Literature DB >> 28360785

Determination of Clinical and Socio-demographical Differences of Adolescents Applying to a Treatment Center with Family Encouragement or the Decision of the Probation Office and Determination of Predictive Factors in Maintaining Soberness among Probation Cases.

Zeki Yüncü1, Rezzan Aydin1, Cahide Aydin1, Burcu Özbaran1, Sezen Köse1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study has two objectives. The first objective of this study was the determination of some basic clinical and socio-demographical differences among the adolescents with substance abuse who apply to a treatment center with support from their family or by order of the probation office. The other objective of this study was the determination of the predictive factors in maintaining soberness among adolescents who successfully complete the probation treatment process.
METHODS: The target population of this study is young adults under 19 years of age who apply to a substance addiction center for adolescents as a result of encouragement from their family or ordered by the Probation Office between 2005 and 2013. These two groups were analyzed in terms of socio-demographical characteristics such as age, the age at which they tried the substance, the age at which they applied to the treatment center, sex, substances they used, education period, employment history, and street life experience. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 18.0 software was used for the statistical analysis.
RESULTS: It was detected that among the cases who applied to the treatment center with family support, their education period was longer than probation (PR) cases (p<0.0001), and the rates of previous treatment, their mother being alive, and having street life experiences were more frequent (p values: <0.0001; =0.010; =0.027; <0.0001, respectively) and employment history was higher among PR cases (p<0.0001). In terms of the substances used, ecstasy, alcohol, inhalants, and volatile substances are more common among those applying with family support (p=0.018; 0.001; <0.0001, respectively). However, use of cannabis was found to be more common among PR cases (p<0.0001). It was found that PR cases who successfully completed their treatment process had married parents (p=0.008) and had more years of education (p=0.004). It can be predicted that if the subject is well educated and does not use multiple substances or have an alcohol history, the treatment process for PR cases can be successfully completed. (R2=0.176; p<0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The rates of completing the treatment among cases analyzed in this study were higher than those among cases from adults. In the studies conducted, the results of the treatment efficiency among PR cases were inconsistent. This inconsistency may result from, except for legal obligations, having different circumstances such as socio-economic factors during the treatment period.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adolescent; probation; substance addiction

Year:  2016        PMID: 28360785      PMCID: PMC5353017          DOI: 10.5152/npa.2015.8719

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Noro Psikiyatr Ars        ISSN: 1300-0667            Impact factor:   1.339


  15 in total

1.  Program factors and treatment outcomes in drug dependence treatment: an examination using meta-analysis.

Authors:  M L Prendergast; D Podus; E Chang
Journal:  Subst Use Misuse       Date:  2000 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.164

2.  The constitutionality of involuntary civil commitment of opiate addicts.

Authors:  Michael P Rosenthal
Journal:  J Drug Issues       Date:  1988

3.  Associations with substance abuse treatment completion among drug court participants.

Authors:  Randall Brown
Journal:  Subst Use Misuse       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.164

4.  Drug abuse treatment entry and engagement: report of a meeting on treatment readiness.

Authors:  R J Battjes; L S Onken; P J Delany
Journal:  J Clin Psychol       Date:  1999-05

5.  Short-term trajectories of substance use in a sample of drug-involved probationers.

Authors:  Michael S Caudy; Liansheng Tang; Alese Wooditch; Faye S Taxman
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2013-08-15

6.  Pretreatment and during treatment risk factors for dropout among patients with substance use disorders.

Authors:  John McKellar; John Kelly; Alex Harris; Rudolf Moos
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  2005-06-23       Impact factor: 3.913

7.  Addiction: pulling at the neural threads of social behaviors.

Authors:  Nora D Volkow; Ruben D Baler; Rita Z Goldstein
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 8.  The effectiveness of community-based programs for chemically dependent offenders: a review and assessment of the research.

Authors:  C Chanhatasilpa; D L MacKenzie; L J Hickman
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2000-12

9.  Client and program factors associated with dropout from court mandated drug treatment.

Authors:  Elizabeth Evans; Libo Li; Yih-Ing Hser
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  2008-12-11

10.  The interactive effects of antisocial personality disorder and court-mandated status on substance abuse treatment dropout.

Authors:  Stacey B Daughters; Brooke A Stipelman; Marsha N Sargeant; Randi Schuster; Marina A Bornovalova; C W Lejuez
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2007-09-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.