INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The Dual Diagnosis Capability of Addiction Treatment (DDCAT) index is used to assess the capacity of substance abuse services to work with individuals with co-occurring mental health problems. The current study aimed to: (i) examine the dual diagnosis capability of residential substance abuse programs in Australia; (ii) identify managers' perceptions regarding both priorities and confidence for change following the completion of the DDCAT; and (iii) to examine the usefulness of the DDCAT to residential substance abuse programs. DESIGN AND METHODS: The DDCAT was completed across 16 residential substance abuse units. An external researcher administered and scored the DDCAT. A Unit Manager from each site completed the Comorbidity Priorities and Confidence Survey following the completion of the DDCAT review. This survey examined the usefulness of the DDCAT, and the unit's priorities to improve its capability, and confidence to improve its DDCAT score. RESULTS: Across the services, program structure and staff training were the DDCAT domains that required the most improvement. While training was the highest endorsed priority area for improvement, program structure was the lowest priority. Overall the Unit Managers reported positive attitudes towards use of the DDCAT and were confident that their unit could improve their DDCAT scores. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: DDCAT scores of Australian residential substance abuse programs are comparable with previous published results. However, there is still substantial work required to improve the capability of these programs. Future research should examine strategies to promote sustained improvements in the capability of residential substance abuse programs.
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The Dual Diagnosis Capability of Addiction Treatment (DDCAT) index is used to assess the capacity of substance abuse services to work with individuals with co-occurring mental health problems. The current study aimed to: (i) examine the dual diagnosis capability of residential substance abuse programs in Australia; (ii) identify managers' perceptions regarding both priorities and confidence for change following the completion of the DDCAT; and (iii) to examine the usefulness of the DDCAT to residential substance abuse programs. DESIGN AND METHODS: The DDCAT was completed across 16 residential substance abuse units. An external researcher administered and scored the DDCAT. A Unit Manager from each site completed the Comorbidity Priorities and Confidence Survey following the completion of the DDCAT review. This survey examined the usefulness of the DDCAT, and the unit's priorities to improve its capability, and confidence to improve its DDCAT score. RESULTS: Across the services, program structure and staff training were the DDCAT domains that required the most improvement. While training was the highest endorsed priority area for improvement, program structure was the lowest priority. Overall the Unit Managers reported positive attitudes towards use of the DDCAT and were confident that their unit could improve their DDCAT scores. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: DDCAT scores of Australian residential substance abuse programs are comparable with previous published results. However, there is still substantial work required to improve the capability of these programs. Future research should examine strategies to promote sustained improvements in the capability of residential substance abuse programs.
Authors: Peter J Kelly; Frances J Kay-Lambkin; Amanda L Baker; Frank P Deane; Adam C Brooks; Alexandra Mitchell; Sarah Marshall; Meredith Whittington; Genevieve A Dingle Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-02-10 Impact factor: 3.295