Motivation is an integral factor in substance use treatment and long-term recovery. However, it is unclear what role intrinsic and extrinsic motivation play across different treatment modalities. A meta-analysis (N = 84) was performed to estimate the pooled effect size of Motivational Interviewing (MI; primarily targeting intrinsic motivation) and contingency management (CM; primarily targeting extrinsic motivation) at different follow-up periods. Collapsed across all substance types, CM had a significant effect at 3-month follow-up, only. In contrast, MI had a significant effect at 6-month follow-up, only. CM had small and medium effects on multiple substances at 3-month follow-up (i.e., tobacco, marijuana, stimulants, polysubstances), but not at 6-month follow-up. MI had 1 significant medium effect at 3-month follow-up (i.e., marijuana), but several significant small effects at 6-month follow-up (i.e., alcohol, tobacco, polysubstances). This meta-analysis suggests that both CM and MI promote reductions in a range of substances, even several months after the intervention concludes. Further, these results provide some evidence that extrinsically focused CM may produce medium follow-up effects in the short run, but intrinsically focused MI may produce small but durable follow-up effects. However, this interpretation is complicated by the differences between the MI and CM studies that preclude statistical tests comparing effect sizes, and few studies assessed motivation itself. Future researchers should investigate how motivational dynamics impact lasting outcomes in substance use treatment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
BACKGROUND & AIMS: We conducted a systematic review of efficacy of psychosocial interventions in inducing or maintaining alcohol abstinence in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD).
METHODS: We performed structured keyword searches in PubMed, PsychINFO, and MEDLINE for original research articles that were published from January 1983 through November 2014 that evaluated the use of psychosocial interventions to induce or maintain alcohol abstinence in patients with CLD and AUD.
RESULTS: We identified 13 eligible studies that comprised 1945 patients; 5 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Delivered therapies included motivational enhancement therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), motivational interviewing, supportive therapy, and psychoeducation either alone or in combination in the intervention group and general health education or treatment as usual in the control group. All studies of induction of abstinence (4 RCTs and 6 observational studies) reported an increase in abstinence among participants in the intervention and control groups. Only an integrated therapy that combined CBT and motivational enhancement therapy with comprehensive medical care, delivered during a period of 2 years, produced a significant increase in abstinence (74% increase in intervention group versus 48% increase in control group, P = .02), which was reported in 1 RCT. All studies of maintenance of abstinence (1 RCT and 2 observational studies) observed recidivism in the intervention and control groups. Only an integrated therapy that combined medical care with CBT produced a significantly smaller rate of recidivism (32.7% in integrated CBT group versus 75% decrease in control group, P = .03), which was reported from 1 observational study. However, data were not collected for more than 2 years on outcomes of patients with CLD and AUD.
CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic analysis of studies of interventions to induce or maintain alcohol abstinence in patients with CLD and AUD, integrated combination psychotherapy with CBT, motivational enhancement therapy, and comprehensive medical care increased alcohol abstinence. No psychosocial intervention was successful in maintaining abstinence, but an integrated therapy with CBT and medical care appears to reduce recidivism.
Motivation is an integral factor in substance use treatment and long-term recovery. However, it is unclear what role intrinsic and extrinsic motivation play across different treatment modalities. A meta-analysis (N = 84) was performed to estimate the pooled effect size of Motivational Interviewing (MI; primarily targeting intrinsic motivation) and contingency management (CM; primarily targeting extrinsic motivation) at different follow-up periods. Collapsed across all substance types, CM had a significant effect at 3-month follow-up, only. In contrast, MI had a significant effect at 6-month follow-up, only. CM had small and medium effects on multiple substances at 3-month follow-up (i.e., tobacco, marijuana, stimulants, polysubstances), but not at 6-month follow-up. MI had 1 significant medium effect at 3-month follow-up (i.e., marijuana), but several significant small effects at 6-month follow-up (i.e., alcohol, tobacco, polysubstances). This meta-analysis suggests that both CM and MI promote reductions in a range of substances, even several months after the intervention concludes. Further, these results provide some evidence that extrinsically focused CM may produce medium follow-up effects in the short run, but intrinsically focused MI may produce small but durable follow-up effects. However, this interpretation is complicated by the differences between the MI and CM studies that preclude statistical tests comparing effect sizes, and few studies assessed motivation itself. Future researchers should investigate how motivational dynamics impact lasting outcomes in substance use treatment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
