Cargando…

Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study

BACKGROUND: Contingency management (CM), despite the evidence base for its effectiveness, remains controversial, with sub-optimal implementation. In 2007, UK guidelines recommended the use of CM in publicly funded services, but uptake has also been minimal. Previous surveys of service providers sugg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sinclair, J.M.A., Burton, A., Ashcroft, R., Priebe, S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3629561/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21680110
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.05.016
_version_ 1782266602823090176
author Sinclair, J.M.A.
Burton, A.
Ashcroft, R.
Priebe, S.
author_facet Sinclair, J.M.A.
Burton, A.
Ashcroft, R.
Priebe, S.
author_sort Sinclair, J.M.A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Contingency management (CM), despite the evidence base for its effectiveness, remains controversial, with sub-optimal implementation. In 2007, UK guidelines recommended the use of CM in publicly funded services, but uptake has also been minimal. Previous surveys of service providers suggest differences in opinions about CM, but to date there has been no published involvement of service users in this debate. METHOD: Focus group methodology was used to explore systematically the attitudes, concerns and opinions of staff and service users about the use of CM, in publicly funded substance misuse services, to identify the key areas that may be influential in terms of implementation and outcome. Data were analysed thematically using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: 70 staff and service users participated in 9 focus groups. 15 themes of discussion around CM were identified, grouped into four categories: how CM was aligned to the philosophy of substance misuse services; the practicalities of implementation; wider ethical concerns; and how participants perceived the evidence for effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Robust process evaluation in different treatment systems is needed to define the active components of CM for implementation. Involvement of service users in this process is essential and is likely to provide valuable insights into the mechanism of action of CM and its effectiveness and uptake within complex treatment systems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3629561
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36295612013-04-18 Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study Sinclair, J.M.A. Burton, A. Ashcroft, R. Priebe, S. Drug Alcohol Depend Article BACKGROUND: Contingency management (CM), despite the evidence base for its effectiveness, remains controversial, with sub-optimal implementation. In 2007, UK guidelines recommended the use of CM in publicly funded services, but uptake has also been minimal. Previous surveys of service providers suggest differences in opinions about CM, but to date there has been no published involvement of service users in this debate. METHOD: Focus group methodology was used to explore systematically the attitudes, concerns and opinions of staff and service users about the use of CM, in publicly funded substance misuse services, to identify the key areas that may be influential in terms of implementation and outcome. Data were analysed thematically using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: 70 staff and service users participated in 9 focus groups. 15 themes of discussion around CM were identified, grouped into four categories: how CM was aligned to the philosophy of substance misuse services; the practicalities of implementation; wider ethical concerns; and how participants perceived the evidence for effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Robust process evaluation in different treatment systems is needed to define the active components of CM for implementation. Involvement of service users in this process is essential and is likely to provide valuable insights into the mechanism of action of CM and its effectiveness and uptake within complex treatment systems. Elsevier 2011-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3629561/ /pubmed/21680110 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.05.016 Text en © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Open Access under CC BY 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) license
spellingShingle Article
Sinclair, J.M.A.
Burton, A.
Ashcroft, R.
Priebe, S.
Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study
title Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study
title_full Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study
title_fullStr Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study
title_full_unstemmed Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study
title_short Clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: A focus group study
title_sort clinician and service user perceptions of implementing contingency management: a focus group study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3629561/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21680110
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.05.016
work_keys_str_mv AT sinclairjma clinicianandserviceuserperceptionsofimplementingcontingencymanagementafocusgroupstudy
AT burtona clinicianandserviceuserperceptionsofimplementingcontingencymanagementafocusgroupstudy
AT ashcroftr clinicianandserviceuserperceptionsofimplementingcontingencymanagementafocusgroupstudy
AT priebes clinicianandserviceuserperceptionsofimplementingcontingencymanagementafocusgroupstudy