Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 1263–1275 | Cite as

Assessing the Need for Higher Levels of Care Among Problem Gambling Outpatients

  • David M. LedgerwoodEmail author
  • Cynthia L. Arfken
  • Michigan Association on Problem Gambling
Original Paper


Most treatment for gambling disorder is provided on an outpatient basis. Only a small number of jurisdictions in North America provide higher levels of gambling treatment, such as residential or intensive outpatient (IOP) care, despite the potential need for these services. Further, there appear to be few guidelines for determining appropriate level of gambling treatment. The aim of the present study was to assess the appropriateness of higher levels of problem gambling care among clients receiving outpatient treatment. Problem gamblers and their therapists independently completed questionnaires that assessed the need and desire for residential and IOP treatment. About 42% of problem gambling outpatients noted that they would be “probably” or “definitely” willing to attend residential treatment, and about half indicated they would be equally likely to attend IOP. Therapists recommended about a third of their clients as appropriate for higher levels of care. For both client and therapist assessments, there was a significant association between desire or recommendation for level of treatment and severity of gambling and co-occurring problems. Further, therapist recommendations for level of care were significantly associated with client willingness to attend higher levels of treatment. Our data reveal the potential need for higher levels of care for problem gambling, as evaluated by clients and their therapists. Policy implications for the funding of residential and IOP treatment are discussed.


Gambling disorder Residential treatment Outpatient treatment Level of care 



We thank Deborah Hollis, Erica Waltz, Lori Mello, Dolores Carter, Hayley Devoli, Lisa Sulkowski, Elorie Eggleston, and Jacob Ledgerwood who provided assistance on this project. Individual Board members of the Michigan Association on Problem Gambling provided feedback regarding questionnaire items and study methodology. We thank Lori Rugle for her advice on applying ASAM criteria to problem gamblers, and Tim Fong and Mike Campos from the UCLA Gambling Studies Program for providing the therapist ASAM-based measure. We thank the therapists and clients who participated. The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Bureau of Substance Abuse and Addiction Services (now Office of Recovery Oriented Systems of Care) provided funding for this project.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Human and Animal Rights

This study involved human subjects research.

Informed Consent

All participants underwent appropriate informed consent processes and the study procedures were approved by the Wayne State University and State of Michigan Institutional Review Boards.


  1. Eisen, S. V., Wilcox, M., Leff, H. S., Schaefer, E., & Culhane, M. A. (1999). Assessing behavioral health outcomes in outpatient programs: Reliability and validity of the BASIS-32. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research, 26, 5–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Gerstein, D., Murphy, S., Toce, M., Hoffmann, J., Palmer, A., Johnson, R., et al. (1999). Gambling impact and behavior study. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  3. Hodgins, D. C. (2004). Using the NORC DSM Screen for gambling problems as an outcome measure for pathological gambling: Psychometric evaluation. Addictive Behaviors, 29, 1685–1690.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Hodgins, D. C., Ching, L. E., & McEwen, J. (2009). Stage of commitment language in motivational interviewing and gambling outcomes. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 23, 122–130.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Hodgins, D. C., & el-Guebaly, N. (2010). The influence of substance dependence and mood disorders on outcomes from pathological gambling: Five-year follow-up. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26, 117–127.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Leblond, J., Ladouceur, R., & Blaszcyznski, A. (2003). Which pathological gamblers will complete treatment? British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 205–209.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ledgerwood, D. M., Loree, A., & Lundahl, L. H. (2014). Predictors of treatment outcome in disordered gamblers. In D. Richards, A. Blaszczynski, & L. Nower (Eds.), Wiley-Blackwell handbook of disordered gambling. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Ledgerwood, D. M., & Petry, N. M. (2004). Gambling and suicidality in treatment seeking pathological gamblers. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 192, 711–714.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Ledgerwood, D. M., Steinberg, M. A., Wu, R., & Potenza, M. N. (2005). Self-reported gambling-related suicidality among gambling Help-line callers. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 19, 175–183.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Lister, J. J., Milosevic, A., & Ledgerwood, D. M. (2015). Psychological characteristics of problem gamblers with and without mood disorder. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 60, 369–376.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Maccallum, F., Blaszczynski, A., Ladouceur, R., & Nower, L. (2007). Functional and dysfunctional impulsivity in pathological gambling. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1829–1838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Marotta, J., Moore, T., & Christensen, T. (2011). 2010 National survey of publicly funded problem gambling services. Phoenix: Association of Problem Gambling Service Administrators.Google Scholar
  13. Mee-Lee, D., & Shulman, G. D. (2009). The ASAM placement criteria and matching patients to treatment. In R. K. Ries, S. C. Miller, D. A. Fielin, & R. Saltz (Eds.), Principles of addiction medicine (4th ed.). New York: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  14. National Gambling Impact Study Commission. (1999). National Gambling Impact Study Final Report. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  15. Petry, N. M., Stinson, F. S., & Grant, B. F. (2005). Comorbidity of DSM-IV pathological gambling and other psychiatric disorders: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66, 564–574.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Sannibale, C., Hurkett, P., van den Bossche, E., O’Connor, D., Zador, D., Capus, C., et al. (2003). Aftercare attendance and post-treatment functioning of severely substance dependent residential treatment clients. Drug and Alcohol Review, 22, 181–190.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Slutske, W. S. (2006). Natural recovery and treatment-seeking in pathological gambling: Results of two U.S. national surveys. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 297–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Stinchfield, R., Winters, K.C., & Dittel, C. (2008). Evaluation of state-supported pathological gambling treatment in Minnesota. University of Minnesota Medical School.Google Scholar
  19. Suurvali, H., Hodgins, D., Toneatto, T., & Cunningham, J. (2008). Treatment seeking among Ontario problem gamblers: Results of a population survey. Psychiatric Services, 59, 1343–1346.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral NeurosciencesWayne State University School of MedicineDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations