Designated case managers as facilitators of medical and psychosocial service delivery in addiction treatment programs

  • Peter D. Friedmann
  • James C. Hendrickson
  • Dean R. Gerstein
  • Zhiwei Zhang
Brief Reports


This study examines whether having designated case management staff facilitates delivery of comprehensive medical and psychosocial services in substance abuse treatment programs. A multilevel, prospective cohort study of 2829 clients admitted to selected substance abuse treatment programs was used to study clients from long-term residential, outpatient, and methadone treatment modalities. Program directors reported whether the program had staff designated as case managers. After treatment discharge, clients reported their receipt of 9 supplemental services during the treatment episode. In multivariate models controlling for multiple program-level and client-level factors, program-level availability of designated case managers increased client-level receipt of only 2 of 9 services, and exerted no effect on service comprehensiveness, compared to programs that did not have designated case managers. These findings do not support the common practice of designating case management staff as a means to facilitate comprehensive services delivery in addiction treatment programs.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gerstein DR, Datta AR, Ingels JS, et al.NTIES. National Treatment Improvement Evaluation Study. Final Report. Rockville, Md: Center for Substance Abuse Treatment; 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anglin MD, Hser YI, Grella CE. Drug addiction and treatment careers among clients in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS).Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 1997;11(4):308–323.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    O'Brien CP, McLellan AT. Myths about the treatment of addiction.Lancet. 1996;347:237–240.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hubbard RL, Marsden ME, Rachal JV, et al.Drug Abuse Treatment: A National Study of Effectiveness. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press; 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Simpson DD, Sells SB. Effectiveness of treatment for drug abuse: an overview of the DARP research program.Advances in Alcohol and Substance Abuse. 1982;2:7–29.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gerstein DR, Lewin LS. Treating drug problems.New England Journal of Medicine. 1990;323:844–848.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McLellan AT, Arndt IO, Metzger DS, et al. The effects of psychosocial services in substance abuse treatment.Journal of the American Medical Association. 1993;269:1953–1959.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    McLellan AT, Grissom GR, Brill P, et al. Private substance abuse treatments: are some programs more effective than others?Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 1993;10:243–254.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McLellan AT, Weisner C. Achieving the public health and safety potential of substance abuse treatment: implications for patient referral, treatment “matching,” and outcome evaluation. In: Bickel WK, DeGrandpre RJ, eds.Drug Policy and Human Nature. Psychological Perspectives on the Prevention, Management, and Treatment of Illicit Drug Abuse. New York: Plenum; 1996:127–154.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McLellan AT, Hagan TA, Levine M, et al. Supplemental social services improve outcomes in public addiction treatment.Addiction. 1998;93:1489–1499.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Durkin EM. An organizational analysis of psychosocial and medical services in drug abuse treatment programs.Social Service Review. 2002;76:406–429.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Friedmann PD, Alexander JA, D'Aunno TA. Organizational correlates of access to primary care and mental health services in drug abuse treatment units.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 1999;16(1):71–80.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Friedmann PD, Lemon S, Durkin E, et al. Trends in comprehensive service availability in outpatient drug abuse treatment.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. In press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee MT, Reif S, Ritter GA, et al. Access to services in the substance abuse treatment system. Variations by facility characteristics.Recent Developments in Alcohol. 2001;15:137–156.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gerstein DR, Condelli WG, Lambert C, et al.National Treatment Improvement Evaluation Study: NTIES Analysis Update 1. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago; 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Center for Substance Abuse Treatment.Comprehensive Case Management for Substance Abuse Treatment. Rockville, Md: Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration; 1998. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) 98-3222.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brindis CD, Pfeffer R, Wolfe A. A case management program for chemically dependent clients with multiple needs.Journal of Case Management. 1995;4(1):22–28.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ridgely MS, Willenbring ML. Application of case management to drug abuse treatment: overview of models and research issues.NIDA Research Monograph. 1992;127:12–33.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sullivan W, Hartmann DJ, Dillon D, Work JL. Implementing case management in alcohol and drug treatment.Families in Society. 1994;75(2):67–73.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Siegal HA, Rapp RC.Case Management and Substance Abuse. New York: Springer; 1996.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Frankel AJ, Gelman SR.Case Management: An Introduction to Concepts and Skills. Chicago: Lyceum; 1998.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Friedmann PD, D'Aunno TA, Jin L, et al. Medical and psychosocial services in drug abuse treatment: do stronger linkages promote client utilization?Health Services Research. 2000;35(2):443–465.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Friedmann PD, Lemon SC, Stein MD, et al. Linkage to medical services in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study.Medical Care. 2001;39(3):284–295.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Etheridge RM, Craddock SG, Dunteman GH, et al. Client services in two national studies of community-based drug abuse treatment programs.Journal of Substance Abuse. 1995;7:9–26.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Friedmann PD, Alexander JA, Jin L, et al. On-site primary care and mental health services in outpatient drug abuse treatment units.Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research. 1999;26(1):80–94.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Damanpour F. Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators.Academy of Management Journal. 1991;34:555–590.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Closser MH, Blow FC. Recent advances in addictive disorders. Special populations: women, ethnic minorities and the elderly.Psychiatric Clinics of North America. 1993;16:199–209.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Seale JP, Muramoto ML. Substance abuse among minority populations.Substance Abuse. 1993;20:167–180.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    D'Aunno TA, Vaughn TE. An organizational analysis of service patterns in outpatient drug abuse treatment units.Journal of Substance Abuse. 1995;7:27–42.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chitwood DD, McBride DC, French MT, et al. Health care need and utilization: a preliminary comparison of injection drug users, other illicit drug users, and nonusers.Substance Use and Misuse. 1999;34(4/5):727–746.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, et al. An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients. The Addiction Severity Index.Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 1980;168:26–33.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wenzel SL, Bakhtiar L, Caskey NH, et al. Homeless veterans' utilization of medical, psychiatric, and substance abuse services.Medical Care. 1995;33:1132–1144.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    US Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment.National Treatment Improvement Evaluation Study (NTIES), 1992–1997. Ann Arbor, Mich: Inter-university Consortium for Political & Social Research; 2001. Available at: Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bryk A, Raudenbush S.Hierarchical Linear Models: Application and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage; 1992.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Little R, Rubin D.Statistical Analysis With Missing Data. New York: Wiley; 1987.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    McNally JW.Generating Hot-Deck Imputation Estimates: Using SAS for Simple and Multiple Imputation Allocation Routines. Providence, RI: Brown University Population Studies & Training Center; 1997. Working Paper 97-12.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Allison PD.Missing Data. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage; 2002.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shwartz M, Stone DA, Camp J, Mulvey KP, Kane M, Plough A. The value of case management in the publicly funded substance abuse treatment system. The perspective of program directors, case managers and clients.Care Management Journal. 2000;2(3):139–147.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    McLellan AT, Kushner H, Metzger D, et al. The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 1992;9(3):199–213.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Friedmann PD, Zhang Z, Hendrickson J, et al. The effect of primary medical care on addiction and medical severity in substance abuse treatment programs.Journal of General Intern Medicine. 2003;18:1–8.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Brown H, Prescott R.Applied Mixed Models in Medicine. New York: Wiley; 1989.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup W, et al.SAS System For Mixed Models. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1996.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Cohen J, Cohen P.Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation: An Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1975.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    McLellan AT, Hagan TA, Levine M, et al. Does clinical case management improve outpatient addiction treatment.Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 1999;55(1/2):91–103.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Rapp RC, Siegal HA, Li L, et al. Predicting postprimary treatment services and drug use outcome: a multivariate analysis.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 1999;24(4):603–615.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Siegal HA, Fisher JH, Rapp RC, et al. Enhancing substance abuse treatment with case management: its impact on employment.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 1996;13(2):93–98.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Samet JH, Friedmann P, Saitz R. Benefits of linking primary medical care and substance abuse services: patient, provider, and societal perspectives.Archives of Internal Medicine. 2001;161(1):85–91.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ritvio JL, Shore JH. Community based treatment. In: Galanter M, Kleber HD, eds.Textbook of Substance Abuse Treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Godley SH, Finch M, Dougan L, et al. Case management for dually diagnosed individuals involved in the criminal justice system.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2000;18(2):137–148.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Blank AE, Caloir S, Rosado TI, et al.:Linking substance abuse patients with a primary care provider: Implications for managed care (abstract):Proceedings of the Association for Health Services Research, 13th Annual Meeting, Atlanta, Ga, 9–11 June 1996. Washington, DC: Association for Health Services Research; 1996.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Shwartz M, Baker G, Mulvey KP, et al. Improving publicy funded substance abuse treatment: the value of case management.American Journal of Public Health. 1997;87(10):1659–1664.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Shwartz M, Gastfriend DR, Mulvey KP, et al. The Boston Target Cities Program: overview and evaluation results.Journal of Psychoactive Drugs. 1999;31(3):265–272.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lehman AF, Herron JD, Schwartz RP, et al. Rehabilitation for adults with severe mental illness and substance use disorders.Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 1993;181(2):86–90.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    McNeese-Smith DK. Case management within substance abuse treatment programs in Los Angeles county.Care Management Journal. 2002;1(1):8–10.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kersbergen AL. Case management: a rich history of coordinating care to control costs.Nursing Outlook. 1996;44(4):169–172.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Council for Community Behavioral Healthcare 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter D. Friedmann
    • 1
  • James C. Hendrickson
    • 2
  • Dean R. Gerstein
    • 2
  • Zhiwei Zhang
    • 2
  1. 1.Medicine & Community Health, Brown Medical School, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of MedicineRhode Island HospitalProvidence
  2. 2.the National Opinion Research Center at the University of ChicagoChicago

Personalised recommendations