Adapting Motivational Interviewing Strategies to Increase Posttreatment 12-Step Meeting Attendance

Cloud, Richard N.; Besel, Karl; Bledsoe, Linda K.; Golder, Seana; McKiernan, Cadc Patrick; Patterson, Mssw David; Ziegler, Craig

doi:10.1300/j020v24n03_03

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is important to listen to and address these issues and concerns in a way that reframes them in a more understandable and less threatening way (Davis & Jansen, 1998). This might also involve the use of motivational interviewing techniques to increase readiness and commitment to change, such as weighing the “pros” and “cons” of continuing versus stopping substance use and of 12-Step involvement versus noninvolvement if one decides that stopping use is a goal (Cloud et al, 2006; Cloud & Kingree, 2008). Although helping clarify such issues, motivational interventions, if effective at increasing 12-Step engagement, appear to do so primarily for those substance abusers with limited prior experience with 12-Step groups (Kahler et al, 2004; Walitzer, Dermen, & Barrick, 2009).…”

Section: What Can Social Workers and Professionals Do To Help?mentioning

confidence: 99%

12-Step Interventions and Mutual Support Programs for Substance Use Disorders: An Overview

Donovan

Ingalsbe

Benbow

et al. 2013

Social Work in Public Health

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social workers and other behavioral health professionals are likely to encounter individuals with substance use disorders in a variety of practice settings outside of specialty treatment. 12-Step mutual support programs represent readily available, no cost community-based resources for such individuals; however, practitioners are often unfamiliar with such programs. The present article provides a brief overview of 12-Step programs, the positive substance use and psychosocial outcomes associated with active 12-Step involvement, and approaches ranging from ones that can be utilized by social workers in any practice setting to those developed for specialty treatment programs to facilitate engagement in 12-Step meetings and recovery activities. The goal is to familiarize social workers with 12-Step approaches so that they are better able to make informed referrals that match clients to mutual support groups that best meet the individual’s needs and maximize the likelihood of engagement and positive outcomes.

show abstract

Section: What Can Social Workers and Professionals Do To Help?mentioning

confidence: 99%

12-Step Interventions and Mutual Support Programs for Substance Use Disorders: An Overview

Donovan

Ingalsbe

Benbow

et al. 2013

Social Work in Public Health

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Accordingly, large majorities of those participating in formal treatment report attending at least one 12-step meeting (Kaskutas, Ye, Greenfield, Witbrodt, & Bond, 2008). Still, treatment studies reliably indicate that most people fail to meet the recommended, minimal threshold of regular, weekly attendance during the year following treatment (Cloud et al, 2006; Cloud & Kingree, 2008; Kelly & Moos, 2003; McKay et al, 1998; McKellar, et al, 2003; Ouimette, Finney, & Moos, 1997; Tonigan, Connors, & Miller, 2003). This is true even in the context of effective 12-step facilitation interventions aiming to encourage 12-step involvement (Timko & Debenedetti, 2007; Timko, et al, 2006; Tonigan, et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of 12-step groups to mutual help alternatives for AUD in a large, national study: Differences in membership characteristics and group participation, cohesion, and satisfaction

Zemore

Kaskutas

Mericle

et al. 2017

Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Many studies suggest that participation in 12-step groups contributes to better recovery outcomes, but people often object to such groups and most do not sustain regular involvement. Yet, research on alternatives to 12-step groups is very sparse. The present study aimed to extend the knowledge base on mutual help group alternatives for those with an alcohol use disorder (AUD), sampling from large, active, abstinence-focused groups including Women for Sobriety (WFS), LifeRing, and SMART Recovery (SMART). This paper presents a cross-sectional analysis of this longitudinal study, using baseline data to describe the profile and participation characteristics of attendees of these groups in comparison to 12-step members. Methods Data from participants 18 and over with a lifetime AUD (N=651) were collected using web-based surveys. Members of alternative 12-step groups were recruited in collaboration with group directors, who helped publicize the study by emailing meeting conveners and attendees and posting announcements on social media. A comparison group of current (past-30-day) 12-step attendees was recruited from an online meeting hub for recovering persons. Interested parties were directed to a webpage where they were screened, and eligible participants completed an online survey assessing demographic and clinical variables; in-person and online mutual help involvement; and group satisfaction and cohesion. Analyses involved comparing those identifying WFS, SMART, and LifeRing as their primary group to 12-step members on the above characteristics. Results Compared to 12-step members, members of the mutual help alternatives were less religious and generally higher on education and income. WFS and LifeRing members were also older, more likely to be married, and lower on lifetime drug and psychiatric severity; meanwhile, LifeRing and SMART members were less likely to endorse the most stringent abstinence goal. Finally, despite lower levels of in-person meeting attendance, members of all the 12-step alternatives showed equivalent activity involvement and higher levels of satisfaction and cohesion, compared to 12-step members. Conclusions Results suggest differences across 12-step groups and their alternatives that may be relevant when advising clients on a choice of mutual help group. Meanwhile, findings for high levels of participation, satisfaction, and cohesion among members of the mutual help alternatives suggest promise for these groups in addressing addiction problems.

show abstract

“…Yet, drop-out is high both in the general population and among severe treatment populations (Kaskutas et al, 2005; Kaskutas et al, 2008; Kelly, 2003; Kelly and Moos, 2003; Kelly et al, 2006; McIntire, 2000). Interventions aiming to increase 12-step involvement have shown success in doing so, but even in such contexts, a small minority of participants have sustained attendance at levels where benefits can be expected (Cloud et al, 2006; Kahler et al, 2004; Timko et al, 2006). For example, participants in Project MATCH's Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) condition, who were exposed to 12 sessions explaining the 12-step philosophy and encouraging involvement, showed irregular attendance even in the first 6 months following treatment; only 37% attended weekly or more (Cloud et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of the Alcoholics Anonymous Intention Measure (AAIM)

Zemore¹,

Kaskutas²

2009

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background-Drop-out from 12-step groups is notoriously high, yet the field lacks strong models and scales for addressing this problem. We aim to determine whether the theory of planned behavior (TPB) can be applied to 12-step involvement, and to develop and validate a scale of 12-step readiness based on that theory: the Alcoholics Anonymous Intention Measure (AAIM).Method-Data were from a longitudinal trial of a manual-guided 12-step facilitation intervention called Making AA Easier (MAAEZ) involving 2 treatment programs in California (N=508). Participants completed surveys at baseline, 7 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. Surveys included the preliminary AAIM, a 12-step involvement measure, other readiness measures, and substance use outcomes.Results-The final, 17-item AAIM measured attitudes (5-item α's=.75-.83), subjective norms (4-item α's=.56-.81), perceived control (5 item α's=.78-.85), and intentions (3-item α's=.80-.95) regarding attendance at 12-step groups. Components were correlated with each other and other readiness measures as expected, supporting the AAIM's validity. Scale components predicted 31% of the variance in Intention to attend 12-step groups at 6 months and 41% of the variance in 12-step involvement at 12 months. Social factors were among the strongest predictors of 12-step involvement. Results did not support the expectancy-value formulation of the TPB, as unweighted (vs. weighted) belief items performed optimally.Conclusions-Results generally support the TPB as a model of 12-step involvement and suggest specific targets for 12-step facilitation interventions within attitude, norm, and control components. Findings also support the AAIM as a tool for identifying drop-out risks and tailoring individual interventions.

show abstract

Adapting Motivational Interviewing Strategies to Increase Posttreatment 12-Step Meeting Attendance

Cited by 14 publications

References 31 publications

12-Step Interventions and Mutual Support Programs for Substance Use Disorders: An Overview

12-Step Interventions and Mutual Support Programs for Substance Use Disorders: An Overview

Comparison of 12-step groups to mutual help alternatives for AUD in a large, national study: Differences in membership characteristics and group participation, cohesion, and satisfaction

Development and validation of the Alcoholics Anonymous Intention Measure (AAIM)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About