The Autonomic Progress Bar Motivates Treatment Completion for Patients of Stimulant Use Disorder and Cannabis Use Disorder

被引:3
|
作者
Chen, I-Chun [1 ,2 ]
Teng, Gloria [3 ]
Chen, Chur-Jen [4 ]
Lan, Tsuo-Hung [1 ,5 ]
Liu, Hung-Jen [2 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Taichung Vet Gen Hosp, Dept Psychiat, Taichung, Taiwan
[2] Natl Chung Hsing Univ, PhD Program Translat Med, Taichung, Taiwan
[3] Xiamen Univ Malaysia, Dept Math, Sepang, Selangor, Malaysia
[4] Tunghai Univ, Dept Appl Math, Taichung, Taiwan
[5] Natl Yang Ming Univ, Fac Med, Taipei, Taiwan
[6] Natl Chung Hsing Univ, Inst Mol Biol, Taichung, Taiwan
来源
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHIATRY | 2020年 / 10卷
关键词
mandatory treatment; progress bar; motivation; stimulant use disorder; time series analysis; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; SENSITIVITY;
D O I
10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00944
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
Background: The intrinsic motivation behind the "need to complete" is more influential than external incentives. We introduced a novel progress-bar tool to motivate the completion of programs designed to treat stimulant and cannabis use disorders. We further examined the effectiveness of the progress bar's scoring approach in forecasting consistently negative urine tests. Methods: This study's participants included 568 patients with stimulant, amphetamine-type, and cannabis use disorders who were undergoing 12-month mandatory treatment programs at Taichung Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan. Patients were given scores of 1, -1, or 0 depending on whether they received negative, positive, or missing urinalysis reports, respectively. The autonomic progress bar generated weekly score totals. At the group level, score(i) donated scores from all patients for a given week (i denoted the week). Score(i) was standardized to adjusted score(i). We then conducted Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) Model of time-series analyses for the adjusted score(i). Results: A total of 312 patients maintained treatment progress over the 12-month program. The autonomic score calculator totaled the shared achievements of these patients. The coefficients of the lag variables for mean (p), lag variables for residual error term (q), and number of orders for ensuring stationary (d) were estimated at p = 3, d = 4, and q = 7 for the first half of the treatment program, and were estimated at p = 2, d = 2, and q = 3 for the second half. Both models were stationary and tested as fit for prediction (p < 0.05). Sharply raised adjusted scores were predicted during the high-demand treatment phase. Discussion: This study's novel progress-bar tool effectively motivated treatment completion. It was also effective in forecasting continually negative urine tests. The tool's free open-source code makes it easy to implement among many substance-treatment services.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Contingency Management for Stimulant Use Disorder Progress, Challenges, and Recommendations
    Rawson, Richard A.
    Erath, Tyler G.
    Chalk, Mady
    Clark, H. Westley
    McDaid, Carol
    Wattenberg, Sarah A.
    Roll, John M.
    McDonell, Michael G.
    Parent, Sara
    Freese, Thomas E.
    JOURNAL OF AMBULATORY CARE MANAGEMENT, 2023, 46 (02) : 152 - 159
  • [2] Comparison of Treatment Receipt and Hospitalization Among Patients With Stimulant Use Disorder and/or Opioid Use Disorder in the Veterans Health Administration
    Frost, Madeline C.
    Coughlin, Lara N.
    Zhang, Lan
    Lin, Lewei
    JOURNAL OF ADDICTION MEDICINE, 2024, 18 (05) : 561 - 566
  • [3] Contingency Management for Cannabis Use Disorder Treatment
    Lima, Marcelo G.
    Tardelli, Vitor S.
    Fidalgo, Thiago M.
    EUROPEAN ADDICTION RESEARCH, 2024, 30 (05) : 321 - 337
  • [4] Cannabis use disorder: from neurobiology to treatment
    Le Foll, Bernard
    Tang, Victor M.
    Rueda, Sergio
    Trick, Leanne V.
    Boileau, Isabelle
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION, 2024, 134 (20)
  • [5] Screening Medications for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder
    Panlilio, L. V.
    Justinova, Z.
    Trigo, J. M.
    Le Foll, B.
    ANIMAL MODELS FOR MEDICATIONS SCREENING TO TREAT ADDICTION, 2016, 126 : 87 - 120
  • [6] Cannabis use, harms and the management of cannabis use disorder
    Copeland, Jan
    Clement, Nicole
    Swift, Wendy
    NEUROPSYCHIATRY, 2014, 4 (01) : 55 - 63
  • [7] Interventions for cannabis use disorder
    Winters, Ken C.
    Mader, Joel
    Budney, Alan J.
    Stanger, Catherine
    Knapp, Ashley A.
    Walker, Denise D.
    CURRENT OPINION IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 38 : 67 - 74
  • [8] Psychosociat interventions for stimulant use disorder
    Minozzi, Silvia
    Saulle, Rosella
    Amato, Laura
    Traccis, Francesco
    Agabio, Roberta
    COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2024, (02):
  • [9] Impact of cannabis legalization on treatment and research priorities for cannabis use disorder
    Sahlem, Gregory L.
    Tomko, Rachel L.
    Sherman, Brian J.
    Gray, Kevin M.
    McRae-Clark, Aimee L.
    INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF PSYCHIATRY, 2018, 30 (03) : 216 - 225
  • [10] Interoceptive attention in opioid and stimulant use disorder
    Stewart, Jennifer L.
    Khalsa, Sahib S.
    Kuplicki, Rayus
    Puhl, Maria
    Paulus, Martin P.
    ADDICTION BIOLOGY, 2020, 25 (06)