Psychiatric severity and behavior change in alcoholism

Individuals who are diagnosed with a chronic mental illness and an alcohol use disorder comprise a high risk population that challenges the mental health care system. Effective treatment for the dually diagnosed, who are characterized by heterogeneity in their psychiatric diagnoses, their substance use patterns, and their current degree of dysfunction, presents a challenge. Several integrated treatment models have been developed that attempt to concurrently treat patients' psychiatric and substance abuse problems. At this point in the development of these "dual diagnosis" programs, treatment planning is hindered by a lack of knowledge about the relation of psychiatric severity to the process of recovery from alcohol abuse and dependence.^ The present study sought to advance the field's understanding of the relation between psychiatric severity and the process of behavior change through an examination of the relation between dimensions of psychiatric severity and Prochaska and DiClemente's Transtheoretical Model (TTM) constructs. The TTM, which focuses on identifying the processes of change that appear to underlie the modification of addictive behaviors, provides a way of conceptualizing and measuring specific elements relevant to the desired behavior change. Knowledge of the relation between these constructs and psychiatric severity will enable treatment planners to develop dual diagnosis programs which target clients' needs with a much higher level of specificity.^ One hundred-thirty two alcohol dependent patients in a dual diagnosis treatment program were assessed on psychiatric severity (defined as number of symptoms and level of distress resulting from symptoms) and the Transtheoretical Model constructs. The constructs include stages and processes of change for alcohol use, alcohol decisional balance, and alcohol abstinence self-efficacy. Results indicate that the TTM variable of "temptation to drink" is most strongly related to psychiatric severity: the more psychiatric distress a person is experiencing, the more he or she is tempted to drink. The "cons" of drinking were also related to psychiatric severity, indicating that participants who were experiencing more psychiatric distress also endorsed as important a higher number of the negative aspects of drinking.^ Additional aims of this investigation were to determine whether participants' scores on the Transtheoretical Model variables were associated with their: (a) severity of drinking, defined as frequency, quantity and consequences of use, (b) previous psychiatric and substance abuse treatment episodes, and (c) functional impairment. Associations were found among these variables and each of the key constructs of the Transtheoretical Model. Each association is explored in detail and implications for treatment programming are discussed. ^

Comparing the factorial structure, invariance, and predictive validity of transtheoretical model constructs for alcohol use across restricted and unrestricted settings

With substance abuse treatment expanding in prisons and jails, understanding how behavior change interacts with a restricted setting becomes more essential. The Transtheoretical Model (TTM) has been used to understand intentional behavior change in unrestricted settings, however, evidence indicates restrictive settings can affect the measurement and structure of the TTM constructs. The present study examined data from problem drinkers at baseline and end-of-treatment from three studies: (1) Project CARE (n = 187) recruited inmates from a large county jail; (2) Project Check-In (n = 116) recruited inmates from a state prison; (3) Project MATCH, a large multi-site alcohol study had two recruitment arms, aftercare (n = 724 pre-treatment and 650 post-treatment) and outpatient (n = 912 pre-treatment and 844 post-treatment). The analyses were conducted using cross-sectional data to test for non-invariance of measures of the TTM constructs: readiness, confidence, temptation, and processes of change (Structural Equation Modeling, SEM) across restricted and unrestricted settings. Two restricted (jail and aftercare) and one unrestricted group (outpatient) entering treatment and one restricted (prison) and two unrestricted groups (aftercare and outpatient) at end-of-treatment were contrasted. In addition TTM end-of-treatment profiles were tested as predictors of 12 month drinking outcomes (Profile Analysis). Although SEM did not indicate structural differences in the overall TTM construct model across setting types, there were factor structure differences on the confidence and temptation constructs at pre-treatment and in the factor structure of the behavioral processes at the end-of-treatment. For pre-treatment temptation and confidence, differences were found in the social situations factor loadings and in the variance for the confidence and temptation latent factors. For the end-of-treatment behavioral processes, differences across the restricted and unrestricted settings were identified in the counter-conditioning and stimulus control factor loadings. The TTM end-of-treatment profiles were not predictive of drinking outcomes in the prison sample. Both pre and post-treatment differences in structure across setting types involved constructs operationalized with behaviors that are limited for those in restricted settings. These studies suggest the TTM is a viable model for explicating addictive behavior change in restricted settings but calls for modification of subscale items that refer to specific behaviors and caution in interpreting the mean differences across setting types for problem drinkers. ^