BACKGROUND: Treatments for alcohol use disorders typically have been abstinence based, but harm reduction approaches that encourage drinkers to alter their drinking behavior to reduce the probability of alcohol-related consequences, have gained in popularity. This study used a contingency management procedure to determine its effectiveness in reducing alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers. METHODS: Eighty-two nontreatment-seeking heavy drinkers (ages 21 to 54, M = 30.20) who did not meet diagnostic criteria for alcohol dependence participated in the study. The study had 3 phases: (i) an Observation phase (4 weeks) where participants drank normally; (ii) a Contingency Management phase (12 weeks) where participants were paid $50 weekly for not exceeding low levels of alcohol consumption as measured by transdermal alcohol concentrations, <0.03 g/dl; and (iii) a Follow-up phase (12 weeks) where participants (n = 66) returned monthly for 3 months to self-report drinking after the contingencies were removed. Transdermal alcohol monitors were used to verify meeting contingency requirements; all other analyses were conducted on self-reported alcohol use. RESULTS: On average 42.3% of participants met the contingency criteria and were paid an average of $222 during the Contingency Management phase, with an average $1,998 in total compensation throughout the study. Compared to the Observation phase, the percent of any self-reported drinking days significantly decreased from 59.9 to 40.0% in the Contingency Management and 32.0% in the Follow-up phases. The percent of self-reported heavy drinking days reported also significantly decreased from 42.4% in the Observation phase to 19.7% in the Contingency Management phase, which was accompanied by a significant increase in percent days of self-reported no (from 40.1 to 60.0%) and low-level drinking (from 9.9 to 15.4%). Self-reported reductions in drinking either persisted, or became more pronounced, during the Follow-up phase. CONCLUSIONS: Contingency management was associated with a reduction in self-reported episodes of heavy drinking among nontreatment-seeking heavy drinkers. These effects persisted even after incentives were removed, indicating the potential utility of contingency management as a therapeutic intervention to reduce harmful patterns of drinking.
BACKGROUND: Treatments for alcohol use disorders typically have been abstinence based, but harm reduction approaches that encourage drinkers to alter their drinking behavior to reduce the probability of alcohol-related consequences, have gained in popularity. This study used a contingency management procedure to determine its effectiveness in reducing alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers. METHODS: Eighty-two nontreatment-seeking heavy drinkers (ages 21 to 54, M = 30.20) who did not meet diagnostic criteria for alcohol dependence participated in the study. The study had 3 phases: (i) an Observation phase (4 weeks) where participants drank normally; (ii) a Contingency Management phase (12 weeks) where participants were paid $50 weekly for not exceeding low levels of alcohol consumption as measured by transdermal alcohol concentrations, <0.03 g/dl; and (iii) a Follow-up phase (12 weeks) where participants (n = 66) returned monthly for 3 months to self-report drinking after the contingencies were removed. Transdermal alcohol monitors were used to verify meeting contingency requirements; all other analyses were conducted on self-reported alcohol use. RESULTS: On average 42.3% of participants met the contingency criteria and were paid an average of $222 during the Contingency Management phase, with an average $1,998 in total compensation throughout the study. Compared to the Observation phase, the percent of any self-reported drinking days significantly decreased from 59.9 to 40.0% in the Contingency Management and 32.0% in the Follow-up phases. The percent of self-reported heavy drinking days reported also significantly decreased from 42.4% in the Observation phase to 19.7% in the Contingency Management phase, which was accompanied by a significant increase in percent days of self-reported no (from 40.1 to 60.0%) and low-level drinking (from 9.9 to 15.4%). Self-reported reductions in drinking either persisted, or became more pronounced, during the Follow-up phase. CONCLUSIONS: Contingency management was associated with a reduction in self-reported episodes of heavy drinking among nontreatment-seeking heavy drinkers. These effects persisted even after incentives were removed, indicating the potential utility of contingency management as a therapeutic intervention to reduce harmful patterns of drinking.
Authors: Mark K Greenwald; David M Ledgerwood; Leslie H Lundahl; Caren L Steinmiller Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Gregory E Skipper; Natasha Thon; Robert L DuPont; Michael D Campbell; Wolfgang Weinmann; Friedrich M Wurst Journal: Eur Addict Res Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Nancy P Barnett; Jennifer Tidey; James G Murphy; Robert Swift; Suzanne M Colby Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2011-06-12 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Donald M Dougherty; Nora E Charles; Ashley Acheson; Samantha John; R Michael Furr; Nathalie Hill-Kapturczak Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Nathalie Hill-Kapturczak; John D Roache; Yuanyuan Liang; Tara E Karns; Sharon E Cates; Donald M Dougherty Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2014-06-13 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Michael G McDonell; Jordan Skalisky; Emily Leickly; Michael F Orr; Sterling McPherson; John Roll; Nathalie Hill-Kapturczak; Martin Javors Journal: Psychol Addict Behav Date: 2017-07-17
Authors: Donald M Dougherty; Tara E Karns; Jillian Mullen; Yuanyuan Liang; Sarah L Lake; John D Roache; Nathalie Hill-Kapturczak Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-12-31 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Jillian Mullen; Charles W Mathias; Tara E Karns; Yuanyuan Liang; Nathalie Hill-Kapturczak; John D Roache; Richard J Lamb; Donald M Dougherty Journal: Addict Disord Their Treat Date: 2016-09