Volume 10 Supplement 1

Abstracts from the 2014 Addiction Health Services Research (AHSR) Conference

Open Access

Opiate-use patients attending residential treatment: characteristics, outcomes, and implications for practice

  • Samuel A MacMaster1,
  • Siobhan A Morse2Email author,
  • Brian Bride3,
  • John Seiters2,
  • Cayce M Watson4 and
  • Sam Choi1
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice201510(Suppl 1):A36

https://doi.org/10.1186/1940-0640-10-S1-A36

Published: 20 February 2015

Background

As opiate use has increased, there has been a corresponding increase in the number of opiate users presenting for treatment. Questions regarding the challenges of treating opiate users in residential treatment remain largely unanswered. This study seeks to determine what, if any, meaningful differences exist between opiate and non-opiate users, as well as within opiate users who enter voluntary, private, or residential dual-diagnosis treatment, and the impact of any differences relative to treatment motivation, length, and outcomes.

Materials and methods

Data for this study were drawn from 1972 individuals, utilizing the Addiction Severity Index, the Treatment Service Review, the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment, and a satisfaction measure. Interviews were conducted at program intake, and 1 and 6-month interviews post-discharge.

Results

The results suggest that although there are similarities there are also some important differences in characteristics, motivation, completion, engagement, retention, levels of satisfaction, and post-treatment service use. Additional analyses were conducted when significant within-group differences by age for opiate users were revealed.

Conclusions

Results suggest different strategies within treatment programs may provide benefit in targeting the disparate needs of younger opiate users. Outcome results at 6 months for all groups demonstrated significant improvement over pretreatment, suggesting that abstinence-based treatment can be an effective form of treatment for opiate users.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
College of Social Work, University of Tennessee
(2)
Foundations Recovery Network in Nashville
(3)
School of Social Work, Georgia State University
(4)
School of Social Work, David Lipscomb University

Copyright

© MacMaster et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2015

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Advertisement