1. Centers that primarily relied on Motivational Interviewing and Motivational Enhancement Therapy,
2. Centers that utilized psychosocial and alternative therapies, and
3. Centers that employed comprehensive treatments, including medication-assisted treatment (MAT).
A treatment philosophy that embraced innovation and structural supports such as access to information, care coordination, more highly educated counselors, and competitive funding, were all associated strongly with centers being in the more comprehensive class (class #3 above). Centers that were larger and had access to onsite prescribing physicians were unsurprisingly also more likely to offer comprehensive treatment, as were centers that relied more heavily on insured clients.
Conclusion: The findings of this study clarify the general strategies of treatment centers in the U.S. and how those strategies are interconnected, information valuable to both providers and clients. Access to diverse treatment is beneficial and centers with limited offerings should consider widening their treatment strategies, especially as the Affordable Care Act begins to increase the emphasis on integration of SUD treatment with general health care practice. Centers offering MAT will be better able to integrate other medical services, and programs that make up the more comprehensive class, offering a wider range of core and wraparound services, will be the most competitive in the new SUD treatment climate.
Funding for this Addiction Science Made Easy project is provided by the Addiction Technology Transfer Center National Office, under the cooperative agreement from the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment of SAMHSA.
Articles were written based on the following published research:
Citation: Edmond MB, Aletraris, L, Paino M, Roman PM. Treatment Strategy Profiles in Substance Use Disorder Treatment Programs: A Latent Class Analysis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2015 (in press).