Impact of an osteopathic peer recovery coaching model on treatment outcomes in high-risk men entering residential treatment for substance use disorders
Author:
Crowthers Raymond A.1, Arya Milan2, Venkataraman Arvind1, Lister Jamey J.3, Cooper Sarah E.3, Enich Michael3, Stevens Scott45, Bender Emily45, Sanders Roynell1, Stagliano Kenneth1, Jermyn Richard T.1
Affiliation:
1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine , Stratford , NJ , USA 2. Cooper Medical School of Rowan University , Camden , NJ , USA 3. Rutgers University School of Social Work , Center for Prevention Science , New Brunswick , NJ , USA 4. Maryville Addiction Treatment Center , Williamstown , NJ , USA 5. Maryville Addiction Treatment Center , Pemberton , NJ , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Context
The United States has witnessed a disproportionate rise in substance use disorders (SUD) and co-occurring mental health disorders, paired with housing instability, especially among racially minoritized communities. Traditional in-patient residential treatment programs for SUD have proven inconsistent in their effectiveness in preventing relapse and maintaining attrition among these patient populations. There is evidence showing that peer recovery programs led by individuals who have lived experience with SUD can increase social support and foster intrinsic motivation within participants to bolster their recovery. These peer recovery programs, when coupled with a standardized training program for peer recovery coaches, may be very efficacious at improving patient health outcomes, boosting performance on Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) national outcome measures (NOMs), and helping participants build an overall better quality of life.
Objectives
The goal of this study is to highlight the efficacy of a peer recovery program, the Minority Aids Initiative, in improving health outcomes and associated NOMs in men with SUD and/or co-occurring mental health disorder.
Methods
Participants received six months of peer recovery coaching from trained staff. Sessions were guided by the Manual for Recovery Coaching and focused on 10 different domains of recovery. Participants and coaches set long-term goals and created weekly action plans to work toward them. Standardized assessments (SAMHSA’s Government Performance and Results Act [GPRA] tool, Addiction Severity Index [ASI]) were administered by recovery coaches at intake and at the 6-month time point to evaluate participant progress. Analyses of participant recovery were carried out according to SAMHSA’s six NOMs and assessed the outcomes of the intervention and their significance.
Results
A total of 115 participants enrolled in the program over a 2-year period. Among them, 53 were eligible for 6-month follow-up interviews. In total, 321 sessions were held, with an average of three sessions per participant. Participants showed marked improvement across five of the six NOMs at the end of the 6-month course and across all ASI outcomes, with the exception of three in which participants reported an absence or few symptoms at intake.
Conclusions
Our study shows that participants receive benefits across nearly all NOM categories when paired with recovery coaches who are well trained in medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) over a 6-month period. We see the following: a higher rate of abstinence; increased housing stability; lower health, behavioral, and social consequences; lower depression and anxiety; longer participant-recovery coach exposure time; and higher follow-up rates. We hope that our results can contribute to advancements and greater acceptance in the implementation of peer recovery coaching as well as an improvement in the lives of the communities affected by substance use.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Complementary and alternative medicine,Complementary and Manual Therapy
Reference37 articles.
1. Corredor-Waldron, A, Currie, J. Tackling the substance use disorder crisis: the role of access to treatment facilities. J Health Econ 2022;81:102579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2021.102579. 2. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2020). 2019 National survey on drug use and health; 2019. Available from: https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/reports/rpt29392/Assistant-Secretary-nsduh2019_presentation/Assistant-Secretary-nsduh2019_presentation.pdf. 3. Austin, AE, Shiue, KY, Naumann, RB, Figgatt, MC, Gest, C, Shanahan, ME. Associations of housing stress with later substance use outcomes: a systematic review. Addict Behav 2021;123:107076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.107076. 4. Kleinman, MB, Doran, K, Felton, JW, Satinsky, EN, Dean, D, Bradley, V, et al.. Implementing a peer recovery coach model to reach low-income, minority individuals not engaged in substance use treatment. Subst Abuse 2021;42:726–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/08897077.2020.1846663. 5. National Institute of Mental Health. Substance use and co-occurring mental disorders. National Institute of Mental Health. Available from: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/substance-use-and-mental-health. Published March 2021. [Accessed 15 Mar 2022].
|
|