Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2012
Patient reactance moderates the effect of directive telephone counseling for methamphetamine users.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание 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.
Karno Mitchell, Farabee David, Brecht Mary-Lynn, Rawson Richard
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the impact of the interaction between patient reactance and treatment directiveness on the effectiveness of telephone aftercare for methamphetamine dependence.
METHOD: Reactance was assessed at baseline, and participants were randomly assigned to directive or nondirective treatment conditions. Logistic regression tested for the significance of the interaction as a predictor of 3-month and 12-month use of methamphetamine and stimulants.
RESULTS: A significant interaction was observed at the 3-month follow-up, in which the directive condition was less effective for patients higher in reactance and was more effective for patients lower in reactance. Among patients at a high level of reactance, the nondirective condition increased the likelihood of abstinence.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that, in the context of telephone-based care, directive interventions offer short-term clinical benefit for methamphetamine users who readily accept influence from authority figures, whereas nondirective interventions offer benefit for patients who do not readily accept influence. The short-term nature of these effects indicates that there is a need for brief but ongoing telephone support to maintain treatment gains.
METHOD: Reactance was assessed at baseline, and participants were randomly assigned to directive or nondirective treatment conditions. Logistic regression tested for the significance of the interaction as a predictor of 3-month and 12-month use of methamphetamine and stimulants.
RESULTS: A significant interaction was observed at the 3-month follow-up, in which the directive condition was less effective for patients higher in reactance and was more effective for patients lower in reactance. Among patients at a high level of reactance, the nondirective condition increased the likelihood of abstinence.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that, in the context of telephone-based care, directive interventions offer short-term clinical benefit for methamphetamine users who readily accept influence from authority figures, whereas nondirective interventions offer benefit for patients who do not readily accept influence. The short-term nature of these effects indicates that there is a need for brief but ongoing telephone support to maintain treatment gains.