Drug and alcohol review · 2023
Feasibility and preliminary results of a call centre delivered continuing care intervention following residential alcohol and other drug treatment.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kelly Peter J, Ingram Isabella, Deane Frank P, Baker Amanda L, Byrne Gerard, Degan Tayla, Osborne Briony, Meyer Johanna M, Townsend Camilla, Nunes Jason, McKay James R, Robinson Laura, Nolan Erin, Palazzi Kerrin, Lunn Joanne
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: To help reduce relapse rates following alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment, continuing care interventions have been recommended. Previous continuing care interventions have incorporated telephone and face-to-face sessions to help promote participant engagement. The study was conducted as a randomised controlled feasibility study and examined a call centre delivered continuing care intervention for people leaving residential rehabilitation services.
METHODS: Participants were attending AOD residential treatment services in NSW, Australia (N = 154). Participants were randomised to either 12- or 4-sessions of continuing care. Follow up assessments were completed at 6-months. The primary outcomes were demand and implementation. Secondary outcomes were AOD use, mental health and physical health at 6-months.
RESULTS: Interest in continuing care was high, with 93% of participants approached reporting an interest in being involved. Of the participants who completed the consent and baseline procedures, 29% of people were contacted post residential treatment and randomised. For those people randomised, the average number of sessions completed was 2.78 (SD = 1.65) for the 4-session arm and 4.81 (SD = 4.46) for the 12-session arm. Fidelity to the treatment manual was high. Both treatment arms showed higher complete abstinence at 6-months compared to baseline (12-session OR 28.57 [2.3, 353.8]; 4-session OR 28.11 [3.6, 221.2]).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: A major challenge associated with the call centre approach was re-engaging participants once they left the residential facility and delivering the planned dose of treatment. Further work is required to promote greater uptake of these protocols once people leave residential treatment.
METHODS: Participants were attending AOD residential treatment services in NSW, Australia (N = 154). Participants were randomised to either 12- or 4-sessions of continuing care. Follow up assessments were completed at 6-months. The primary outcomes were demand and implementation. Secondary outcomes were AOD use, mental health and physical health at 6-months.
RESULTS: Interest in continuing care was high, with 93% of participants approached reporting an interest in being involved. Of the participants who completed the consent and baseline procedures, 29% of people were contacted post residential treatment and randomised. For those people randomised, the average number of sessions completed was 2.78 (SD = 1.65) for the 4-session arm and 4.81 (SD = 4.46) for the 12-session arm. Fidelity to the treatment manual was high. Both treatment arms showed higher complete abstinence at 6-months compared to baseline (12-session OR 28.57 [2.3, 353.8]; 4-session OR 28.11 [3.6, 221.2]).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: A major challenge associated with the call centre approach was re-engaging participants once they left the residential facility and delivering the planned dose of treatment. Further work is required to promote greater uptake of these protocols once people leave residential treatment.