Utilizing Mutual Aid in Reducing Adolescent Substance Use and Developing Group Engagement

Abstract

Objective: This study assessed the effectiveness of mutual aid groups for high school students. Methods: A quasi-experimental design was applied to 242 adolescents, where every other adolescent was assigned to the intervention or the control condition. The study evaluated the influence of implementing mutual aid groups in decreasing perceived risk of substance use, favorable attitudes toward substance use, and reducing substance use while increasing group engagement. Participants were assessed at baseline, during Sessions 2 and 7, and treatment exit. General linear mixed-effects models were used to detect significant differences between treatment and control conditions. Results: Findings indicated mutual aid groups significantly reduced favorable attitudes toward drug use and decreased alcohol and marijuana usage compared to the control group. In addition, the adolescents in treatment significantly increased their group engagement. Conclusions: Results support mutual aid group work models for reducing alcohol use and increasing group engagement for high school youth.

Time Effects of Supportive Interaction and Facilitator Input Variety on Treatment Adherence of Young People with Chronic Health Conditions: A Dynamic Mechanism in Mutual Aid Groups

“…In general, the results of this study are consistent with previous findings [ 15 , 50 ] that show supportive interaction and facilitator input variety have positive outcomes for participants in mutual aid groups [ 14 , 17 , 51 ]. Specifically, supportive interaction has been viewed as a co-creation process of rehabilitation [ 52 ], through which members of mutual aid groups utilize each other’s emotional and informational support [ 50 ].…”

“…In general, the results of this study are consistent with previous findings [ 15 , 50 ] that show supportive interaction and facilitator input variety have positive outcomes for participants in mutual aid groups [ 14 , 17 , 51 ]. Specifically, supportive interaction has been viewed as a co-creation process of rehabilitation [ 52 ], through which members of mutual aid groups utilize each other’s emotional and informational support [ 50 ]. As supportive interaction ensures frequent information sharing and reciprocal exchange of resources among group members [ 16 ], this interactive dynamic consequently helps members of the groups achieve improvements in their treatment adherence [ 18 , 52 ].…”

Conduct Disorder Symptoms and Illicit Drug Use in Juvenile Justice Involved Youth: The Reciprocal Relationship Between Positive Illicit Drug-Use Attitudes and Illicit Drug Use

“…Current treatment options for juvenile justice involved youth are often time consuming and costly (Henggeler & Sheidow, 2012; Henggeler, 2003), and attempts to reduce illicit drug use in this high-risk sample have limited effectiveness (Watson, Greene, & Kelly, 2014; Grella, Hser, Joshi, & Rounds-Bryant, 2001). Treatments that target positive attitudes toward drug use in youth have resulted in reduced positive attitudes towards illicit drug use, alcohol use, and marijuana use (e.g., Mogro-Wilson, Letendre, Toi, & Bryan, 2015; Tebes et al, 2007). It thus seems reasonable that such treatments could be combined, adapted, and validated for use in juvenile justice involved youth in order to target both drug use and positive attitudes toward drug use.…”

Can the group harm the individual? Reviewing potential iatrogenic effects of group treatment for adolescent substance use.

“…Regarding ASU prevention, whereas concerted efforts are underway to disseminate evidence-based prevention and early intervention services more widely in primary pediatric care (see Ozechowski, Becker, & Hogue, 2016), most programs occur in school or community settings wherein targeted youth are in the presence of peers. This includes universal programs designed for all youth within a given age range (e.g., Botvin & Griffin, 2004) and selected or indicated programs aimed at those who possess specific ASU risk factors and/or have initiated use (e.g., Houck et al, 2016; Mogro-Wilson, Letendre, Toi, & Bryan, 2015).…”

“…Studies overall documented a negligible amount of adverse events, and most studies that tracked client outcomes found that greater session attendance rates were associated with greater abstinence rates during follow-up—though evidence of improved substance use outcomes was absent in studies of highest methodological quality. Likewise, school-based mutual help groups (e.g., Mogro-Wilson et al, 2015) and recovery high schools (e.g., Finch, Tanner-Smith, Hennessy, & Moberg, 2017) have only begun to accumulate quasi-experimental evidence of positive effects and have not examined possible harmful effects.…”