Impact of centralized intake on case management services

被引:15
作者
Scott, CK
Sherman, RE
Foss, MA
Godley, M
Hristova, L
机构
[1] Lighthouse Inst, Chestnut Hlth Syst, Chicago, IL 60610 USA
[2] Chicago Informat Org Teaching & Applicat IOTA Inc, Chicago, IL USA
关键词
case management; centralized intake unit; treatment;
D O I
10.1080/02791072.2002.10399936
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
The Chicago Target Cities demonstration project was designed to improve the effectiveness and accessibility of substance abuse treatment in large metropolitan areas. The primary interventions included centralized intake (CIU), comprehensive standardized assessment procedures, and management of a centralized wait list. A part of this project, the effectiveness of a case management model implemented through the CIU, was tested. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions, case management (CM) or no case management (No-CM). The primary objectives of the CIU case management model were to improve the show rate to treatment, provide referrals to ancillary services, and to support treatment completion. Participants in both groups could also receive other support services provided by staff for the treatment agencies. CM participants were significantly more likely to show to treatment (78.9%) than No-CM participants (71.8%). Case management was found to primarily improve the show rates for younger participants, who without CM were significantly less likely to show for treatment than older participants. CM participants were significantly more likely to receive referrals to non substance abuse treatment services than No-CM participants, although the number of referrals was low in both conditions. No differences were found in the amount or length of substance abuse treatment services received by participants in the two conditions.
引用
收藏
页码:51 / 57
页数:7
相关论文
共 27 条
[11]   CONCURRENT VALIDITY OF THE ADDICTION SEVERITY INDEX [J].
KOSTEN, TR ;
ROUNSAVILLE, BJ ;
KLEBER, HD .
JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISEASE, 1983, 171 (10) :606-610
[12]  
MCCUSKER J, 1994, AM J ADDICTION, V3, P254
[13]   NEW DATA FROM THE ADDICTION SEVERITY INDEX - RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY IN 3 CENTERS [J].
MCLELLAN, AT ;
LUBORSKY, L ;
CACCIOLA, J ;
GRIFFITH, J ;
EVANS, F ;
BARR, HL ;
OBRIEN, CP .
JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISEASE, 1985, 173 (07) :412-423
[14]   THE 5TH EDITION OF THE ADDICTION SEVERITY INDEX [J].
MCLELLAN, AT ;
KUSHNER, H ;
METZGER, D ;
PETERS, R ;
SMITH, I ;
GRISSOM, G ;
PETTINATI, H ;
ARGERIOU, M .
JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT, 1992, 9 (03) :199-213
[15]  
MCLELLAN AT, 1997, TREATMENT ADDICTION
[16]   PITFALLS IN EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CASE-MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS FOR HOMELESS PERSONS - LESSONS FROM THE NIAAA COMMUNITY DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM [J].
ORWIN, RG ;
SONNEFELD, LJ ;
GARRISONMOGREN, R ;
SMITH, NG .
EVALUATION REVIEW, 1994, 18 (02) :153-207
[17]   FACTOR STRUCTURE OF THE ADDICTION SEVERITY INDEX IN AN INPATIENT DETOXIFICATION SAMPLE [J].
ROGALSKI, CJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE ADDICTIONS, 1987, 22 (10) :981-992
[18]  
*SAS I, 1998, STAT AN SOFTW SAS VE
[19]  
SCHLENGER WE, 1992, NIDS RES MONOGRAPH, V127
[20]  
SCOTT CK, 1999, TARGET CHICAGO SUMMA