TY - JOUR
T1 - Substance abuse treatment providers' beliefs and objections regarding contingency management
T2 - Implications for dissemination
AU - Kirby, Kimberly C.
AU - Benishek, Lois A.
AU - Dugosh, Karen Leggett
AU - Kerwin, Mary Louise E.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was funded by grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA 015991) and the Pennsylvania Department of Health 2003 Formula Grant (ME #03-185). The authors wish to thank Thomas Coyne, Tanya Farranda-Diedrich, Jennifer Guiterrez, Heather Haberle, Rene Schwartz, Jenear Sewell, and Julie Wosak, for their assistance with data collection.
PY - 2006/10/15
Y1 - 2006/10/15
N2 - Contingency management (CM) interventions are among the most effective methods for initiating drug abstinence, but they infrequently have been adopted by community drug and alcohol treatment programs. The primary purpose of this investigation was to determine the prevalence of specific beliefs that community treatment providers hold regarding contingency management interventions. We surveyed 383 treatment providers from three geographical areas of the United States regarding moral or ethical objections, negative side effects, practicality, limitations and positive opinions regarding tangible and social CM interventions. Results indicate that positive beliefs were surprisingly prevalent, with providers agreeing with an average of 67% of the positive statements regarding CM using tangible incentives and 54% indicating that they would be in favor of adding a tangible CM intervention to their treatment program. The most prevalent objections to incentive programs were that they cost too much, fail to address the underlying problems of addiction, and do not address multiple behaviors. Social incentives were viewed more favorably than tangible incentives and both were viewed more positively by providers who were supervisors, had advanced degrees, had more addictions experience, and had previous experience with tangible incentives. These findings have implications for improving the dissemination of this empirically-supported treatment.
AB - Contingency management (CM) interventions are among the most effective methods for initiating drug abstinence, but they infrequently have been adopted by community drug and alcohol treatment programs. The primary purpose of this investigation was to determine the prevalence of specific beliefs that community treatment providers hold regarding contingency management interventions. We surveyed 383 treatment providers from three geographical areas of the United States regarding moral or ethical objections, negative side effects, practicality, limitations and positive opinions regarding tangible and social CM interventions. Results indicate that positive beliefs were surprisingly prevalent, with providers agreeing with an average of 67% of the positive statements regarding CM using tangible incentives and 54% indicating that they would be in favor of adding a tangible CM intervention to their treatment program. The most prevalent objections to incentive programs were that they cost too much, fail to address the underlying problems of addiction, and do not address multiple behaviors. Social incentives were viewed more favorably than tangible incentives and both were viewed more positively by providers who were supervisors, had advanced degrees, had more addictions experience, and had previous experience with tangible incentives. These findings have implications for improving the dissemination of this empirically-supported treatment.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33748605045&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33748605045&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.03.010
DO - 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.03.010
M3 - Article
C2 - 16650657
AN - SCOPUS:33748605045
SN - 0376-8716
VL - 85
SP - 19
EP - 27
JO - Drug and Alcohol Dependence
JF - Drug and Alcohol Dependence
IS - 1
ER -