Interventions to Reduce Drug Use Among Methamphetamine Users at Risk for HIV
- 364 Downloads
Purpose of Review
This paper reports on the results of a study comparing two behavioral treatments for methamphetamine users. The outcome was the effectiveness of the interventions in reducing meth use. The interventions were contingency management (CM) and contingency management plus strengths-based case management (CM/SBCM).
CM/SBCM was found to be associated with attending more sessions for people who reported being in a couple. Also, participants who earned more money in the first part of the study were more likely to have more clean urinalysis in the second part of the study. Latent class analysis identified a class of participants who were in a couple, without sexual abuse history, and less meth use at baseline. This class tended to have more clean urinalysis in the CM/SBCM intervention.
These results indicate that incentive-based interventions with case management may be useful for helping meth users reduce their drug use.
KeywordsMethamphetamine Behavioral interventions Contingency management
The authors gratefully acknowledge the staff at Project Safe and the study participants, without whom this research would not have been possible.
This study received funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA026741).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This research is in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and all research procedures were approved by the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board (COMIRB).
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance
- 1.Substance Abuse and mental health Service Administration (SAMHSA). Results from the 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National findings. Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Studies, 2017. (HHS Publication No. SMA 17–5044, NSDUH Series H-52).Google Scholar
- 2.National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Research Report Series: Methamphetamine. National Institutes of Health, September 2013.Google Scholar
- 3.National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Epidemiologic trends in drug abuse: proceedings of the Community Epidemiologic Work Group, Highlights and Executive Summary. Bethesda, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: National Institutes of Health: Division of Epidemiology, Services, and Prevention Research, 2014.Google Scholar
- 4.U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). National drug threat assessment 2008: methamphetamine. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, 2008.Google Scholar
- 5.Hoxworth T. Patterns and trends in drug abuse in Denver and Colorado: January–December 2005. Community Epidemiology Work Group (CEWG), 2006.Google Scholar
- 8.•• Kral AH, Lorvick J, Martinez A, Lewis MA, Orr WA, Anderson R, et al. HIV prevalence and risk among heterosexual methamphetamine injectors in California. Subst Use Misuse. 2011;46(9):1081–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/10826084.2011.557136. This study describes high risk behaviors among heterosexual methamphetamine users and thereby highlights the need for effective interventions to reduce meth use among this population. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Krawczyk CS, Molitor F, Ruiz J, et al. Methamphetamine use and HIV risk behaviors among heterosexual men - preliminary results from five Northern California counties, December 2001–November 2003. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2006;55(10):273–7.Google Scholar
- 11.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Methamphetamine use and HIV risk behaviors among heterosexual men--preliminary results from five northern California counties, December 2001–November 2003. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2006;55(10):273–7.Google Scholar
- 27.Molitor F, Truax SR, Ruiz JD, Sun RK. Association of methamphetamine use during sex with risky sexual behaviors and HIV infection among non-injection drug users. West J Med. 1998;168(2):93–7.Google Scholar
- 28.Lorvick J, Martinez A, Wenger L, Gee L, Kral A. Methamphetamine use among female injectors in San Francisco. Presented at the First National Conference on Methamphetamine, HIV and Hepatitis, Salt Lake City, UT. 2005.Google Scholar
- 30.Winslow BT, Voorhees KI, Pehl KA. Methamphetamine abuse. Am Fam Physician. 2007;76(8):1167–74.Google Scholar
- 31.California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, University of California LAISAP. Methamphetamine treatment: a practitioner’s reference 2007. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs; 2007.Google Scholar
- 33.•• Roll JM, Chudzynski J, Cameron JM, Howell DN, McPherson S. Duration effects in contingency management treatment of methamphetamine disorders. Addict Behav. 2013;38(9):2445–62. This study supports the Contingency Management intervention and its effects over time on abstinence and reduced drug use among meth users.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.•• Shoptaw S, Klausner JD, Reback CJ, et al. A public health response to the methamphetamine epidemic: the implementation of contingency management to treat methamphetamine dependence. BMC Public Health. 2006;6:214–8. This study supports the role of contingency management to treat meth dependence in myriad settings including non-traditional and traditional drug treatment programs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Skinner BF. The behavior of organisms: an experimental analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1938.Google Scholar
- 38.Bigelow GE, Silverman K. Theoretical and empirical foundations of contingency management treatments for drug abuse. In: Higgins S, Silverman K, editors. Motivating behavior change among illicit-drug abusers: research on contingency management interventions. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association; 1999. p. 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.Higgins ST, Petry NM. Contingency management. Incentives for sobriety. Alcohol Res Health. 1999;23:122–7.Google Scholar
- 50.Petry NM. Contingency management in addiction treatment. Psychiatric Times. 2002;19(2).Google Scholar
- 63.Weil M, Karls JM. Historical origins and recent developments. In: Weil M, Karls JM, editors. Case management in human service practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.; 1989. p. 1–28.Google Scholar
- 66.Hasson AL, Grella CE, Rawson R, Anglin MD. Case management within a methadone maintenance program: a research demonstration project for HIV risk reduction. J Case Manag. 1994;3:167–73.Google Scholar
- 68.Bokos P, Mejta C, Mickenberg J, Monks R. Case management: an alternative approach to working with intravenous drug users. In: Asher RS, editor. Progress and issues in case management. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse Monograph Series; 1992. p. 92–111.Google Scholar
- 72.Falck R, Carlson RG, Price SK, Turner JA. Case management to enhance HIV risk reduction among users of injection drugs and crack cocaine. J Case Manag. 1994;3:162–7.Google Scholar
- 75.Rapp RC, Siegal HA, Fisher JH. A strengths-based model of case management/advocacy: adapting a mental health model to practice work with persons who have substance abuse problems. NIDA Res Monogr. 1992;127:79–91.Google Scholar
- 79.Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Timeline Followback user’s guide: a calendar method for assessing alcohol and drug use. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation; 1996.Google Scholar