Sheila M Alessi1, Nancy P Barnett2, Nancy M Petry3. 1. University of Connecticut School of Medicine and Calhoun Cardiology Center - Behavioral Health, 263 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, CT 06030-3944, USA. Electronic address: salessi@uchc.edu. 2. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University, Box G-S121-5, Providence, RI 02912, USA. Electronic address: npetry@uchc.edu. 3. University of Connecticut School of Medicine and Calhoun Cardiology Center - Behavioral Health, 263 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, CT 06030-3944, USA. Electronic address: Nancy_Barnett@brown.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Transdermal alcohol monitoring technology allows for new research on alcohol use disorders. This study assessed feasibility, acceptability, and adherence with this technology in the context of two clinical research trials. METHODS:Participants were the first 100 community-based alcohol treatment outpatients enrolled in randomized studies that monitored drinking with the secure continuous remote alcohol monitor (SCRAMx®) for 12 weeks. Study 1 participants were randomized to usual care (n=36) or usual care with contingency management incentives for treatment attendance (CM-Att; n=30). Study 2 participants were randomized to usual care (n=17) or usual care with CM for each day of no drinking per SCRAMx (CM-Abst; n=17). After 12 weeks, participants completed a survey about the bracelet. RESULTS: Nine percent of individuals screened (54 of 595) declined participation because of the bracelet. Of participants, 84% provided 12weeks of data, and 96% of bracelets were returned fully intact. Ninety-four equipment tampers occurred, affecting 2% of monitoring days; 56% (67) of tampers coincided with detected drinking. Common concerns reported by participants were skin marks (58%), irritation (54%), and interfered with clothing choices (51%), but severity ratings were generally mild (60%-94%). Eighty-one percent of participants reported that the bracelet helped them reduce drinking, and 75% indicated that they would wear it for longer. A common suggestion for improvement was to reduce the size of the bracelet. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the viability of transdermal monitoring in voluntary substance abuse treatment participants for an extended duration. Issues to consider for future applications of this technology are discussed.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Transdermal alcohol monitoring technology allows for new research on alcohol use disorders. This study assessed feasibility, acceptability, and adherence with this technology in the context of two clinical research trials. METHODS:Participants were the first 100 community-based alcohol treatment outpatients enrolled in randomized studies that monitored drinking with the secure continuous remote alcohol monitor (SCRAMx®) for 12 weeks. Study 1 participants were randomized to usual care (n=36) or usual care with contingency management incentives for treatment attendance (CM-Att; n=30). Study 2 participants were randomized to usual care (n=17) or usual care with CM for each day of no drinking per SCRAMx (CM-Abst; n=17). After 12 weeks, participants completed a survey about the bracelet. RESULTS: Nine percent of individuals screened (54 of 595) declined participation because of the bracelet. Of participants, 84% provided 12weeks of data, and 96% of bracelets were returned fully intact. Ninety-four equipment tampers occurred, affecting 2% of monitoring days; 56% (67) of tampers coincided with detected drinking. Common concerns reported by participants were skin marks (58%), irritation (54%), and interfered with clothing choices (51%), but severity ratings were generally mild (60%-94%). Eighty-one percent of participants reported that the bracelet helped them reduce drinking, and 75% indicated that they would wear it for longer. A common suggestion for improvement was to reduce the size of the bracelet. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the viability of transdermal monitoring in voluntary substance abuse treatment participants for an extended duration. Issues to consider for future applications of this technology are discussed.
Authors: Nancy M Petry; Ken B Kolodner; Rui Li; Jessica M Peirce; John M Roll; Maxine L Stitzer; John A Hamilton Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2006-01-10 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
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: Oladunni Oluwoye; Hailey Reneau; Jalene Herron; Karl C Alcover; Sterling McPherson; John Roll; Michael G McDonell Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2020 May/Jun Impact factor: 4.647
Authors: Eun-Young Mun; Xiaoyin Li; Michael S Businelle; Emily T Hébert; Zhengqi Tan; Nancy P Barnett; Scott T Walters Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 3.455