Current Psychiatry Reports

, Volume 8, Issue 5, pp 355–362

Continuing care in the treatment of addictive disorders



Newer models of continuing care in the addictions are designed to improve the long-term management of substance use disorders by engaging patients into flexible, or “adaptive,” treatment algorithms that change in focus and intensity as symptoms wax and wane over time. This article describes some of these newer approaches to the management of substance use disorders and presents recent research on their effectiveness. Findings suggest the following: 1) Continuing care interventions of a year or longer are more likely to show significant positive effects; 2) Continuing care treatments that are less burdensome to patients appear to promote higher rates of sustained engagement; 3) More structured and intensive continuing care may be more effective for patients with severe substance dependence and associated problems and for those who fail to achieve reasonable progress while in the initial phase of treatment; and 4) Use of medications as part of continuing care is increasing.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Hser YI, Anglin MD, Grella C, et al.: Drug treatment careers: a conceptual framework and existing research findings. J Subst Abuse Treat 1997, 14:543–558.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    McKay JR: Is there a case for extended interventions for alcohol and drug use disorders? Addiction 2005, 100:1594–1610. This article provides a comprehensive review of the literature on addiction treatment interventions of at least 1 year in duration, including a number of studies focused specifically on continuing care. Several studies that used or are currently using adaptive treatment protocols also are described.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moos RH, Finney JW, Cronkite RC: Alcoholism Treatment: Context, Process, and Outcome. New York: Oxford University Press; 1990.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vaillant GE: A long-term follow-up of male alcohol abuse. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1996, 53:243–249.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McLellan AT, Lewis DC, O’Brien CP, Kleber HD: Drug dependence, a chronic medical illness: implications for treatment, insurance, and outcomes evaluation. JAMA 2000, 284:1689–1695.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McKay JR: The role of continuing care in outpatient alcohol treatment programs. In Recent Developments in Alcoholism: Services Research in the Era of Managed Care, vol XV. Edited by Galanter M. New York: Kluwer; 2001:357–372.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Humphreys K, Tucker JA: Toward more responsive and effective intervention systems for alcohol-related problems. Addiction 2002, 97:126–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mattson ME, Del Boca FK, Carroll KM, et al.: Compliance with treatment and follow-up protocols in Project MATCH: predictors and relationship to outcome. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1998, 22:1328–1339.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McLellan AT, Carise D, Kleber HD: The national addiction treatment infrastructure: Can it support the public’s demand for quality care? J Subst Abuse Treat 2003, 25:117–121.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garnick DW, Lee MT, Chalk M, et al.: Establishing the feasibility of performance measures for alcohol and other drugs. J Subst Abuse Treat 2002, 23:375–385.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McKay JR, Alterman AI, McLellan AT, et al.: The effect of random versus non-random assignment in a comparison of inpatient and day hospital rehabilitation for male alcoholics. J Consult Clin Psychol 1995, 63:70–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carroll KM, Nich C, Sifry RL, et al.: A general system for evaluating therapist adherence and competence in psychotherapy research in the addictions. Drug Alcohol Depend 2000, 57:225–238.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matching Alcoholism Treatments to Client Heterogeneity: Project MATCH post-treatment drinking outcomes. J Stud Alcohol 1997, 58:7–29.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Collins LM, Murphy SA, Bierman KL: A conceptual framework for adaptive preventive interventions. Prev Sci 2004, 5:185–196.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lavori PW, Dawson R, Rush AJ: Flexible treatment strategies in chronic disease: clinical and research implications. Biol Psychiatry 2000, 48:605–614.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murphy SA: Optimal dynamic treatment regimes. J R Stat Soc 2003, 65:331–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Murphy SA, McKay JR: Adaptive treatment strategies: an emerging approach for improving treatment effectiveness. Clinical Science Newsletter of an American Psychological Association Division 12, Section III: The Society for the Science of Clinical Psychology. Washington, DC; 2004.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sobell MB, Sobell LC: Stepped care as a heuristic approach to the treatment of alcohol problems. J Consult Clin Psychol 2000, 68:573–579.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group: Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2002, 288:2981–2997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rush AJ, Trivedi MH, Wisniewski SR, et al.: Bupropion-SR, sertraline, or venlafaxine-XR after failure of SSRIs for depression. N Engl J Med 2006, 354:1231–1242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schneider LS, Tariot PN, Lyketsos CG, et al.: National Institute of Mental Health Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE): Alzheimer disease trial methodology. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2001, 9:346–360.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rakowski W, Lipkus IM, Clark MA, et al.: Reminder letter, tailored stepped-care, and self-choice comparison for repeat mammography. Am J Prev Med 2003, 25:308–314.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McKay JR, Lynch KG, Shepard DS, Pettinati HM: The effectiveness of telephone-based continuing care for alcohol and cocaine dependence: 24-month outcomes. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2005, 62:199–207. Results of this study indicated that patients who made good initial progress did particularly well in lower intensity, telephone-based continuing care, whereas those who made less progress initially required more intensive face-to-face continuing care.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dennis ML, Scott CK, Funk R: An experimental evaluation of recovery management checkups (RMC) for people with chronic substance use disorders. Eval Program Plann 2003, 26:339–352. This study tested a disease management strategy that involved interviewing patients every 3 months over a 2-year period and attempting to re-engage those who had relapsed back into treatment. The strategy led to faster re-entry into treatment and better substance use outcomes.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Milby JB, Schumacher JE, Raczynski JM, et al.: Sufficient conditions for effective treatment of substance abusing homeless persons. Drug Alcohol Depend 1996, 43:39–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Silverman K, Svikis D, Wong CJ, et al.: A reinforcementbased therapeutic workplace for the treatment of drug abuse: three-year abstinence outcomes. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2002, 10:228–240.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    O’Farrell TJ, Choquette KA, Cutter HS: Couples relapse prevention sessions after behavioral marital therapy for male alcoholics: outcomes during the three years after starting treatment. J Stud Alcohol 1998, 59:357–370.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Humphreys K: Circles of Recovery: Self-Help Organizations for Addictions. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Willenbring ML, Olson DH: A randomized trial of integrated outpatient treatment for medically ill alcoholic men. Arch Intern Med 1999, 159:1946–1952.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Helzer JE, Badger GJ, Rose GL, et al.: Decline in alcohol consumption during two years of daily reporting. J Stud Alcohol 2002, 63:551–558.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hall MJ, Tidwell WC: Internet recovery for substance abuse and alcoholism: an exploratory study of service users. J Subst Abuse Treat 2003, 24:161–167.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stout RL, Rubin A, Zwick W, et al.: Optimizing the costeffectiveness of alcohol treatment: a rationale for extended case monitoring. Addict Behav 1999, 24:17–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Silverman K, Robles E, Mudric T, et al.: A randomized trial of long-term reinforcement of cocaine abstinence in methadone-maintained patients who inject drugs. J Consult Clin Psychol 2004, 72:839–854.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sees KL, Delucchi KL, Masson C, et al.: Methadone maintenance vs. 180-day psychosocially enriched detoxification for treatment of opioid dependence: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000, 283:1303–1310.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Krystal JH, Cramer JA, Krol WF, Kirk GF: Naltrexone in the treatment of alcohol dependence. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:1734–1739.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    O’Malley SS, Rounsaville BJ, Farren C, et al.: Initial and maintenance naltrexone treatment for alcohol dependence using primary care vs specialty care: a nested sequence of 3 randomized trials. Arch Intern Med 2003, 163:1695–1704. This study focused on identifying optimal continuing care treatments for patients who had a good initial response to naltrexone plus a behavioral intervention. An extended period on naltrexone was helpful for those who received a primary care-based intervention, whereas those who received CBT did not benefit from additional time on naltrexone.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Garbutt JC, Kranzler HR, O’Malley SS, et al.: Efficacy and tolerability of long-acting injectable naltrexone for alcohol dependence: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005, 293:1617–1625. This is the first study to show that a monthly injectable version of an addiction medicine is both feasible and effective. Although treatment lasted only 6 months, compliance was excellent, suggesting that this approach could be used as part of a continuing care protocol to improve long-term disease management. However, results were significant only in men.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    McKay JR, Lynch KG, Shepard DS, et al.: The effectiveness of telephone-based continuing care in the clinical management of alcohol and cocaine use disorders: 12 month outcomes. J Consult Clin Psychol 2004, 72:967–979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Horng FF, Chueh KH: Effectiveness of telephone follow-up and counseling in aftercare for alcoholism. J Nurs Res 2004, 12:11–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bennett GA, Withers J, Thomas PW, et al.: A randomized trial of early warning signs relapse prevention training in the treatment of alcohol dependence. Addict Behav 2005, 30:1111–1124.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gorski T: Relapse Prevention Therapy Workbook: Managing Core Personality and Lifestyle Issues. Independence, MO: Herald House; 1995.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    McCrady BS, Epstein EE, Kahler CW: Alcoholics Anonymous and relapse prevention maintenance strategies after conjoint behavioral alcohol treatment for men: 18-month outcomes. J Consult Clin Psychol 2004, 72:870–878.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lieber CS, Weiss DG, Groszmann R, et al.: I. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study of polyenylphosphatidylcholine in alcoholic liver disease: effects on drinking behavior by nurse/physician teams. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2003, 27:1757–1764.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hall SM, Humfleet GL, Reus VI, et al.: Extended nortriptyline and psychological treatment for cigarette smoking. Am J Psychiatry 2004, 161:2100–2107. This study found that an extended (eg, 52-week) protocol that included both medication and behavioral treatment produced higher smoking abstinence rates than the extended behavioral intervention with placebo, an 8-week version of the behavioral intervention plus placebo, or 8 weeks of medication plus the behavioral intervention.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Brown BS, O’Grady K, Battjes RJ, Farrell EV: Factors associated with treatment outcomes in an aftercare population. Am J Addict 2004, 13:447–460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sannibale C, Hurkett P, van den Bossche E, et al.: Aftercare attendance and post-treatment functioning of severely substance dependent residential treatment clients. Drug Alcohol Rev 2003, 22:181–190.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Longabaugh R, Wirtz PW, eds: Project MATCH Hypotheses: Results and Causal Chain Analyses. Bethesda, MD: Department of Health and Human Services; 2001.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Brown TG, Seraganian P, Tremblay J, Annis H: Process and outcome changes with relapse prevention versus 12-step aftercare programs for substance abusers. Addiction 2002, 97:677–689.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Schaefer JA, Ingudomnukul E, Harris AH, Cronkite RC: Continuity of care practices and substance use disorder patients’ engagement in continuing care. Med Care 2005, 43:1234–1241.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Siegal HA, Li L, Rapp RC: Case management as a therapeutic enhancement: impact on post-treatment criminality. J Addict Dis 2002, 21:37–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lash SJ, Burden JL, Monteleone BR, Lehmann LP: Social reinforcement of substance abuse treatment aftercare participation: impact on outcome. Addict Behav 2004, 29:337–342.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Schmitt SK, Phibbs CS, Piette JD: The influence of distance on utilization of outpatient mental health aftercare following inpatient substance abuse treatment. Addict Behav 2003, 28:1183–1192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wagner EH, Austin BT, Davis C, et al.: Improving chronic illness care: translating evidence into action. Health Aff (Millwood) 2001, 20:64–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tonigan JS, Toscova R, Miller WR: Meta-analysis of the literature on Alcoholics Anonymous: Sample and study characteristics moderate findings. J Stud Alcohol 1996, 57:65–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Moos RH, Moos BS: Long-term influence of duration and frequency of participation in Alcoholics Anonymous on individuals with alcohol use disorders. J Consult Clin Psychol 2004, 72:81–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kranzler HR, Armeli S, Feinn R, Tennen H: Targeted naltrexone treatment moderates the relations between mood and drinking behavior among problem drinkers. J Consult Clin Psychol 2004, 72:317–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kranzler HR, Armeli S, Tennen H, et al.: Targeted naltrexone for early problem drinkers. J Clin Psychopharmacol 2003, 23:294–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Samet JH, Friedmann P, Saitz R: Benefits of linking primary medical care and substance abuse services: patient, provider, and societal perspectives. Arch Intern Med 2001, 161:85–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Weisner C, Mertens J, Parthasarathy S, et al.: Integrating primary medical care with addictions treatment: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2001, 286:1715–1723.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Institute of Medicine: Improving the Quality of Health Care for Mental and Substance-Use Conditions: Quality Chasm Series. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Dwight-Johnson M, Sherbourne CD, Liao D, Wells KB: Treatment preferences among depressed primary care patients. J Gen Intern Med 2000, 15:527–534.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    McLellan AT, McKay JR, Forman R, et al.: Reconsidering the evaluation of addiction treatment: from retrospective follow-up to concurrent recovery monitoring. Addiction 2005, 100:447–458.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Treatment Research CenterUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations