1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.

A comparison of contingency management and cognitive-behavioral approaches for stimulant-dependent i

A comparison of contingency management and cognitive-behavioral approaches for stimulant-dependent i

  1. Jatelka
    Addiction 2006 Feb;101(2):267-74

    Rawson RA, McCann MJ, Flammino F, Shoptaw S, Miotto K, Reiber C, Ling W.

    AIMS: Previous research has reported that both contingency management (CM) and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) are efficacious interventions for the treatment of stimulant abusers. The present study sought to directly compare the effectiveness of (CM) and (CBT) alone and in combination in reducing stimulant use. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Stimulant-dependent individuals (n = 171). INTERVENTION: CM, CBT or combined CM and CBT, 16-week treatment conditions. CM condition participants received vouchers for stimulant-free urine samples. CBT condition participants attended three 90-minute group sessions each week. MEASUREMENTS: Participants were interviewed at baseline and weeks 17, 26 and 52. Measures included psychiatric disorders and alcohol and drug use and concomitant social problems. FINDINGS: CM procedures produced better retention and lower rates of stimulant use during the study period. Self-reported stimulant use was reduced from baseline levels at all follow-up points for all groups and urinalysis data did not differ between groups at follow-up. While CM produced robust evidence of efficacy during treatment application, CBT produced comparable longer-term outcomes. There was no evidence of an additive effect when the two treatments were combined. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that CM is an efficacious treatment for reducing stimulant use and is superior during treatment to a CBT approach. CM is useful in engaging substance abusers, retaining them in treatment and helping them achieve abstinence from stimulant use. CBT also reduces drug use from baseline levels and produces comparable outcomes on all measures at follow-up

    Discussion Thread