To review the steps required to develop an outcome evaluation package and to report on the 12-month outcome of an integrated day program.
Method:
Based on the identification of salient outcome predictors, standardized instruments were selected. A cohort of 78 patients was assessed at the time of admission to the program, at discharge, and 3, 6, and 12 months afterward.
Results:
Improvements were sustained over 1 year in all areas including treatment needs, quality of life, and readiness to change.
Conclusions:
The gap between the “cultures” of treatment and research must be narrowed. Following evidence of a program's general effectiveness through outcome monitoring, a randomized control design is optimal for specific interventions. The optimal length of follow-up depends on the perceived confounds.
MueserKTDrakeREMilesKM. The course and treatment of substance use disorder in persons with severe mental illness. In: OnkenLSBlaineJDGenderSHortonAM, editors. Treatment of drug-dependent individuals with comorbid mental disorders. N1DA Research Monograph 172, US Department of Health and Human Services; 1997. p 86–109.
2.
Mercer-McFaddenCDrakeRE. A review of 13 NIMH demonstration projects for young adults with severe mental illness and substance abuse problems. Rockville (MD): Community Support Program, Center for Mental Health Services, US Department of Health and Human Services; 1995
3.
JerrellJMRidgleyMS. Improvements in functioning and symptomatology in people with dual diagnoses. Psychiatr Serv1995;46:233–8.
4.
DrakeREBeboutRRQuimbyETeagueGBHarrisMRoschJP. Process evaluation in the Washington, DC dual diagnosis project. Alcohol Treatment Quarterly1993;10:113–24.
5.
DrakeREMcHugoGMNoordsyDL. Treatment of alcoholism among schizophrenia outpatients; four-year outcomes. Am J Psychiatry1993;150:328–9.
6.
Institute of Medicine. Broadening the base of treatment for alcohol problems. Washington (DC): National Academy Press; 1990. p 143–7, 319–21, 455–63.
7.
MandellW. A critical overview of evaluation of alcoholism treatment. Alcohol Clin Exp Res1979;3:315–23.
8.
SobellLCSobellMB. Outcome criteria and the assessment of alcohol treatment efficacy. In: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, editor. Evaluation of the alcoholic: Implications for research, theory and treatment (Research Monograph No.5). Rockville (MD): National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; 1981. p 369–82.
9.
SobellMBBrochuSSobellLCRoyJStevensJA. Alcohol treatment outcome evaluation methodology: State of the art 1980–1984. Addict Behav1987;12:113–28.
10.
SobellMBSobellLCGavinDR. Portraying alcohol treatment outcomes: Different yardsticks of success. Behavior Therapy1995;26:643–69.
11.
BreslinFCSobellSLSobellLCSobellMB. Alcohol treatment outcome methodology: State of the art 1989–1993. Addict Behav1997;22:145–55.
12.
MillerWRBrownJMSimpsonTLHandmakerNSBienTH, Luckie LF, and others. What works? A methodological analysis of the alcohol treatment outcome literature. In: HesterRKMillerWR, editors. Handbook of alcoholism treatment approaches. Effective alternatives. 2nd ed.1995; p 12–44.
13.
McKayJRAltermanAIMcLellanATSniderECO'BrienCP. Effect of random versus non random assignment in a comparison of inpatient and day hospital rehabilitation for male alcoholics. Consulting and Clinical Psychology1995;63:70–8.
14.
McLellanATAltermanAIMetzgerDSGrissomGR, Woody GE, Luborskyl, and others. Similarity of outcome predictors across opiate, cocaine and alcohol treatments. Role of treatment services. Consulting and Clinical Psychology1994;62:1141–58.
15.
SpitzerRLWilliamsJBWGibbonMFirstMB. Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-III-R (SCID). user's guide. Washington (DC): American Psychiatric Press; 1990.
CooneyNLKaddenRMLittMD. A comparison of methods for assessing sociopathy in male and female alcoholics. J Stud Alcohol1990;51:42–8.
18.
KaddenRMLittMDonovanDCooneyN. Psychometric properties of the California Psychological Inventory Socialization scale in treatment-seeking alcoholics. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors1996;10:131–46.
19.
McLellanATLuborskyLO'BrienCPWoodyGE. An improved evaluation instrument for substance abuse patient: The Addiction Severity Index. J Nerv Men Dis1980;168:26–33.
20.
McLellanATKushnerHMetzgerDPetersFSmithI, Glisson G, and others. The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index. J Subst Abuse Trea1992;9:199–213.
21.
HodginsDel-GuebalyN. More data on the Addiction Severity Index. Reliability and validity with the mentally ill substance abuser. J Nerv Ment Dis1992;180:197–201.
22.
FeragneMALongabaughRStevensonJF. The Psychosocial Functioning Inventory. Evaluation and the Health Professions1983;6:25–37.
23.
MillerWRToniganS. Assessing drinkers' motivation for change: The Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCTRATES). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors1996;10:81–9.
24.
WoodWDSwansonDA. Development and application of criteria for classes of psychotherapy based on patients' request for service. Journal of Medical Psychology1985;58:45–54.
25.
SobellLCSobellMB. Timeline follow-back technique for assessing self-reported alcohol consumption. In: LittenRZAllenJP, editors. Measuring alcohol consumption. Totowa (NJ): Humana Press; 1992. p 41–72.
26.
CareyKB. Reliability and validity of the time-line follow-back interview among psychiatric outpatients: A preliminary report. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors1997;11:26–33.
27.
AtkinsonCC. Client satisfaction questionnaire. In: CorcoranKFisherJ, editors. Measures for clinical practice. A sourcebook. New York: The Free Press; 1987.
28.
McLellanATAltermanAIWoodyGEMetzgerD. A quantitative measure of substance abuse treatments: The Treatment Services Review. J Nerv Ment Dis1992;180:101–10.
Project MATCH Research Group. Matching alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH posttreatment drinking outcomes. J Stud Alcohol1997;58:7–29.
