Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 97
5 Best Practices in Prevention, Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Substance Use Disorders T his chapter reviews best practices for prevention, screening, diag- nosis, and treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs). The review that follows in Chapter 6 compares current military policies and pro- grams pertaining to SUDs with best practices as described in the scientific literature outlined here. PREVENTION Prevention is a key strategy for addressing substance use problems. As a first step in delaying the onset and progression of substance abuse, effective prevention has the potential to minimize the need for diagnosis, treatment, and management of SUDs and reduce the enormous social and economic costs of alcohol and other drug dependence. The 2011 National Drug Control Strategy identifies the military as an important population for the receipt of substance abuse prevention services (ONDCP, 2011b). The strategy gives priority to three objectives pertaining directly to SUD preven- tion within the military: community-based efforts (both on and off base); efforts with youth (i.e., military dependents); and prevention of prescription drug abuse, a growing problem in the military as well as in the general U.S. population (ONDCP, 2011b). The major goals of prevention are to prevent or delay the onset of substance use and to delay the progression of use from experimental to regular use and dependence. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has identified three major types of prevention activities: universal, selective, and indicated (IOM, 1994a; NRC and IOM, 2009). In the present context, universal pre- 97
OCR for page 98
98 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES vention focuses on the general population or population subgroups that are not currently at high risk for SUDs. Selective prevention targets individuals and groups at greater risk of developing SUD-related problems. Finally, indicated prevention focuses on those who are already in the early stages of problematic substance use. Each type of prevention is integral to a robust and comprehensive prevention strategy. Risk and Protective Factors for SUDs Effective prevention programs are intended to diminish risk factors and promote protective factors for substance use. Risk factors can be divided into three categories: individual, social, and environmental. Exam- ples include a genetic predisposition to SUD, low self-confidence, low self- fficacy, poor decision-making skills, negative peer influences, and per- e missive attitudes toward substance use by parents and the community, among others (Lowinson, 2005; NRC and IOM, 2000). Protective factors include, for example, having emotionally supportive parents with open communication styles who are aware of their children’s potential for sub- stance use, a strong family orientation, religion/spirituality, involvement in organized school activities, and a strong sense of connection to teachers and school. The National Institute on Drug Abuse’s (NIDA’s) (2009b) Preven- tion Research Review Work Group advocates the use of a biopsychosocial approach to identifying risk and protective factors, which involves assessing context (e.g., school, workplace, military) and stage of development (e.g., early childhood, adolescence, young adulthood) (see also NRC and IOM, 2009, and Robertson et al., 2003). This section reviews evidence on risk and protective factors for SUDs by domain (i.e., individual, social, environ- mental) and developmental stage (i.e., childhood, adolescence, adulthood). Risk Factors Most individual risk factors are identified in children and adolescents (e.g., childhood maltreatment/abuse) (Horwitz et al., 2001; Hussey et al., 2006; Mayes and Suchman, 2006; NRC and IOM, 2009; Sternberg et al., 2006; Trickett et al., 2011). Some individual risk factors, however (e.g., intimate partner violence, including physical, sexual, or emotional abuse and/or coercion and degradation) (Campbell, 2002), apply more specifically to adults. While genetic susceptibility to SUD is not modifiable, recent research on executive cognitive function and arousal mechanisms in the prefrontal cortex portions of the brain suggests that sensation seeking can be controlled and redirected by pharmacotherapeutic agents (Kalivas and Volkow, 2005). There is also evidence that prevention activities can ameliorate genetic risk (Brody et al., 2009). Social (or group) risk factors include family risk factors (e.g., modeled family drug use behavior, family
OCR for page 99
BEST PRACTICES 99 management practices, family conflict, weak family bonding) (Kumpfer et al., 2003), as well as peer risk factors (e.g., peers who use substances increase risk by modeling and normalizing substance use) (Hawkins et al., 1992). Peer pressure may be especially strong among military members and their families because of the formal military structure that requires mutual support for effective functioning. Environmental risk factors include the availability of low-cost and easily accessible substances (e.g., discounted alcohol on military bases). There are several risk factors associated specifically with military ser- vice. Examples include service-related injuries (Baker et al., 2009; Larson et al., 2012), trauma, and demands related to active duty (e.g., carrying heavy equipment; witnessing and experiencing traumatic events during deploy- ment; being separated from family members; experiencing occupational stress and boredom when serving in isolated sites; and being the object of discriminatory treatment and, in some cases, acts of violence based on gen- der, race/ethnicity, or sexual orientation). Military service in general often involves exposure to stressful and traumatic events (Seal et al., 2009), and numerous studies have documented high rates of service-related mental health symptoms among military personnel, which are known to intensify the risk for substance use problems (Edlund et al., 2007; Foran et al., 2011a,b; Jakupcak et al., 2010). The United States’ current conflicts are distinguishable from those of the past by the increased length and number of deployments and the types of injuries (Tanielian et al., 2008). A recent review of substance use problems and risk factors among veterans of Operation Enduring Free- dom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation New Dawn concluded that “military personnel and combat veterans have higher rates of unhealthy substance use than their age peers in the general population” (Larson et al., 2012, p. 21). The review found evidence of a positive relationship between deployment and smoking initiation and recidivism, heavy drinking, and possibly prescription drug misuse. Stress-related consequences of military service-specific conditions, such as acute stress symptoms, psychological and marital problems, and use of medication for combat stress may mani- fest immediately, or symptoms may be delayed, as suggested by higher rates of such problems among those with more deployments than among those with fewer (MHAT, 2006). Multiple studies have shown that deployment and combat exposure are associated with unhealthy alcohol use (Jacobson et al., 2008; Shen et al., 2012; Spera and Franklin, 2010; Wilk at al., 2010). Another IOM study currently under way is examining the physical and mental health readjustment needs of veterans of these conflicts, and should offer additional evidence on the associated types and levels of risk.1 1 For more information, see the study website at http://www.iom.edu/Activities/Veterans/ MilPersReadjustNeeds.aspx.
OCR for page 100
100 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES Certain features of military culture (e.g., drinking norms) can contrib- ute to the initiation of problem drinking and related consequences among military personnel. For example, there may be pressure to drink excessively to prove one’s toughness, perform a rite of passage, fit into a new group culture, or cope with trauma. Boredom on military bases and in deployment settings, with few recreational activities available, was highlighted as a con- tributor to problem drinking in presentations to the committee and during visits to military bases. Concern about family finances also is associated with problem drinking among military personnel (Foran et al., 2011a,b). Military-relevant environmental risk factors include the ready availability of alcohol on or near bases, often at reduced prices. This latter contribut- ing factor can be effectively addressed through environmental prevention strategies, which are discussed in detail below. Finally, the strong warrior ethos in the military may be considered a risk factor for not seeking help when treatment for SUDs or other mental health problems is needed. While both male and female members of the military are at risk for substance use as a result of military-specific stressors, men (particularly those aged 25 and younger) are at greater risk of developing drug use disorders, while women are at greater risk of developing depression (Seal et al., 2009). Compared with military service-specific risk factors among military personnel, there is a paucity of research identifying risk factors for SUDs among their spouses and children (Mansfield and Engel, 2011). Deploy- ments, however, have a number of effects on the spouses and children of service members that may put them at risk for SUDs. Studies have shown that deployments can impact children’s behavior and academic perfor- mance, spouses’ stress levels, and child maltreatment rates (Chandra, 2011; Chartrand et al., 2008; Gibbs et al., 2007; Lester et al., 2010). Whether such stressors associated with military service by parents or spouses are risk factors for SUDs and other mental health problems in their dependents is not yet well documented. Protective Factors Compared with risk factors, less research has been conducted to iden- tify factors that protect against the development of SUDs. Protective factors that may mediate or moderate the effects of risk exposure include resiliency, attachment, positive temperament, support (either through the family or from an external support system), and religiosity (Hawkins et al., 1992; NRC and IOM, 2000). In children, resiliency refers to the ability to thrive and exhibit positive health behaviors despite exposure to adverse living conditions (e.g., extreme poverty, crime, drugs, and abuse) (NRC and IOM, 2000; Rutter, 2006). The extent to which adult military members can be resilient to the effects of risk factors for SUDs and adverse conditions (e.g.,
OCR for page 101
BEST PRACTICES 101 war-related life-threatening situations) is not well understood. There is some evidence that resiliency operates through other mechanisms, includ- ing religiosity, family support, peer bonding, and parenthood (NRC and IOM, 2009). Positive temperament may enable an individual to reframe or reinterpret otherwise highly threatening situations in order to cope (e.g., functioning under fire). Finally, while lack of executive cognitive function (ECF) has been found to be a predictor of substance use and SUDs (Blume and Marlatt, 2009), it is not yet known whether the reverse is true (i.e., whether high levels of ECF can protect against the development of SUDs). Since ECF consists of a host of skills required for military members to func- tion in the armed services—including working memory, deliberate planning, decision making, emotional regulation, and behavioral impulse control skills—it may operate indirectly as a protective factor against the develop- ment of SUDs by enhancing the ability to thrive, cope, and minimize stress. Evidence-Based Programs and Practices Prevention activities that reduce the incidence of one problem behavior tend to reduce other problem behaviors (Karoly et al., 1998). The initial investments in these types of interventions generally are repaid in both sav- ings to government and benefits to society, including gains in adult employ- ment and resulting tax revenues, as well as reductions in criminal activity and associated cost savings for arrests, judicial proceedings, probation, and incarceration (Karoly et al., 2001). Evidence-based SUD prevention programming (1) addresses the appropriate risk and protective factors for the population in question, (2) employs approaches with demonstrated effectiveness, (3) takes place at the appropriate time chronologically and developmentally, (4) makes use of proper settings and domains for delivery, and (5) manages programs effectively (ONDCP, 2001). These core elements served as the basis for the committee’s assessment of the adequacy, appro- priateness, and likely effectiveness of prevention programs in the various branches of the U.S. military; broader nonprogrammatic environmental prevention strategies are discussed later in this section. Address Risk and Protective Factors As outlined above, effective prevention programs address the risk and protective factors relevant both to the problem or issue at hand and the population(s) to be reached. Military dependents require a different set of prevention strategies from those appropriate for active duty service mem- bers, for instance. Demographic (e.g., age, race) and sociocultural (e.g., ethnicity) considerations are critical in designing effective prevention activi- ties. Several sources (NIDA, 2009a; NRC and IOM, 2009; Robertson et al.,
OCR for page 102
102 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES 2003) provide solid frameworks for identifying risk and protective factors as a component of the design and adoption of evidence-based programs. Employ Effective Approaches The National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices (NREPP) lists SUD prevention programs determined to be evidence-based according to their readiness for dissemination and the quality of their evalu- ation research—specifically measurement reliability and validity; fidelity of implementation; appropriateness of analysis; and the handling of attrition, missing data, and confounding variables (SAMHSA, 2012). Programs that focus only on increasing knowledge or changing attitudes have had few effects on substance use behaviors compared with programs that focus on resistance and social/life skill building (Botvin et al., 1995). Evidence- based prevention programs often include skills particularly relevant to mili- tary members and their families, such as resisting peer pressure, avoiding high-risk situations, identifying and bonding with individuals who provide social support and a nonuse norm, and practicing emotional regulation and impulse control. Not all prevention programs have been evaluated with all popula- tions or in all settings. Often, prevention providers opt to adopt promising programs or approaches. Sometimes this process involves implementing programs effective in one population but not evaluated in another (e.g., adapting a program evaluated with college students for use in a military population). At other times, the process involves working with a program that is theory based, although not yet formally evaluated. Among the more prominent theories represented in evidence-based prevention efforts are social learning/cognitive theory (Bandura, 1977), attitudinal theory (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980), and social network theory (Valente, 2010). Accord- ing to the principles of participant modeling and social learning theory, program implementers must be perceived as credible role models to whom military members can relate. Use of slightly older peer leaders to assist program implementers enhances program participation and effects (Perry et al., 1986). The most effective program delivery is sequenced as the pro- vision of general principles of the program, modeling of prevention skills, role playing or rehearsal of skills, and extended practice in real-life settings. Take Place at the Appropriate Time Skill development programs need to be age appropriate. Prevention programs for early childhood, for instance, should focus on parental man- agement of children, parent-child communication, and basic health behav- ior (e.g., nutrition, sleep, and health care) (NRC and IOM, 2000; Shonkoff et al., 2012). Elementary school programs typically focus on building
OCR for page 103
BEST PRACTICES 103 socioemotional competence and preventing conduct problems. Adolescent programs should focus on reducing risk factors and increasing protective factors, including training in resisting peer pressure, positive adult support seeking, nonuse social norms, and nonuse leisure time activities (Hansen and Graham, 1991; Wills and Vaughan, 1989). Training for adults (i.e., spouses and military members in the emerging adulthood period) should focus on brief motivational interviewing; coping skills; social support; and skills in positive parent-child communication, rule setting, and monitoring. In addition to developmental considerations, chronology is important as well; the most successful prevention efforts are reinforced over time in a variety of settings. Make Use of Appropriate Settings “Appropriate” settings are based on the nature of the problem/issue being addressed and the characteristics of the population being served. The setting for program delivery can be, for example, the school, the home, a religious institution, or the workplace. Manage Programs Effectively The most effective prevention programs provide standardized training and manualized protocols, along with specific and measurable prevention skills and goals (Mihalik et al., 2004). Standardization helps minimize pro- gram “drift” and dilution, whereas use of a general outline, procedures, or processes is not effective in changing substance use behavior (Mihalik et al., 2004)—a point that is particularly relevant given the strong empirical link between program effectiveness and implementation fidelity. Well-trained providers and consistent monitoring and program evaluation are also inte- gral components of an evidence-based prevention strategy. Included within this principle as well is alignment of program values and institutional values. Program buy-in, implementation, participation, and maintenance relate to whether SUD prevention is perceived to enhance military functioning and promote individual warrior fitness. Important factors include (1) an environment supportive of the delivery of preven- tion programs (in terms of allocation of time and availability of qualified implementers), (2) social environmental norms consistent with nonuse, (3) supportive (versus punitive) policies that link directly and clearly to preven- tion programs, and (4) reinforcement of nonuse behaviors and practices. Environmental Strategies Beyond prevention programs and efforts aimed at impacting individual behavior, the military is uniquely positioned to implement more overarching
OCR for page 104
104 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES systems-level, or environmental, prevention strategies that affect the com- munity at large. Environmental prevention strategies are directed at com- munity norms and policy regulations. This section describes best practices in environmental prevention efforts for SUDs applicable in military settings. Alcohol A number of strategies based on sound theory and with proven effec- tiveness exist to control alcohol use and related problems at the popula- tion level. These strategies are “environmental” because they work by decreasing the availability or appeal of alcohol or illicit drugs (including prescription drugs) in the community rather than attempting to change individual behavior. These strategies lead to decreases in consumption and minimization or prevention of alcohol-related problems. Several reviews of these policies are available in the scientific literature (e.g., Babor et al., 2010a,b; Saltz et al., 2010; Wagenaar et al., 2009; WHO, 2009), some of which are addressed specifically to policy makers, including those in charge of developing and implementing health policies in the U.S. armed forces. In the alcohol field, Babor and colleagues (2010a) discuss seven policy approaches, four of which are environmental and can be used by the U.S. armed forces to address alcohol consumption and related problems among military personnel. (An additional approach discussed by these authors— advertising regulation—affects military personnel but cannot be changed by the military.) The first of these four pertinent approaches is controlling affordability through pricing and taxation. The evidence in this area clearly indicates that higher prices lead to a decrease in alcohol consumption (Chisholm et al., 2004; Wagenaar et al., 2009). The second approach is restricting the availability of alcohol available for purchase (Chaloupka et al., 2002; Stockwell and Gruenewald, 2004). Consistent enforcement of the legal drinking age is a key strategy that falls under this approach and is highly effective in reducing alcohol consumption in this age group (Wagenaar and Toomey, 2002). The third environmental prevention approach involves altering the con- text in which alcohol is consumed. Best practices in this area entail “server intervention” strategies, or training bar staff and liquor and convenience store employees in responsible beverage service (e.g., requiring age identifica- tion, recognizing potential problems, and exercising increased responsibility in selling alcohol and serving alcoholic beverages) and in the management and prevention of aggressive and/or problematic patrons, who may or may not be intoxicated (Babor et al., 2010a; Graham, 2000; raham and Homel, G 2008; Graham et al., 2005). Dram shop liability laws—the U.S. laws that hold bar owners responsible for injuries caused to a third party by someone
OCR for page 105
BEST PRACTICES 105 who was sold or served alcohol when intoxicated—are also effective in modifying drinking contexts (Rammohan et al., 2011). The fourth approach is directed at preventing impaired driving. While policies reflecting this approach were developed to respond to drinking and driving, many of them can also be used to prevent driving under the influence of other drugs, including prescription drugs. Drinking and driv- ing countermeasures are among the most effective population-level control policies in the alcohol field. Enforcement of these policies contributed to a decrease in alcohol-related traffic fatalities from a high of 59.5 percent of all traffic fatalities in 1982 to 32 percent in 2009 (National Highway Traf- fic Safety Administration, 2009). Sobriety checkpoints and random breath testing are two of the most effective policies in this area. Their effective- ness, however, is associated with the frequency of their implementation and consistency in advertising (i.e., alerting drivers in the community to the existence—although not the location—of checkpoints and random breath testing). Also relevant for the military is enforcement of blood alcohol content (BAC) limits and administrative license suspension. There is some evidence that the lower the BAC limit, the more effective it can be, although BAC limits lower than .02 are difficult to enforce (Babor et al., 2010a). Two rigorous evaluations of these types of environmental initiatives found significant reductions in alcohol-related traffic accidents, assaults involving alcohol, amount or quantity of drinking, and driving while intoxicated in intervention compared with control communities (Holder et al., 2000; Treno et al., 2007). Appendix I summarizes policy-relevant strategies dis- cussed by Babor and colleagues (2010a) for the prevention of alcohol- related problems by category and strength of evidentiary support. Other Drugs Use of illicit drugs and abuse of prescription drugs continue to be a major public health problem in the United States. Prescription drug abuse, one of the major concerns that prompted this study, is a vexing problem among military personnel. As in the alcohol field, there are environmental, population-level approaches that can be useful in the prevention of drug use and abuse. Babor and colleagues (2010b) discuss various approaches, one of which is pertinent to the U.S. military to address concerns related to prescription drug abuse. This approach is what Babor and colleagues (2010b) call “prescription regimes,” which involve controlling the safety, storage, and distribution of prescription drugs to prevent or minimize their diversion to the black market for illicit use and abuse. Some of these mea- sures entail tight regulation of prescription dispensation and control and over-the- ounter sales, physician education, and enforcement of prescrip- c tion regulations.
OCR for page 106
106 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES In the context of the increasing incidence of prescription drug problems in both the military and civilian sectors, the Office of National Drug Con- trol Policy’s (ONDCP’s) four major strategies also provide best practices in environmental prevention that correspond with the prescription regimes of Babor et al. (2010b) (ONDCP, 2012). The first strategy is education. While ONDCP’s 2011 Prescription Drug Abuse Prevention Plan focuses on par- ent, child, and patient education (ONDCP, 2011a), also critical is provider education regarding responsible prescribing practices and alternative pain medications with lower dependence potential. The second strategy is moni- toring, which involves the implementation of prescription drug monitoring programs. In the military setting specifically, it is critically important that monitoring systems be capable of sharing data across branches and with state monitoring programs to prevent the practice of “doctor shopping.” The third strategy in ONDCP’s prevention plan is disposal, which entails “convenient and environmentally responsible prescription drug disposal programs to help decrease the supply of unused prescription drugs in the home” (ONDCP, 2012, p. 1). Finally, proper enforcement of policies and laws is necessary to ensure consistent implementation and maximum effectiveness. Summary In conclusion, SUD prevention in the military is a complex issue. Changing attitudes about acceptable alcohol and other drug use is cen- tral to changing drinking and drug using behavior. Intensive antismoking campaigns of the past several decades—entailing a combination of higher prices (through taxation) (Chaloupka et al., 2012); restrictions on where use is permitted; and above all, changed social norms about smoking— have resulted in major reductions in smoking initiation and tobacco use. Structural measures can impact alcohol use problems, illicit drug use, and prescription drug problems. Environmental strategies for these problems, as discussed above, are available and effective. Partnerships within the larger communities in which military bases are located are also integral to a solid environmental prevention strategy (e.g., Spoth et al., 2011). The military has a unique opportunity to communicate consistent messages about drinking (clearly the most prevalent substance use problem in the military, about which great ambivalence persists at the highest levels), illicit drug use, and nonmedical use of prescription drugs, as well as to control the environmental factors that drive both heavy drinking and prescription drug misuse through such measures as restricting availability, increasing cost, and limiting permitted times and locations for the use of legal drugs.
OCR for page 107
BEST PRACTICES 107 SCREENING, DIAGNOSIS, AND TREATMENT While the prevention of SUDs is the foundation of any good strategy for addressing the problem, a comprehensive strategy must also include evidence-based screening mechanisms to identify at-risk and existing users, validated diagnostic instruments with which to obtain accurate diagnoses, and empirically supported treatment approaches for effective rehabilitation. Screening As discussed previously, selective and indicated prevention each involve the identification of particular target groups (e.g., high-risk individuals), which is frequently accomplished through screening. Screening can detect both health problems and risk factors, the latter of which is particularly useful for these groups. As a strategy for universal prevention, screening must be linked to effective subsequent interventions. False-positive and false-negative cases each carry undesirable consequences (e.g., unnecessary anxiety and medical expenditure for the former, missed opportunities for intervention for the latter), and effort should therefore be made to minimize error. Awareness of the limitations of screening has led the public health sec- tor to develop a series of parameters to guide screening activities (Gray, 2001; Wilson and Jungner, 1968), including guidelines to identify the popu- lations that should be screened and the diseases that should be screened for, performance standards for screening tests, and guidance on how per- formance should be assessed. Because screening for disease can be costly, inconvenient, and not always reliable, guidelines for effective screening identify situations in which screening is advantageous and will promote and protect health in the population. Classic criteria for evaluating screening programs emphasize the need for screening to focus on important health problems, link to diagnosis and treatment, have acceptable screening pro- cedures, attend to costs, and be a continuous activity (Wilson and Jungner, 1968). The United Kingdom’s National Screening Committee added three additional criteria to be considered (Muir Gray, 2004): potential harm caused by screening, the strength of the evidence with which to evaluate success, and the opportunity costs associated with screening. Disease Characteristics Screening should focus on serious health problems that are highly prevalent in the target population. Preclinical symptoms or behaviors also should be highly prevalent in the population, and this preclinical phase should be long and clearly detectable. Treatment should exist, and should
OCR for page 126
126 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES Back, S. E., T. Killeen, E. B. Foa, E. J. Santa Ana, D. F. Gros, and K. T. Brady. 2012. Use of an integrated therapy with prolonged exposure to treat PTSD and comorbid alcohol dependence in an Iraq veteran. American Journal of Psychiatry 169(7):688-691. Baker, D. G., P. Heppner, N. Afari, S. Nunnink, M. Kilmer, A. Simmons, L. Harder, and B. Bosse. 2009. Trauma exposure, branch of service, and physical injury in relation to men- tal health among US veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Military Medicine 174(8):773-778. Ball, J. C., and A. Ross. 1991. The effectiveness of methadone maintenance treatment: Pa- tients, programs, services, and outcome. New York: Springer-Verlag. Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Becker, C. B., C. Zayfert, and E. Anderson. 2004. A survey of psychologists’ attitudes to- wards and utilization of exposure therapy for PTSD. Behaviour Research and Therapy 42(3):277-292. Bellg, A. J., B. Resnick, D. S. Minicucci, G. Ogedegbe, D. Ernst, B. Borrelli, J. Hecht, M. Ory, D. Orwig, and S. Czajkowski. 2004. Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: Best practices and recommendations from the nih behavior change con- sortium. Health Psychology 23(5):443-451. Bertholet, N., J.-B. Daeppen, V. Wietlisbach, M. Fleming, and B. Burnand. 2005. Reduction of alcohol consumption by brief alcohol intervention in primary care: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of Internal Medicine 165(9):986-995. Blatt, S. J., C. A. Sanislow, III, D. C. Zuroff, and P. A. Pilkonis. 1996. Characteristics of ef- fective therapists: Further analyses of data from the National Institute of Mental Health treatment of depression collaborative research program. Journal of Consulting and Clini- cal Psychology 64(6):1276-1284. Blume, A. W., and G. A. Marlatt. 2009. The role of executive cognitive functions in changing substance use: What we know and what we need to know. Annals of Behavior Medicine 37(2):117-125. Botvin, G. J., E. Baker, L. Dusenbury, E. M. Botvin, and T. Diaz. 1995. Long-term follow-up results of a randomized drug abuse prevention trial in a white middle-class population. Journal of the American Medical Association 273(14):1106-1112. Brady, K., T. Pearlstein, G. M. Asnis, D. Baker, B. Rothbaum, C. R. Sikes, and G. M. Farfel. 2000. Efficacy and safety of sertraline treatment of posttraumatic stress dis- order: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association 283(14):1837-1844. Brady, K. T., P. Tuerk, S. E. Back, M. E. Saladin, A. E. Waldrop, and H. Myrick. 2009. Combat posttraumatic stress disorder, substance use disorders, and traumatic brain injury. Journal of Addiction Medicine 3(4):179-188. Brody, G. H., Y. F. Chen, S. R. H. Beach, R. A. Philibert, and S. M. Kogan. 2009. Participa- tion in a family-centered prevention program decreases genetic risk for adolescents’ risky behaviors. Pediatrics 124(3):911-917. Brown, J. M. 2004. The effectiveness of treatment. In The essential handbook of treatment and prevention of alcohol problems, edited by N. Heather and T. Stockwell. London: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Pp. 9-20. Brown, R. L., J. J. Patterson, L. A. Rounds, and O. Papasouliotis. 1996. Substance abuse among patients with chronic back pain. Journal of Family Practice 43(2):152-160. Campbell, J. 2002. Health consequences of intimate partner violence. Lancet 359(9314):1331-1336. Carroll, K. M. 2005. Recent advances in the psychotherapy of addictive disorders. Current Psychiatry Reports 7(5):329-336. Carroll, K. M., and L. S. Onken. 2005. Behavioral therapies for drug abuse. American Journal of Psychiatry 162(8):1452-1460.
OCR for page 127
BEST PRACTICES 127 Carroll, K. M., S. A. Ball, C. Nich, S. Martino, T. L. Frankforter, C. Farentinos, L. E. Kunkel, S. K. Mikulich-Gilbertson, J. Morgenstern, J. L. Obert, D. Polcin, N. Snead, and G. E. Woody. 2006. Motivational interviewing to improve treatment engagement and outcome in individuals seeking treatment for substance abuse: A multisite effectiveness study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 81(3):301-312. Carroll, K. M., S. Martino, S. A. Ball, C. Nich, T. Frankforter, L. M. Anez, M. Paris, L. Suarez-Morales, J. Szapocznik, W. R. Miller, C. Rosa, J. Matthews, and C. Farentinos. 2009. A multisite randomized effectiveness trial of motivational enhancement therapy for Spanish-speaking substance users. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 77(5):993-999. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. 2006. Substance abuse: Clinical issues in intensive outpatient treatment. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) series 47. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. 2009. Incorporating alcohol pharmacotherapies into medical practice. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Chaloupka, F. J., M. Grossman, and H. Saffer. 2002. The effects of price on alcohol consump- tion and alcohol-related problems. Alcohol Research & Health 26(1):22-34. Chaloupka, F. J., A. Yurekli, and G. T. Fong. 2012. Tobacco taxes as a tobacco control strat- egy. Tobacco Control 21(2):172-180. Chandra, A. 2011. Views from the homefront: The experiences of youth and spouses from military families. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Chartrand, M. M., D. A. Frank, L. F. White, and T. R. Shope. 2008. Effect of parents’ wartime deployment on the behavior of young children in military families. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 162(11):1009-1014. Chisholm, D., J. Rehm, M. Van Ommeren, and M. Monteiro. 2004. Reducing the global burden of hazardous alcohol use: A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 65(6):782-793. Coviello, D. M., J. W. Cornish, K. G. Lynch, A. I. Alterman, and C. P. O’Brien. 2010. A randomized trial of oral naltrexone for treating opioid-dependent offenders. American Journal on Addictions 19(5):422-432. Coviello, D. M., J. W. Cornish, K. G. Lynch, T. Y. Boney, C. A. Clark, J. D. Lee, P. D. F riedmann, E. V. Nunes, T. W. Kinlock, M. S. Gordon, R. P. Schwartz, E. S. Nuwayser, and C. P. O’Brien. 2012. A multisite pilot study of extended-release injectable naltrexone treatment for previously opioid-dependent parolees and probationers. Substance Abuse 33(1):48-59. Crits-Christoph, P., and J. Mintz. 1991. Implications of therapist effects for the design and analysis of comparative studies of psychotherapies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 59(1):20-26. Davidson, J. R. T. 2000. Pharmacotherapy of posttraumatic stress disorder: Treatment op- tions, long-term follow-up, and predictors of outcome. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 61(Suppl. 5):52-59. Dennis, M., C. K. Scott, and R. Funk. 2003. An experimental evaluation of recovery manage- ment checkups (RMC) for people with chronic substance use disorders. Evaluation and Program Planning 26(3):339-352. Dennis, M. L., C. K. Scott, R. Funk, and M. A. Foss. 2005. The duration and correlates of addiction and treatment careers. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28(Suppl. 1):S51-S62. Duncan, B. L., S. D. Miller, J. A. Sparks, D. A. Claud, L. R. Reynolds, J. Brown, and L. D. Johnson. 2003. The session rating scale: Preliminary psychometric properties of a “work- ing” alliance measure. Journal of Brief Therapy 3(1):3-11.
OCR for page 128
128 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES Dutra, L., G. Stathopoulou, S. L. Basden, T. M. Leyro, M. B. Powers, and M. W. Otto. 2008. A meta-analytic review of psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry 165(2):179-187. Edlund, M. J., D. Steffick, T. Hudson, K. M. Harris, and M. Sullivan. 2007. Risk factors for clinically recognized opioid abuse and dependence among veterans using opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Pain 129(3):355-362. Erbes, C., J. Westermeyer, B. Engdahl, and E. Johnsen. 2007. Post-traumatic stress disorder and service utilization in a sample of service members from Iraq and Afghanistan. Mili- tary Medicine 172(4):359-363. Fishbain, D. A., B. Cole, J. Lewis, H. L. Rosomoff, and R. S. Rosomoff. 2008. What percent- age of chronic nonmalignant pain patients exposed to chronic opioid analgesic therapy develop abuse/addiction and/or aberrant drug-related behaviors? A structured evidence- based review. Pain Medicine 9(4):444-459. Foa, E. B., T. M. Keane, M. J. Friedman, and J. Cohen. 2008. Effective treatments for PTSD: Practice guidelines from the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Foran, H., A. Smith Slep, and R. Heyman. 2011a. Hazardous alcohol use among active duty Air Force personnel: Identifying unique risk and promotive factors. Psychology of Ad- dictive Behaviors 25(1):28-40. Foran, H. M., R. E. Heyman, and A. M. S. Slep. 2011b. Hazardous drinking and military community functioning: Identifying mediating risk factors. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 79(4):521-532. Gibbs, D. A., S. L. Martin, L. L. Kupper, and R. E. Johnson. 2007. Child maltreatment in enlisted soldiers’ families during combat-related deployments. Journal of the American Medical Association 298(5):528-535. Graham, K. 2000. Preventive interventions for on-premise drinking: A promising but under- researched area of prevention. Contemporary Drug Problems 27(3):593-668. Graham, K., and R. Homel. 2008. Raising the bar: Preventing aggression in and around bars, clubs and pubs. Abingdon, UK: Willan Publishing. Graham, K., S. Bernards, D. W. Osgood, R. Homel, and J. Purcell. 2005. Guardians and handlers: The role of bar staff in preventing and managing aggression. Addiction 100(6):755-766. Gray, B. T. 2001. A factor analytic study of the Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory (SASSI). Educational and Psychological Measurement 61(1):102-118. Hansen, W. B., and J. W. Graham. 1991. Preventing alcohol, marijuana, and cigarette use among adolescents: Peer pressure resistance training versus establishing conservative norms. Preventive Medicine 20(3):414-430. Hawkins, J. D., R. F. Catalano, and J. Y. Miller. 1992. Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin 112(1):64-105. Hennekens, C. H., J. E. Buring, and S. L. Mayrent. 1987. Epidemiology in medicine (1st ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. Hien, D. A., A. N. C. Campbell, L. M. Ruglass, M. C. Hu, and T. Killeen. 2010. The role of alcohol misuse in PTSD outcomes for women in community treatment: A second- ary analysis of NIDA’s Women and Trauma Study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 111(1-2):114-119. Holder, H. D., P. J. Gruenewald, W. R. Ponicki, A. J. Treno, J. W. Grube, R. F. Saltz, R. B. Voas, R. Reynolds, J. Davis, L. Sanchez, G. Gaumont, and P. Roeper. 2000. Effect of community-based interventions on high-risk drinking and alcohol-related injuries. Jour- nal of the American Medical Association 284(18):2341-2347.
OCR for page 129
BEST PRACTICES 129 Horwitz, A. V., C. S. Widom, J. McLaughlin, and H. R. White. 2001. The impact of childhood abuse and neglect on adult mental health: A prospective study. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 42(2):184-201. Hughes, C. E., and A. Stevens. 2010. What can we learn from the Portuguese decriminalization of illicit drugs? British Journal of Criminology 50(6):999-1022. Hussey, J. M., J. J. Chang, and J. B. Kotch. 2006. Child maltreatment in the United States: Prevalence, risk factors, and adolescent health consequences. Pediatrics 118(3):933-942. Imel, Z. E., B. E. Wampold, S. D. Miller, and R. R. Fleming. 2008. Distinction without a dif- ference: Direct comparisons of psychotherapies for alcohol use disorders. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 22(4):533-543. IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1994a. Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preven- tive intervention research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. IOM. 1994b. Under the influence? Drugs and the American work force: Summary: Conclusion and recommendations. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. IOM. 1995. Federal regulation of methadone treatment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. IOM. 2000. To err is human: Building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. IOM. 2001. Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washing- ton, DC: National Academy Press. IOM. 2006. Improving the quality of health care for mental and substance-use conditions: Quality chasm series. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. IOM. 2007. Treatment of PTSD: An assessment of the evidence. Washington, DC: The Na- tional Academies Press. Jacobsen, L. K., S. M. Southwick, and T. R. Kosten. 2001. Substance use disorders in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder: A review of the literature. American Journal of Psy- chiatry 158(8):1184-1190. Jacobson, I. G., M. A. K. Ryan, T. I. Hooper, T. C. Smith, P. J. Amoroso, E. J. Boyko, G. D. Gackstetter, T. S. Wells, and N. S. Bell. 2008. Alcohol use and alcohol-related problems before and after military combat deployment. Journal of the American Medical Associa- tion 300(6):663-675. Jakupcak, M., M. T. Tull, M. J. McDermott, D. Kaysen, S. Hunt, and T. Simpson. 2010. PTSD symptom clusters in relationship to alcohol misuse among Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans seeking post-deployment VA health care. Addictive Behaviors 35(9):840-843. Kalivas, P. W., and N. D. Volkow. 2005. The neural basis of addiction: A pathology of motiva- tion and choice. American Journal of Psychiatry 162(8):1403-1413. Kaner, E. F. S., H. O. Dickinson, F. R. Beyer, F. Campbell, C. Schlesinger, N. Heather, J. B. Saunders, B.��������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������� Burnand, and E. D. Pienaar. 2009. Effectiveness of brief alcohol interven- tions in primary care populations. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1. Karoly, L. A., P. W. Greenwood, S. S. Everingham, J. Hoube, M. R. Kilburn, C. P. Rydell, M. Sanders, and J. Chiesa. 1998. Investing in our children: What we know and don’t know about the costs and benefits of early childhood interventions. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Karoly, L. A., M. R. Kilburn, J. H. Bigelow, J. P. Caulkins, and J. S. Cannon. 2001. Assessing costs and benefits of early childhood intervention programs: Overview and application to the starting early starting smart program. Seattle, WA: Casey Family Programs and Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Kessler, R. C., A. Sonnega, E. Bromet, M. Hughes, and C. B. Nelson. 1995. Posttraumatic stress disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey. Archives of General Psychiatry 52(12):1048-1060.
OCR for page 130
130 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES Kivlighan, D. M., Jr., and D. M. Kivlighan, III. 2009. Training related changes in the ways that group trainees structure their knowledge of group counseling leader interventions. Group Dynamics 13(3):190-204. Knapp, W. P., B. Soares, M. Farrel, and M. S. Lima. 2007. Psychosocial interventions for cocaine and psychostimulant amphetamines related disorders. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 3. Kosten, T. R., and P. G. O’Connor. 2003. Management of drug and alcohol withdrawal. New England Journal of Medicine 348(18):1786-1795. Krystal, J. H., J. A. Cramer, W. F. Krol, G. F. Kirk, and R. A. Rosenheck. 2001. Nal- trexone in the treatment of alcohol dependence. New England Journal of Medicine 345(24):1734-1739. Kumpfer, K. L., R. Alvarado, and H. O. Whiteside. 2003. Family-based interventions for substance use and misuse prevention. Substance Use and Misuse 38(11-13):1759-1787, 1916. Lambert, M. J. 2005. Early response in psychotherapy: Further evidence for the impor- tance of common factors rather than “placebo effects.” Journal of Clinical Psychology 61(7):855-869. Larson, M. J., N. R. Wooten, R. S. Adams, and E. L. Merrick. 2012. Military combat deploy- ments and substance use: Review and future directions. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions 12(1):6-27. Lester, P., K. Peterson, J. Reeves, L. Knauss, D. Glover, C. Mogil, N. Duan, W. Saltzman, R. Pynoos, K. Wilt, and W. Beardslee. 2010. The long war and parental combat deployment: Effects on military children and at-home spouses. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 49(4):310-320. Ling, W., L. Amass, S. Shoptaw, J. J. Annon, M. Hillhouse, D. Babcock, G. Brigham, J. arrer, H M. Reid, J. Muir, B. Buchan, D. Orr, G. Woody, J. Krejci, and D. Ziedonis. 2005. A multi-center randomized trial of buprenorphine-naloxone versus clonidine for opioid detoxification: Findings from the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Net- work. Addiction 100(8):1090-1100. Lowinson, J. H., ed. 2005. Substance abuse: A comprehensive textbook. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Luborsky, L., A. T. McLellan, L. Diguer, G. Woody, and D. A. Seligman. 1997. The psy- chotherapist matters: Comparison of outcomes across twenty-two therapists and seven patient samples. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 4(1):53-65. Mallinckrodt, B., and M. L. Nelson. 1991. Counselor training level and the formation of the psychotherapeutic working alliance. Journal of Counseling Psychology 38(2):133-138. Manchikanti, L., K. S. Damron, C. D. McManus, and R. C. Barnhill. 2004. Patterns of illicit drug use and opioid abuse in patients with chronic pain at initial evaluation: A prospec- tive, observational study. Pain Physician 7(4):431-437. Mansfield, A. J., and C. C. Engel. 2011. Understanding substance use in military spouses. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings 18(2):198-199. Marshall, R. D., K. L. Beebe, M. Oldham, and R. Zaninelli. 2001. Efficacy and safety of par- oxetine treatment for chronic PTSD: A fixed-dose, placebo-controlled study. American Journal of Psychiatry 158(12):1982-1988. Martell, B. A., P. G. O’Connor, R. D. Kerns, W. C. Becker, K. H. Morales, T. R. Kosten, and D. A. Fiellin. 2007. Systematic review: Opioid treatment for chronic back pain: Prevalence, efficacy, and association with addiction. Annals of Internal Medicine 146(2):116-127. Mattick, R. P., J. Kimber, C. Breen, and M. Davoli. 2008. Buprenorphine maintenance versus placebo or methadone maintenance for opioid dependence. Cochrane Database of Sys- tematic Reviews (Online) 2.
OCR for page 131
BEST PRACTICES 131 Mattick, R. P., C. Breen, J. Kimber, and M. Davoli. 2009. Methadone maintenance therapy versus no opioid replacement therapy for opioid dependence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 3. Mayes, L. C., and N. Suchman. 2006. Developmental pathways to substance abuse. In Devel- opmental psychopathology: Risk, disorder, and adaptation (Vol. 3), edited by D. Cicchetti and D. Cohen. New York: Wiley. Pp. 599-619. Mayfield, W. A., C. M. Kardash, and D. M. Kivlighan, Jr. 1999. Differences in experienced and novice counselors’ knowledge structures about clients: Implications for case concep- tualization. Journal of Counseling Psychology 46(4):504-514. McCarty, D., K. J. McConnell, and L. A. Schmidt. 2010. Priorities for policy research on treatments for alcohol and drug use disorders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 39(2):87-95. McGlynn, E. A., S. M. Asch, J. Adams, J. Keesey, J. Hicks, A. DeCristofaro, and E. A. Kerr. 2003. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. New England Journal of Medicine 348(26):2635-2645. McKay, J. R., K. G. Lynch, D. S. Shepard, and H. M. Pettinati. 2005. The effectiveness of telephone-based continuing care for alcohol and cocaine dependence: 24-month out- comes. Archives of General Psychiatry 62(2):199-207. McLellan, A. T. 2002. Have we evaluated addiction treatment correctly? Implications from a chronic care perspective. Addiction 97(3):249-252. McLellan, A. T., D. C. Lewis, C. P. O’Brien, and H. D. Kleber. 2000. Drug dependence, a chronic medical illness. Journal of the American Medical Association 284(13):1689-1695. McLellan, A. T., G. S. Skipper, M. Campbell, and R. L. DuPont. 2008. Five year outcomes in a cohort study of physicians treated for substance use disorders in the United States. British Medical Journal 337(7679):1154-1156. Mee-Lee, D. 2001. ASAM patient placement criteria for the treatment of substance-related disorders. (2nd rev. ed.). Chevy Chase, MD: American Society of Addiction Medicine. Mee-Lee, D., and G. D. Shulman. 2003. The ASAM placement criteria and matching patients to treatment. In Principles of addiction medicine (3rd ed.), edited by A. W. Graham, T. K. Schultz, M. F. Mayo-Smith, R. K. Ries, and B. B. Wilford. Chevy Chase, MD: American Society of Addiction Medicine. Pp. 453-465. Mertens, J. R., C. Weisner, G. T. Ray, B. Fireman, and K. Walsh. 2005. Hazardous drinkers and drug users in HMO primary care: Prevalence, medical conditions, and costs. Alcohol- ism: Clinical and Experimental Research 29(6):989-998. MHAT (Mental Health Advisory Team). 2006. Mental Health Advisory Team (MHAT) IV, Operation Iraqi Freedom 05-07. Washington, DC: Office of the Surgeon, Multinational Force-Iraq and Office of the Surgeon General, United States Army Medical Command. Mihalik, S., A. Fagan, K. Irwin, D. Ballard, and D. Elliot. 2004. Blueprints for violence preven- tion. Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence. Miller, S. D., B. L. Duncan, J. Brown, J. A. Sparks, and D. A. Claud. 2003. The outcome rat- ing scale: A preliminary study of the reliability, validity, and feasibility of a brief visual analog measure. Journal of Brief Therapy 2(2):91-100. Miller, S. D., D. Mee-Lee, W. Plum, and M. A. Hubble. 2005. Making treatment count: Client- directed outcome-informed clinical work with problem drinkers. In Handbook of clinical family therapy, edited by J. Lebow. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Pp. 281-308. Miller, W. R., and P. L. Wilbourne. 2002. Mesa grande: A methodological analysis of clinical trials of treatments for alcohol use disorders. Addiction 97(3):265-277. Miller, W. R., J. L. Sorensen, J. A. Selzer, and G. S. Brigham. 2006. Disseminating evidence- based practices in substance abuse treatment: A review with suggestions. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 31(1):25-39.
OCR for page 132
132 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES Montgomery, L., A. K. Burlew, A. S. Kosinski, and A. A. Forcehimes. 2011. Motivational enhancement therapy for African American substance users: A randomized clinical trial. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 17(4):357-365. Moos, R. H. 2007. Theory-based active ingredients of effective treatments for substance use disorders. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 88(2-3):109-121. Morgenstern, J., and J. R. McKay. 2007. Rethinking the paradigms that inform behavioral treatment research for substance use disorders. Addiction 102(9):1377-1389. Morrissey, J. P., E. W. Jackson, A. R. Ellis, H. Amaro, V. B. Brown, and L. M. Najavits. 2005. Twelve-month outcomes of trauma-informed interventions for women with co-occurring disorders. Psychiatric Services 56(10):1213-1222. Muir Gray, J. A. 2004. New concepts in screening. British Journal of General Practice 54(501):292-298. Najavits, L. M., D. Ryngala, S. E. Back, E. Bolton, K. T. Mueser, and K. T. Brady. 2008. Treat- ment for PTSD and comorbid disorders: A review of the literature. In Effective treatments for PTSD: Practice guidelines from the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (2nd ed.), edited by E. B. Foa, T. M. Keane, M. J. Friedman, and J. Cohen. New York: Guilford Press. Pp. 508-535. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2009. Traffic Safety Facts 2009: A Compi- lation of Motor Vehicle Crash Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the General Estimates System, Early Edition. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation. NIAAA (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism). 2005. Helping patients who drink too much: A clinician’s guide. Bethesda, MD: NIAAA. NIDA (National Institute on Drug Abuse). 2009a. Principles of drug addiction treatments. NIH Publication Number: 09-4180. Bethesda, MD: NIDA. NIDA. 2009b. Review of the prevention research portfolio. Bethesda, MD: NIDA. NRC (National Research Council) and IOM. 2000. From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. NRC and IOM. 2009. Preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people: Progress and possibilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Ockene, J. K., A. Adams, T. G. Hurley, E. V. Wheeler, and J. R. Hebert. 1999. Brief physi- cian- and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinkers: Does it work? Archives of Internal Medicine 159(18):2198-2205. ONDCP (Office of National Drug Control Policy). 2001. Evidence-based principles for sub- stance abuse prevention. Washington, DC: ONDCP. https://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/ publications/prevent/evidence_based_eng.html (accessed August 6, 2012). ONDCP. 2011a. Epidemic: Responding to America’s prescription drug abuse crisis. Washing- ton, DC: ONDCP. ONDCP. 2011b. National drug control strategy, 2011. Washington, DC: ONDCP. ONDCP. 2012. Prescription drug abuse. Washington, DC: ONDCP. http://www.whitehouse. gov/ondcp/prescription-drug-abuse (accessed August 7, 2012). Ouimette, P., and P. J. Brown. 2002. Trauma and substance abuse: Causes, consequences, and treatment of comorbid disorders. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press. Peirce, J. M., N. M. Petry, M. L. Stitzer, J. Blaine, S. Kellogg, F. Satterfield, M. Schwartz, J. Krasnansky, E. Pencer, L. Silva-Vazquez, K. C. Kirby, C. Royer-Malvestuto, J. M. Roll, A. Cohen, M. L. Copersino, K. Kolodner, and R. Li. 2006. Effects of lower-cost incentives on stimulant abstinence in methadone maintenance treatment: A national drug abuse treatment clinical trials network study. Archives of General Psychiatry 63(2):201-208. Perry, C. L., K.-I. Klepp, A. Halper, K. G. Hawkins, and D. M. Murray. 1986. A process evalu- ation study of peer leaders in health education. Journal of School Health 56(2):62-67.
OCR for page 133
BEST PRACTICES 133 Petrakis, I. L., J. Poling, C. Levinson, C. Nich, K. Carroll, E. Ralevski, and B. Rounsaville. 2006. Naltrexone and disulfiram in patients with alcohol dependence and comorbid post-traumatic stress disorder. Biological Psychiatry 60(7):777-783. Petry, N. M., S. M. Alessi, J. Marx, M. Austin, and M. Tardif. 2005. Vouchers versus prizes: Contingency management treatment of substance abusers in community settings. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 73(6):1005-1014. Powers, M. B., E. Vedel, and P. M. G. Emmelkamp. 2008. Behavioral couples therapy (BCT) for alcohol and drug use disorders: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review 28(6):952-962. Rammohan, V., R. A. Hahn, R. Elder, R. Brewer, J. Fielding, T. S. Naimi, T. L. Toomey, and S. K. Chattopadhyay. 2011. Effects of dram shop liability and enhanced over service law enforce ent initiatives on excessive alcohol consumption and related harms: m Two community guide systematic reviews. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 41(3):334-343. Reiff-Hekking, S., J. K. Ockene, T. G. Hurley, and G. W. Reed. 2005. Brief physician and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinking. Results at 12-month follow-up. Journal of General Internal Medicine 20(1):7-13. Robertson, E. B., S. L. David, and S. A. Rao. 2003. Preventing drug use among children and adolescents: A research-based guide for parents, educators, and community leaders (2nd ed.). Rockville, MD: NIDA. Rösner, S. 2011. Review: Acamprosate increases abstinence in patients with alcohol depen- dence. Annals of Internal Medicine 154(2):JC1-10. Rösner, S., A. Hackl-Herrwerth, S. Leucht, P. Lehert, S. Vecchi, and M. Soyka. 2010a. Acam- prosate for alcohol dependence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Online) 9. Rösner, S., A. Hackl-Herrwerth, S. Leucht, S. Vecchi, M. Srisurapanont, and M. Soyka. 2010b. Opioid antagonists for alcohol dependence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 12. Rowe, C. L. 2012. Family therapy for drug abuse: Review and updates 2003-2010. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 38(1):59-81. Rowe, C. L., and H. A. Liddle. 2003. Substance abuse. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 29(1):97-120. Rutter, M. 2006. Implications of resilience concepts for scientific understanding. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1094:1-12. Saltz, R. F., M. J. Paschall, R. P. McGaffigan, and P. M. Nygaard. 2010. Alcohol risk manage- ment in college settings: The safer California universities randomized trial. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 39(6):491-499. SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration). 2010. Results from the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Mental health findings. NSDUH Series H-39. Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Studies. SAMHSA. 2012. NREPP’s quality of research. http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/ReviewQOR. aspx (accessed May 28, 2012). Scott, C. K., M. L. Dennis, and M. A. Foss. 2005. Utilizing recovery management checkups to shorten the cycle of relapse, treatment reentry, and recovery. Drug & Alcohol Depen- dence 78(3):325-338. Seal, K. H., D. Bertenthal, C. R. Miner, S. Sen, and C. Marmar. 2007. Bringing the war back home mental health disorders among 103,788 US veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan seen at Department of Veterans Affairs facilities. Archives of International Medicine 167(5):476-482.
OCR for page 134
134 SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES Seal, K. H., T. J. Metzler, K. S. Gima, D. Bertenthal, S. Maguen, and C. R. Marmar. 2009. Trends and risk factors for mental health diagnoses among Iraq and Afghanistan veter- ans using Department of Veterans Affairs health care, 2002-2008. American Journal of Public Health 99(9):1651-1658. Seal, K. H., G. Cohen, A. Waldrop, B. E. Cohen, S. Maguen, and L. Ren. 2011. Substance use disorders in Iraq and Afghanistan veterans in VA healthcare, 2001-2010: Implications for screening, diagnosis and treatment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 116(1-3):93-101. Shen, Y.-C., J. Arkes, and T. V. Williams. 2012. Effects of Iraq/Afghanistan deployments on major depression and substance use disorder: Analysis of active duty personnel in the US military. American Journal of Public Health 102(S1):S80-S87. Shonkoff, J. P., L. Richter, J. van der Gaag, and Z. A. Bhutta. 2012. An integrated sci- entific framework for child survival and early childhood development. Pediatrics 129(2):e460-e472. Simpson, D. D., G. W. Joe, G. A. Rowan-Szal, and J. M. Greener. 1997. Drug abuse treat- ment process components that improve retention. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 14(6):565-572. Smedslund, G., R. C. Berg, K. T. Hammerstrøm, A. Steiro, K. A. Leiknes, H. M. Dahl, and K. Karlsen. 2011. Motivational interviewing for substance abuse. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 5. Spera, C., and K. Franklin. 2010. Reducing drinking among junior enlisted Air Force members in five communities: Early findings of the EUDL program’s influence on self-reported drinking behaviors. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 71(3):373-383. Spoth, R. L., L. M. Schainker, and S. HillerSturmhöefel. 2011. Translating family-focused pre- vention science into public health impact: Illustrations from partnership-based research. Alcohol Research and Health 34(2):188-203. Srisurapanont, M., and N. Jarusuraisin. 2005. Opioid antagonists for alcohol dependence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1. Sternberg, K. J., L. P. Baradaran, C. B. Abbott, M. E. Lamb, and E. Guterman. 2006. Type of violence, age, and gender differences in the effects of family violence on children’s behavior problems: A mega-analysis. Developmental Review 26(1):89-112. Stine, S. M., M. K. Greenwald, and T. R. Kosten. 2004. Pharmacologic interventions for opioid addiction. In Principles of addiction medicine (3rd ed.), edited by S. T. Graham, M. Mayo-Smith, R. K. Ries, and B. B. Wilford. Chevy Chase, MD: American Society of Addiction Medicine. Pp. 735-748. Stockwell, T., and P.J. Gruenewald. 2004. Controls on the physical availability of alcohol. In The essential handbook of treatment and prevention of alcohol problems, edited by N. Heather and T. Stockwell. Chichester, UK: Wiley and Sons. Pp. 213-233. Tanielian, T. L., L. Jaycox, T. L. Schell, G. N. Marshall, M. A. Burnam, C. Eibner, B. R. Karney, L. S. Meredith, J. S. Ringel, and M. E. Vaiana. 2008. Invisible wounds of war: Summary and recommendations for addressing psychological and cognitive injuries. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, Center for Military Health Policy Research. Treatment Research Institute. 2010. Integrating appropriate services for substance use con- ditions in health care settings: An issue brief on lessons learned and challenges ahead. Philadelphia, PA: Forum on Integration, Treatment Research Institute. Treno, A. J., P. J. Gruenewald, J. P. Lee, and L. G. Remer. 2007. The sacramento neighbor- hood alcohol prevention project: Outcomes from a community prevention trial. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 68(2):197-207. Trickett, P. K., J. G. Noll, and F. W. Putnam. 2011. The impact of sexual abuse on female de- velopment: Lessons from a multigenerational, longitudinal research study. Development and Psychopathology 23(02):453-476.
OCR for page 135
BEST PRACTICES 135 Tucker, P., R. Zaninelli, R. Yehuda, L. Ruggiero, K. Dillingham, and C. D. Pitts. 2001. Par- oxetine in the treatment of chronic posttraumatic stress disorder: Results of a placebo- controlled, flexible-dosage trial. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 62(11):860-868. VA (Department of Veterans Affairs) and DoD (Department of Defense). 2009. VA/DoD clinical practice guideline for management of substance use disorders. Washington, DC: VA and DoD. Valente, T. W. 2010. Social networks and health: Models, methods, and applications. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. VHA (Veterans Health Administration) Office of Public Health and Environmental Haz- ards. 2008. Analysis of VA health care utilization among US Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) veterans: Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom. Washington, DC: VHA. Wagenaar, A. C., and T. L. Toomey. 2002. Effects of minimum drinking age laws: Re- view and analyses of the literature from 1960 to 2000. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 14(Suppl.):206-225. Wagenaar, A. C., M. J. Salois, and K. A. Komro. 2009. Effects of beverage alcohol price and tax levels on drinking: A meta-analysis of 1003 estimates from 112 studies. Addiction 104(2):179-190. Weisner, C., and H. Matzger. 2002. A prospective study of the factors influencing entry to alcohol and drug treatment. Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research 29(2):126-137. Weiss, R. D., J. S. Potter, D. A. Fiellin, M. Byrne, H. S. Connery, W. Dickinson, J. Gardin, M. L. Griffin, M. N. Gourevitch, D. L. Haller, A. L. Hasson, Z. Huang, P. Jacobs, A. S. Kosinski, R. Lindblad, E. F. McCance-Katz, S. E. Provost, J. Selzer, E. C. Somoza, S. C. Sonne, and W. Ling. 2011. Adjunctive counseling during brief and extended b uprenorphine-naloxone treatment for prescription opioid dependence: A 2-phase ran- domized controlled trial. Archives of General Psychiatry 68(12):1238-1246. WHO (World Health Organization). 2009. Global health risks: Mortality and burden of disease attributable to selected major risks. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Wilk, J. E., P. D. Bliese, P.Y. Kim, J.L. Thomas, D. McGurk, and C.W. Hoge. 2010. Relation- ship of combat experiences to alcohol misuse among U.S. soldiers returning from the Iraq war. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 108(1-2):115-121. Wills, T. A., and R. Vaughan. 1989. Social support and substance use in early adolescence. Journal of Behavioral Medicine 12(4):321-339. Wilson, J. M. G., and G. Jungner. 1968. Principles and practice of screening for disease. Ge- neva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Woody, G. E., S. A. Poole, G. Subramaniam, K. Dugosh, M. Bogenschutz, P. Abbott, A. Patkar, M. Publicker, K. McCain, J. S. Potter, R. Forman, V. Vetter, L. McNicholas, J. Blaine, K. G. Lynch, and P. Fudala. 2008. Extended vs. short-term buprenorphine-naloxone for treatment of opioid-addicted youth a randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association 300(17):2003-2011.
OCR for page 136