whether different house characteristics require different manager roles.

Recovery Home Environment Characteristics Associated with Recovery Capital.

BACKGROUND: Recovery capital refers to internal and external resources that facilitate recovery from alcohol and drug disorders. Examples include support from friends and family, access to health and other services, stable housing and finances, and internal assets, such as self-esteem and motivation. Recovery capital is receiving increased emphasis as an integral component of addiction services. However, there are a limited number of studies assessing recovery capital in different settings. METHODS: The current study assessed recovery capital among 363 individuals entering sober living recovery homes (SLHs) and showed how recovery capital was associated with individual and social environment characteristics of the houses. Individual characteristics were assessed shortly after residents entered the house (mean=17 days, sd=9.0). Approximately one month later, individuals were interviewed about their perceptions of the social environment within the household. We hypothesized residents' perceptions of social model characteristics within the household would be associated with higher recovery capital. RESULTS: Study findings showed individual characteristics associated with recovery capital included motivation, support from friends and family, and 12-step involvement. Perceptions of the social environment assessed by four subscales on the Community Oriented Program Evaluation Scale and a measure of social model characteristics were correlated with recovery capital. Regression analyses controlling for individual characteristics showed modest, but consistent associations with recovery capital. CONCLUSION: Even after relatively short periods of time in SLHs, resident perceptions of the social environment show associations with recovery capital. Additional research is needed to understand causal dynamics of this relationship and associations with outcome.

Recovery in context: Sober living houses and the ecology of recovery.

Sober living houses (SLHs) are an increasingly common element of the recovery support services landscape, yet little is known about their neighborhood context. This study describes neighborhoods in which SLHs are located and examines differences by house characteristics. SLHs in Los Angeles County (N = 297) were geocoded and linked with U.S. Census, alcohol outlet, recovery resources, and accessibility data. Regression analyses tested differences by house characteristics. Co-ed houses were in neighborhoods that were less ethnically diverse and farther away from recovery resources. Larger house capacity was associated with increased density of off-premise alcohol outlets but also increased proximity to treatment. Higher fees were associated with lower neighborhood disadvantage and off-premise alcohol outlet density but the greater distance from treatment programs and other recovery resources. House characteristics are associated with neighborhood factors that both support recovery and place residents at risk.

Intensive Motivational Interviewing for Heavy Drinking among Women.

OBJECTIVES: Women suffer more severe consequences related to heavy drinking than men. Relative to men, women who are heavy drinkers experience higher severity of medical, psychiatric, and social problems, even when they have fewer years drinking. Currently there are few gender-specific, evidence-based interventions for heavy drinking among women. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was conducted with 215 women with alcohol problems. Half were randomly assigned to receive a 9-session, "Intensive Motivational Interviewing" (IMI) intervention (N=107) and half were randomly assigned to a standard single session of MI (SMI) along with 8 sessions of nutritional education (N=108) to achieve time equivalence. Both conditions received weekly outpatient group counseling. Follow-up interviews were conducted at 2 months. Primary outcomes included percent drinking days (PDD), percent heavy drinking days (PHDD, 4+ drinks), and the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) Alcohol scale. Longitudinal changes were assessed using generalized estimating equations (GEE). RESULTS: The sample was predominantly white (83.3%), college educated (61.4%), and married (53.5%). The mean age was 50.9 (sd = 11.3). Relative to baseline, both study conditions showed significant reductions in PDD, PHDD, and ASI alcohol severity (p<.001). Among heavy drinkers, defined as women drinking 14+ days to the point of intoxication over the past 30 days at baseline (N=153), those assigned to IMI (n=67) showed larger reductions in PDD (p<.01) and PHDD (p<.05) at 2-months compared to women receiving SMI. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the efficacy of IMI for heavy drinking among women. Additional studies are needed that assess drinking over longer time periods.

Improving Recovery Outcomes among MSM: The Potential Role of Recovery Housing.

BACKGROUND: Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) face unique recovery challenges. Recovery housing may play an important role in improving outcomes among MSM, but little is known about their experiences in these settings. METHODS: This study examined 3-month outcomes among MSM (N=22) living in a group of recovery residences in Texas, one of which is a home specifically designated for gay and bisexual men. Upon intake, adult MSM were recruited to participate in the study, which involved a baseline and 3-month phone interview and allowing study staff to access records maintained by the program about their stay. RESULTS: At follow-up, only two (9.1%) reported used of any substances in the past 30 days. The vast majority (73%) had attended outpatient substance use treatment in the past three months, and 86% reported working for pay during the past 30 days. All participants reported attending four or more 12-step meetings in the past 30 days. Use of dysfunctional coping strategies significantly decreased, however so did scores on health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: MSM have complex treatment needs. Recovery housing may help improve outcomes among MSM by bridging formal substance use treatment with community-based recovery support.

"I have more support around me to be able to change": A Qualitative Exploration of Probationers' and Parolees' Experiences Living in Sober Living Houses.

Persons in the U.S. who are incarcerated for drug offenses are increasingly being released into the community as a way to decrease prison and jail overcrowding. One challenge is finding housing that supports compliance with probation and parole requirements, which often includes abstinence from drugs and alcohol. Sober living houses (SLHs) are alcohol- and drug-free living environments that are increasingly being used as housing options for probationers and parolees. Although a few studies have reported favorable outcomes for residents of SLHs, little is known about resident experiences or the factors that are experienced as helpful or counterproductive. This study conducted qualitative interviews with 28 SLH residents on probation or parole to understand their experiences living in the houses, aspects of the houses that facilitated recovery, ways residence in a SLH affected compliance with probation and parole, and ways the houses addressed HIV risk, a widespread problem among this population. Interviews were audiotaped and coded for dominant themes. Study participants identified housing as a critically important need after incarceration. For residents nearing the end of their stay in the SLHs, there was significant concern about where they might live after they left. Residents emphasized that shared experiences and goals, consistent enforcement of rules (especially the requirement of abstinence), and encouragement from probation and parole officers as particularly helpful. There was very little focus in HIV issues, even though risk behaviors were common. For some residents, inconsistent enforcement of house rules was experienced as highly problematic. Research is needed to identify the organizational and operational procedures that enhance factors experienced as helpful. This paper is the first to document the views and experiences of persons on probation or parole who reside in sober living recovery houses. These data can be used by SLH operators to develop houses that are responsive to factors experienced as helpful and counterproductive. The significance of this paper is evident in the trend toward decreasing incarceration in the U.S. of persons convicted of drug offenses and the need for alcohol- and drug-free alternative living environments.

Motivational Interviewing Case Management (MICM) for Persons on Probation or Parole Entering Sober Living Houses.

The failure of incarceration as a response to drug offenses has resulted in new policies supporting community-based alternatives. One challenge has been finding appropriate housing for persons on probation and parole. Sober living houses (SLHs) are alcohol- and drug-free living environments that are increasingly being used as housing options for these individuals. The current study examined 6- and 12-month outcomes for 330 persons on probation or parole who entered 49 SLHs. Residents in 22 houses (n = 149 individuals) were randomly assigned to receive a "Motivational Interviewing Case Management" (MICM) intervention and residents in the other 27 houses (n = 181 individuals) received SLH residency as usual. At 6-and 12-month follow-up, both study conditions showed significant improvement relative to baseline on substance abuse, criminal justice, HIV risk, and employment outcomes. For persons who attended at least one MICM session, there were better criminal justice outcomes compared to the SLH as usual group.

Housing Status, Psychiatric Symptoms, and Substance Abuse Outcomes Among Sober Living House Residents over 18 Months.

Studies show individuals entering sober living recovery houses (SLHs) make significant, sustained improvement on measures of substance abuse problems, employment, and arrests. The current study assessed changes in housing status among SLH residents over 18 months and the relative influences of housing status and psychiatric distress on substance abuse outcomes. Two hundred forty one men and 58 women, all age 18 and older, were interviewed within their first week of entering 20 SLHs and again at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up. Between entry into the SLHs and 18-month follow-up homelessness declined from 16% to 4%, marginal housing declined from 66% to 46%, and stable housing increased from 13% to 27%. Psychiatric severity was generally mild to moderate in severity, but nevertheless showed improvement over the 18-month study period. Multivariate models showed worse substance abuse outcomes for residents with higher psychiatric distress and unstable housing. Relative to persons with stable housing, those who were homeless or marginally housed had worse outcomes and those in SLHs had better outcomes. Overall, we conclude that individuals entering SLHs show improvement in housing status and psychiatric distress, both of which are associated with better substance abuse outcomes.

Social Support Influences on Substance Abuse Outcomes Among Sober Living House Residents with Low and Moderate Psychiatric Severity.

Social support and psychiatric severity are known to influence substance abuse. However, little is known about how their influences vary under different conditions. We aimed to study how different types of social support were associated with substance abuse outcomes among persons with low and moderate psychiatric severity who entered Sober Living Houses (SLHs). Two hundred forty-five individuals entering 16 SLHs were interviewed at baseline and 6, 12, and 18 months. The Brief Symptom Inventory assessed psychiatric symptoms and the Important People Instrument and a modified AA Affiliation Scale assessed social support. Social support variables predicted substance abuse outcomes for persons with low and moderate psychiatric severity. However, they were the strongest and most consistent predictors for the low severity group.

Changes in psychiatric symptoms among persons with methamphetamine dependence predicts changes in severity of drug problems but not frequency of use.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined how changes in psychiatric symptoms over time are associated with changes in drug use and severity of drug problems. No studies have examined these relationships among methamphetamine (MA)-dependent persons receiving motivational interviewing within the context of standard outpatient treatment. METHODS: Two hundred seventeen individuals with MA dependence were randomly assigned to a standard single session of motivational interviewing (MI) or an intensive 9-session model of MI. Both groups received standard outpatient group treatment. The Addiction Severity Index (ASI) and timeline follow-back (TLFB) for MA use were administered at treatment entry and 2-, 4-, and 6-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Changes in ASI psychiatric severity between baseline and 2 months predicted changes in ASI drug severity during the same time period, but not changes on measures of MA use. Item analysis of the ASI drug scale showed that psychiatric severity predicted how troubled or bothered participants were by their drug us, how important they felt it was for them to get treatment, and the number of days they experienced drug problems. However, it did not predict the number days they used drugs in the past 30 days. These associations did not differ between study conditions, and they persisted when psychiatric severity and outcomes were compared across 4- and 6-month time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Results are among the first to track how changes in psychiatric severity over time are associated with changes in MA use and severity of drug problems. Treatment efforts targeting reduction of psychiatric symptoms among MA-dependent persons might be helpful in reducing the level of distress and problems associated with MA use but not how often it is used. There is a need for additional research describing the circumstances under which the experiences and perceptions of drug-related problems diverge from frequency of consumption.

Interaction of Motivation and Social Support on Abstinence among Recovery Home Residents.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The impetus to abstain from alcohol and drugs is especially robust when individuals seek help. However, motivation to continue abstinence during ongoing recovery is less understood. The present study assessed how social support interacted with motivation to affect abstinence over an 18-monthe time period. METHODS: A sample of 289 residents entering residential recovery homes were recruited and followed at 6-, 12-, and 18-months. Motivation was measured as the perceived costs and benefits of abstinence. Five social influence measures were used to assess interactive effects with costs and benefits on abstinence. RESULTS: Perceived costs and benefits of abstinence were robust predictors of abstinence over the 18 month assessment period. Two social support factors interacted with perceived benefits to influence abstinence: 12-step involvement and number of persons in the social network. CONCLUSION: Suggestions are made for recovery services to influence perceived costs, benefits, and social network characteristics.

Challenges and Rewards of Conducting Research on Recovery Residences for Alcohol and Drug Disorders.

Although research shows treatment for alcohol and drug problems can be effective, persons without stable housing that supports recovery are at risk for relapse. Recovery residences (RRs) for drug and alcohol problems are a growing response to the need for alcohol- and drug-free living environments that support sustained recovery. Research on RRs offers an opportunity to examine how integration of these individuals into a supportive, empowering environment has beneficial impacts on substance use, housing, and other outcomes, as well as benefits for the surrounding community. Research can also lead to the identification of operations and practices within houses that maximize favorable outcomes for residents. However, research on RRs also presents significant obstacles and challenges. Based on our experiences conducting recovery home research for decades, we present suggestions for addressing some of the unique challenges encountered in this type of research.

Interaction of motivation and psychiatric symptoms on substance abuse outcomes in sober living houses.

BACKGROUND: Studies show residents of sober living recovery houses (SLHs) make improvements in a variety of areas including alcohol and drug use, arrests, and employment. Longitudinal measures of motivation (assessed as costs and benefits of continuing sobriety) have been shown to be associated with alcohol and drug outcomes in SLHs. However, how motivation interacts with other potentially important factors, such as psychiatric severity, is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to assess how perceived costs and benefits of sobriety among residents of SLHs differed by psychiatric severity. The study also aimed to assess how costs and benefits interacted with psychiatric severity to influence outcome. METHODS: Two hundred forty-five residents of SLHs were assessed at baseline and 6, 12, and 18 months. RESULTS: High psychiatric severity was associated with higher severity of alcohol and drug problems and higher perceived costs of sobriety at all data collection time points. Perceived costs and benefits of sobriety were strong predictors of alcohol and drug problems for participants with low psychiatric severity. Perceived costs, but not perceived benefits, predicted outcomes for residents with high psychiatric severity. CONCLUSIONS/IMPORTANCE: High psychiatric severity is a serious impediment for some residents in SLHs. These individuals perceive sobriety as difficult and that perception is associated with worse outcome. Finding ways to decrease perceived costs and challenges to sustained sobriety among these individuals is essential as is collaboration with local mental health services. SLHs should consider whether additional onsite services or modifications of SLH operations might help this population.

Text messaging for addiction: a review.

Individuals seeking treatment for addiction often experience barriers due to cost, lack of local treatment resources, or either school or work schedule conflicts. Text-messaging-based addiction treatment is inexpensive and has the potential to be widely accessible in real time. We conducted a comprehensive literature review identifying 11 published, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating text-messaging-based interventions for tobacco smoking, four studies for reducing alcohol consumption, one pilot study in former methamphetamine (MA) users, and one study based on qualitative interviews with cannabis users. Abstinence outcome results in RCTs of smokers willing to make a quit attempt have been positive overall in the short term and as far out as at six and 12 months. Studies aimed at reducing alcohol consumption have been promising. More data are needed to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of this approach for other substance use problems.