Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
Volume 28, Issue 3 , Pages 213-223 , April 2005

Substance use disorder patients who are mandated to treatment: Characteristics, treatment process, and 1- and 5-year outcomes

  • John F. Kelly, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University, Box G-BH, Providence, RI 02912, USA. Tel.: +1 401 444 1830.
    • ,
  • John W. Finney, Ph.D.
    • ,
  • Rudolf Moos, Ph.D.

Received 31 May 2004 ,Revised 20 August 2004 ,Accepted 29 October 2004.

References 

  1. Anglin MD, Brecht M, Maddahian E. Pre-treatment characteristics and treatment performance of legally coerced versus voluntary methadone maintenance admissions. Criminology. 1989;27:537–557
  2. Annis H, Davis CS. Self-efficacy and the prevention of alcoholic relapse: Initial findings from a treatment trial. In:  Baker TB,  Cannon Dale S editor. Assessment and treatment of addictive disorders. New York: Praeger; 1988;p. 88–112
  3. Attkisson CC, Zwick R. The client satisfaction questionnaire. Psychometric properties and correlations with service utilization and psychotherapy outcome. Evaluation and Program Planning. 1982;5:233–237
  4. Brecht M, Anglin MD, Wang J. Treatment effectiveness for legally coerced versus voluntary methadone maintenance clients. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 1993;19:89–106
  5. Derogatis LR, Melisaratos N. The brief symptom inventory: An introductory report. Psychological Medicine. 1983;13:595–605
  6. Farabee D, Prendergast ML, Anglin MD. The effectiveness of coerced treatment for drug-abusing offenders. Federal Probation. 1998;62:3–10(06.35)
  7. Fomby TB, Rangaprasad V. Divert Court of Dallas County cost–benefit analysis. Dallas, TX: Department of Economics, Southern Methodist University; 2002;
  8. Gerstein DR, Johson RA, Harwood H, Fountain D, Suter N, Malloy K. Evaluating recovery services. The California Drug and Alcohol Treatment Assessment (CALDATA). Sacramento, CA: California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs; 1994;
  9. Gregoire TK, Burke AC. The relationship of legal coercion to readiness to change among adults with alcohol and other drug problems. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2004;26:35–41
  10. Hiller ML, Knight K, Broome KM, Simpson DD. Legal pressure and treatment retention in a national sample of long-term residential programs. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 1998;25:463–481
  11. Hora PF. A dozen years of drug treatment courts: Uncovering our theoretical foundation and the construction of a mainstream paradigm. Substance Use & Misuse. 2002;37:1469–1488
  12. Howard DL, McCaughrin WC. The treatment effectiveness of outpatient substance misuse treatment organizations between court-mandated and voluntary clients. Substance Use & Misuse. 1996;31:895–926
  13. Hubbard RL, Craddock SG, Flynn PM, Anderson J, Etheridge RM. Overview of 1-year follow-up outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 1997;11:261–278
  14. Joe GW, Simpson DD, Broome KM. Retention and patient engagement models for different treatment modalities in DATOS. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 1999;57:113–125
  15. Johnson V. I'll quit tomorrow. Oxford: Harper & Row; 1973;(168 pp)
  16. Kline A. Profiles of criminal-justice clients in drug treatment: Implications for intervention. Addictive Behaviors. 1997;22:263–268
  17. Lawental E, McLellan T, Grissom GR, Brill P, O'Brien C. Coerced treatment for substance abuse problems detected through workplace urine surveillance: Is it effective?. Journal of Substance Abuse. 1996;8:115–128
  18. Marshall GN, Hser YI. Characteristics of criminal justice and non-criminal justice clients receiving treatment for substance abuse. Addictive Behaviors. 2002;27:179–192
  19. Martin BK, Clapp L, Alfers J, Beresford T. Adherence to court-ordered disulfiram at fifteen months: A naturalistic study. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2004;26:1–4
  20. Martin BK, Clapp L, Bialkowski D, Bridgeford D, Amponsah A, Lyons L, et al. Compliance to supervised disulfiram therapy: A comparison of voluntary and court-ordered patients. American Journal on Addictions. 2003;12:137–143
  21. McCarty D, Argeriou M. Re-arrest following residential treatment for repeat offender drunken drivers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 1988;49:1–6
  22. Miller WR, Tonigan JS. Assessing drinkers' motivations for change: The Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 1996;10:81–89
  23. Moos R. Coping responses inventory: A measure of approach and avoidance coping skills. In:  Zalaquett CP,  Wood RJ editor. Evaluating stress: A book of resources. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press; 1993;p. 51–65
  24. Moos R. Evaluating residential facilities: The multiphasic environmental assessment procedure. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1996;
  25. Moos R. Addictive disorders in context: Principles and puzzles of effective treatment and recovery. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 2003;17:3–12
  26. Moos R, Fenn C, Billings A, Moos B. Assessing life stressors and social resources: Applications to alcoholic patients. Journal of Substance Abuse. 1989;1:135–152
  27. Ouimette P, Finney JW, Moos R. Twelve-step and cognitive–behavioral treatment for substance abuse: A comparison of treatment effectiveness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1997;65:230–240
  28. Ouimette P, Finney JW, Moos R. Two-year post-treatment functioning and coping of substance abuse patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 1999;13:105–114
  29. Prendergast M, Farabee D, Cartier J, Henkin S. Involuntary treatment within a prison setting: Impact on psychosocial change during treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2002;29:5–26
  30. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice. 1982;19:276–288
  31. Project MATCH Research Group. Matching alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH Post-treatment drinking outcomes. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 1997;58:7–29
  32. Rempel M, Fox-Kralstein D, Cissner A, Cohen R, Labriola M, Farole D, et al. The New York state adult drug court evaluation: Policies participants and impacts. New York: Center for Court Innovation; 2002;
  33. Rollnick S, Heather N, Gold R, Hall W. Development of a short “readiness to change” questionnaire for use in brief, opportunistic interventions among excessive drinkers. British Journal of Addiction. 1992;87:743–754
  34. Rosenberg CM, Liftik J. Use of coercion in the outpatient treatment of alcoholism. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 1976;37:58–65
  35. Simpson J, Friend HJ. Legal status and long-term outcomes for addicts in the DARP followup project. NIDA Research Monograph Series. 1988;86:81–98
  36. Snow MG, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS. Processes of change in Alcoholics Anonymous: Maintenance factors in long-term sobriety. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 1994;55:362–371
  37. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS). Highlights—2002. Rockville, Md: National Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment Services; 2004;DASIS Series: S-22, Office of Applied Studies. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 04-394
  38. Sung HE, Bolenko S, Feng L, Tabachnik C. Predicting treatment noncompliance among criminal justice-mandated clients: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2004;26:13–26
  39. Watson CG, Brown K, Tilleskjor C, Jacobs L, Pucel J. The comparative recidivism rates of voluntary- and coerced-admission male alcoholics. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1988;44:573–581

☆ The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

PII: S0740-5472(05)00045-0

doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2004.10.014

Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
Volume 28, Issue 3 , Pages 213-223 , April 2005

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution