D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego,...
-
Upload
jeremy-hines -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego,...
![Page 1: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
D. Paul Moberg, PhDAndrew Finch, PhD
Association of Recovery Schools2013 Annual Meeting
San Diego, CA
![Page 2: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
This research was supported by the National Institute On Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health under award number R01DA029785. This project has also benefited from the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program, through the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) grant UL1TR000427. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Thanks to our Co-Investigators Ken Winters and Mark Lipsey and to research staff and colleagues including Andria Botzet, Christine Dittel, Tamara Fahnhorst, Emily Fisher, Angela Forgues, Stephanie Lindsley, Patrick McIlvaine, Emily Tanner-Smith, David Weimer, and Holly Wegman.
![Page 3: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Background—Recent Research on Adolescent Recovery
Logic model for Recovery High School Research
Our Current Research Study (NIDA funded) Our Cumulative Observations
◦ Variation in Schools and Structures◦ Dynamics of Recovery High Schools◦ Integration in community recovery care◦ Policies that facilitate Recovery High Schools◦ Sustainability
![Page 4: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
132,953 Total Episodes, representing 7.6% of youths needing treatment
![Page 5: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Recent ResearchRecent Researchon on
Interventions and Interventions and Adolescent RecoveryAdolescent Recovery
![Page 6: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Data:55 experimental or quasi-experimental studies69 research studies with pre-test to post-test dataGAIN study of “routine treatment practice” (103 OP, 30 res programs)
Participants:70% male58% whiteMean age about 16Symptoms of clinical level of substance use disordersAlcohol, marijuana most common60% comorbid mental health disorders
![Page 7: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Treatment “generally appeared to work equally well irrespective of demographic characteristics”
Pretest-posttest analysis effect sizes showed significant reductions after treatment
Experimental or quasi-experimental studies generally showed significant result for focal treatment.
Randomized trial data suggest general effectiveness of: ◦ -Family therapy (FFT, MDFT, MST, etc.)◦ -CBT
“…many of the treatments…are at least somewhat effective in reducing substance use…”
![Page 8: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Treatment Implementation Quality Scale:Program has a treatment manualStandard scripts/protocolProvides implementation feedback to treatment providersWas set up for research purposesDelivered by researchers
Implementation Quality was “strongly and significantly associated with better substance use outcomes” independent of what type of treatment was applied.
![Page 9: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
1. Therapeutic models involving multiple systems--School and family interventions are most influential (Waldron, 2008; Karki, 2012)
◦ Behavioral Family Systems Therapy (BFST) – reduced marijuana use for those with mild to moderate mental health diagnoses (Santisteban, 2003).
◦ Family Behavioral Therapy (FBT) – improved long term outcomes in adolescent conduct, reductions in their use of illicit drugs, school performance , mood and family functioning (Azrin, 2001)
◦ Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) - long term outcomes for reduced substance use, delinquency, internalized distress and reduced risk in family, peer, and school domains (Waldron, 2008; Liddle, 2008 and 2009)
![Page 10: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
2. Individual Therapy ◦ Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)-- significant pre
to post treatment decreases in adolescent substance abuse (Liddle, 2008; Waldron, 2008; Becker, 2008)
3. Youth Empowerment approach ◦ Focus on personal responsibility, coping and problem
solving skills using Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET), CBT and Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) (Dennis, 2004)
4. Brief Motivational Interventions◦ MET, Motivational Interviewing (MI), CBT and MET
combined (Becker, 2008; S. Godley, 2010)
![Page 11: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
5. Community Support◦ Therapeutic Community (TC) outpatient treatment
models - reductions in substance use, criminal behavior, and psychological distress; improved psychological functioning (Morral, 2004; Jainchill, 2005)
◦ AA/NA attendance during and following treatment (Kelly, 2010; 2013)
◦ Assertive Continuing Care (ACC) promotes continuing care linkage and retention, long term abstinence from marijuana in study of residential treatment (M. Godley et al., 2007) but not for outpatient treatment (S. Godley et al., 2010)
![Page 12: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
After-school/after-care programs Assertive Continuing Care community-
based program Recovery classrooms (including school-day
support group meetings) Student Assistance Programs and
counselors
![Page 13: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Recovery High Schools Therapeutic Boarding Schools with a
Recovery Emphasis Alcohol & Drug Treatment Center Schools Non-Traditional Schools of Choice with
Targeted Substance Abuse Programming◦ Alterative schools◦ Charter schools◦ Contract schools◦ Home schools ◦ Virtual/Online schools ◦ Area Learning Centers
Traditional Secondary Schools
![Page 14: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
A. Primary purpose is to educate students in recovery from substance use or co-occurring disorders;
B.Meet state requirements for awarding a secondary school diploma, i.e. school offers credits leading to a state-recognized high school diploma, and student is not just getting tutored or completing work from another school while there;
C.Intent that all students enrolled be in recovery and working a program of recovery from substance use or co-occurring disorders as determined by the student and the School;
D.Available to any student in recovery who meets state or district eligibility requirements for attendance, i.e., students do not have to go through a particular treatment program to enroll, and the school is not simply the academic component of a primary or extended-care treatment facility or therapeutic boarding school. SOURCE: Association of Recovery Schools, 2013
![Page 15: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Inputs Activities Short-term Outcomes (3-6 months)
Medium-Term Outcomes (6-12 mos)
Long Term Outcomes (24+ months)
Students post-treatment for substance use disorder
Recovery support/continuing care in school:-daily group-therapeutic cmnty -peer support-ind counseling-outside meetings-relapse prevention
Monitoring (UA)
Group support
Self efficacy Problem Solving Cognitive expectancies Outside support sought if needed Self reveals if relapse
Reduced substance use:-Days Used-Quantity Used -UA clean Reduced substance related problems Reduced MH symptoms Reduced delinquent behavior Reduced risky sexual behavior
Long term abstinence from drugs Alcohol use abstinent or non-risky levels No SUD symptoms Fewer treatment episodes for MH Not incarcerated or “on paper” Seeks continuing care in case of relapse Overall positive health status
Schools (RHS or other HS):-Teachers-Counselors-Academics-Therapeutics/ Support
Academics-Curriculum-Enrichment-Experiential and Comm Service lrng
Attendance Credits earned School satisfaction Therapeutic Satisfaction
Test Scores GPA Graduation
Pursuing Higher education Gainfully employed
Families
-Fam Support-Parent Monitoring
-Parent satisfaction
Ongoing positive relationship with family
Peers New peer group based in school
-Reports positive peer behavior
Positive social functioning
Maintains positive peer group
![Page 16: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Our Current Research Study Research Design Characteristics of Treatment
Programs and Recovery Schools
Characteristics of Participants Preliminary Results Challenges
![Page 17: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Prior studies and reports (e.g., Moberg and Thaler, 1995; Moberg and Finch,
2008; Finch, 2003; Kochanek, 2010 ) suggest that RHSs are an effective component of continuing care for adolescents with SUDs.
Focal Question:Are RHSs cost effective in comparison to traditional high schools in preventing relapse, facilitating academic achievement, and reducing dropout for students recovering from SUDs
Specific Aims: To assess, as compared to traditional high school students with treated SUDs:Behavioral outcomes for RHS students (less alcohol and other drug use, fewer mental health symptoms, and less delinquent behavior)Academic outcomes for RHS students (higher GPA, higher standardized test scores, better attendance, lower drop-out rates)Cost-benefit ratio of RHS participation
![Page 18: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Students and parents recruited from MN and WI substance abuse treatment settings and RHSs.
Comparison group of students not attending RHS selected from this pool using propensity score techniques with variables based on prior meta-analyses.
Interviews of students and parents at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months; UA at baseline and 12 months; extensive measures including domains from Lipsey and Tanner-Smith’s meta-analyses.
Site visits and interviews with schools and treatment facilities to better characterize the interventions.
![Page 19: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Recruit from:Baseline
SchoolType
3 MonthsSchoolType
6 MonthsSchoolType
12 Months LongerTerm
Follow-up?
TreatmentSettings
O0Non-RHS
O3Non-RHS
O6Non-RHS
O12 ??? O24
RHS (recruitment added)
O0 RHS O3 RHS O6 RHS O12 ??? O24
O=Observation/interview of youth and parent
School Type=RHS or Non-RHS
Primary Analysis=Differential change from O0
to O12 for RHS vs Non-RHS students.
![Page 20: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
From Lipsey and Tanner-Smith’s (2010) meta-analysis (119 studies) of predictors of substance use treatment outcome (r=.30-.50):
prior substance use history attitudes toward substance use; intentions to use drugs or alcohol peer substance use and attitudes; peer antisocial behavior; availability of
drugs from peers delinquency, aggression, antisocial behavior; impulsiveness, hyperactivity;
antisocial attitudes school performance, achievement, grades; school bonding, attitudes toward
school; school truancy, attendance religiosity social competence, social skills family antisocial behavior, substance use negative parenting; poor parent skills; weak family cohesion internalizing behavior/symptoms
![Page 21: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Current study: 7 recovery high schools◦ 3 have closed in last 60 days◦ Plan to add 2 Wisconsin schools next year◦ Exploring Massachusetts, which has 4 schools◦ Descriptive Study: 17 schools plus one pilot in 7
states, including 8 RHSs in MN
School types:◦ Charter schools (3) – 1 remaining◦ Area Learning Centers/Schools-within-schools (4) – 3
remaining◦ Descriptive Study: 5 charters, 9 alternative
schools/ALCs, 3 private schools
![Page 22: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Facilities for 7 RHS participants:
• 1 school building• 1 church• 2 community centers• 3 office complexes
![Page 23: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
![Page 24: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Baseline
3-Month
6-Month
12-Mont
h
Total Intervie
ws to date
Youth Interviews
12390
(82%)61
(68%)33
(64%)307
Parent Interviews
127101
(89%)79
(81%)42
(79%)349
Total Interviews
250 191 140 75656
![Page 25: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Number PercentAge (Mean= 16.4, s.d.= 1.1): 14
7 6 %
15 16 14 %
16 28 25 %
17 45 40 %
18 15 13 %
19 1 1 %
Sex: Male
60 54 %
Female 52 46 %
Race/ethnicity: Asian
10 9 %
Native American 5 5 %
African American 11 10 %
Caucasian 101 90 %
Hispanic 6 5 %
Other 2 2 %
Recruited from: Treatment Center
59 53 %
RHS 53 47 %
![Page 26: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Mental Health Services:Inpatient/Resid. 44%Outpatient 72%
Alcohol/Drug Services:Inpatient/Resid. 60%Outpatient 86%AA/NA 64%
![Page 27: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Substance Use(3 months prior to treatment)
Mean (s.d.) Percent Used
Days alcohol (tlfb) 19.7 (23.0) 88 %Days marijuana (tlfb) 57.9 (32.0) 93 %
Days other drugs (tlfb) 28.0 (33.8) 76 % Diagnostics (DSM-IV): Number Percent
Alcohol -Dependence 60 54 % -Abuse 18 16 %
Other Drug-Dependence 95 85 %
-Abuse 13 11 %Tobacco Dependence 70 62 %
Major Depression 80 71 %
![Page 28: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Status at 3 Months
Attending RHS (n=36)
Not-RHS (n=38)
Total (n=74)
Entered study from Treatment center
17%
83 %
49 %
Used Alcohol (“to intoxication”)Used Marijuana*
28 %
33 %
30 %
53 %
29 %
43 %
Used Other Drugs 21 % 22 % 22 % Depression Problems
62 % 68 % 65 %
Attending School** 97 % 74 % 85 %At Traditional HS 0 % 29 % 15 %Other students “support my recovery”*
Strongly Agree Agree
39 %44 %
18 %39 %
29 %42 %
* p < .10** p < .05
![Page 29: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Status at 6 months Attending RHS (n=26) Not-RHS (n=22)
Days Used Alcohol* (mean and s.d. in past 90)
1.7 (4.3) 6.9 (9.8)
Days used Marijuana**(mean and s.d in past 90)
2.4 (6.9) 19.6 (28.9)
Days Used Other Drugs(mean and s.d in past 90)
1.6 (4.7) 3.1 (7.5)
* p < .05** p < .01
![Page 30: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Accrual/recruitment more difficult than anticipated; low flow from treatment to RHS.
Variable treatment experiences—modalities, repetition, intensity, dual disorder emphasis
Stability of RHSs—resource and institutionalization difficulties.
Variable longevity of RHS participation by students.
![Page 31: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
What have we learned based on our “Program of Research”?
RHSs are important option in continuum of recovery support, in particular serve students withCo-occurring disordersSevere substance use disordersHigh need for services and support
![Page 32: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Most programs studied appear to be successful in supporting young people in recovery, and providing (at least transitional) academic services
RHS programs less successful in community institutionalization
Sustainability continues to be an issue
![Page 33: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
RHS’s vary significantly in school structure and organizational home
Recovery Schools are very dynamic in nature
Policies that facilitate Recovery Schools—vary by state (macro level policy) and community or school district (micro level policy)
Sustainability of individual schools is tenuous—we are trying to sort out factors that are important
![Page 34: D. Paul Moberg, PhD Andrew Finch, PhD Association of Recovery Schools 2013 Annual Meeting San Diego, CA.](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022042703/56649ddf5503460f94ad9315/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Questions?