Allen S. Daniels

Peer Support Services for Individuals With Serious Mental Illnesses: Assessing the Evidence

OBJECTIVE This review assessed the level of evidence and effectiveness of peer support services delivered by individuals in recovery to those with serious mental illnesses or co-occurring mental and substance use disorders. METHODS Authors searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress, the Educational Resources Information Center, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature for outcome studies of peer support services from 1995 through 2012. They found 20 studies across three service types: peers added to traditional services, peers in existing clinical roles, and peers delivering structured curricula. Authors judged the methodological quality of the studies using three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low). They also described the evidence of service effectiveness. RESULTS The level of evidence for each type of peer support service was moderate. Many studies had methodological shortcomings, and outcome measures varied. The effectiveness varied by service type. Across the range of methodological rigor, a majority of studies of two service types--peers added and peers delivering curricula--showed some improvement favoring peers. Compared with professional staff, peers were better able to reduce inpatient use and improve a range of recovery outcomes, although one study found a negative impact. Effectiveness of peers in existing clinical roles was mixed. CONCLUSIONS Peer support services have demonstrated many notable outcomes. However, studies that better differentiate the contributions of the peer role and are conducted with greater specificity, consistency, and rigor would strengthen the evidence.

Supported Employment: Assessing the Evidence

OBJECTIVE Supported employment is a direct service with multiple components designed to help adults with mental disorders or co-occurring mental and substance use disorders choose, acquire, and maintain competitive employment. This article describes supported employment and assesses the evidence base for this service. METHODS Authors reviewed meta-analyses, research reviews, and individual studies from 1995 through 2012. Databases surveyed were PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress, the Educational Resources Information Center, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Authors chose from three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low) based on benchmarks for the number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence for service effectiveness. RESULTS The level of research evidence for supported employment was graded as high, based on 12 systematic reviews and 17 randomized controlled trials of the individual placement and support model. Supported employment consistently demonstrated positive outcomes for individuals with mental disorders, including higher rates of competitive employment, fewer days to the first competitive job, more hours and weeks worked, and higher wages. There was also strong evidence supporting the effectiveness of individual elements of the model. CONCLUSIONS Substantial evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of supported employment. Policy makers should consider including it as a covered service. Future research is needed for subgroups such as young adults, older adults, people with primary substance use disorders, and those from various cultural, racial, and ethnic backgrounds.

Permanent Supportive Housing: Assessing the Evidence

OBJECTIVES Permanent supportive housing provides safe, stable housing for people with mental and substance use disorders who are homeless or disabled. This article describes permanent supportive housing and reviews research. METHODS Authors reviewed individual studies and literature reviews from 1995 through 2012. Databases surveyed were PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress, the Educational Resources Information Center, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. The authors chose from three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low) on the basis of benchmarks for the number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence of service effectiveness. RESULTS The level of evidence for permanent supportive housing was graded as moderate. Substantial literature, including seven randomized controlled trials, demonstrated that components of the model reduced homelessness, increased housing tenure, and decreased emergency room visits and hospitalization. Consumers consistently rated this model more positively than other housing models. Methodological flaws limited the ability to draw firm conclusions. Results were stronger for studies that compared permanent supportive housing with treatment as usual or no housing rather than with other models. CONCLUSIONS The moderate level of evidence indicates that permanent supportive housing is promising, but research is needed to clarify the model and determine the most effective elements for various subpopulations. Policy makers should consider including permanent supportive housing as a covered service for individuals with mental and substance use disorders. An evaluation component is needed to continue building its evidence base.

Medication-Assisted Treatment With Methadone: Assessing the Evidence

OBJECTIVE Detoxification followed by abstinence has shown little success in reducing illicit opioid use. Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) helps individuals with an opioid use disorder abstain from or decrease use of illegal or nonmedical opiates. This review examined evidence for MMTs effectiveness. METHODS Authors reviewed meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and individual studies of MMT from 1995 through 2012. Databases searched were PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress. The authors rated the level of evidence (high, moderate, and low) based on benchmarks for the number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence of service effectiveness and examined maternal and fetal results of MMT for pregnant women. RESULTS The review included seven randomized controlled trials and two quasi-experimental studies of MMT, indicating a high level of evidence for the positive impact of MMT on treatment retention and illicit opioid use, particularly at doses greater than 60 mg. Evidence suggests positive impacts on drug-related HIV risk behaviors, mortality, and criminality. Meta-analyses were difficult to perform or yielded nonsignificant results. Studies found little association between MMT and sex-related HIV risk behaviors. MMT in pregnancy was associated with improved maternal and fetal outcomes, and rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome were similar for mothers receiving different doses. Reports of adverse events were also found. CONCLUSIONS MMT is associated with improved outcomes for individuals and pregnant women with opioid use disorders. MMT should be a covered service available to all individuals.

Medication-Assisted Treatment With Buprenorphine: Assessing the Evidence

OBJECTIVE Buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) and methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) are pharmacological treatment programs for individuals with opioid use disorders. MMT is discussed in a companion article. This article describes BMT and reviews available research on its efficacy. METHODS Authors reviewed meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and individual studies of BMT from 1995 through 2012. Databases surveyed were PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress. They chose from three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low) based on benchmarks for the number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence of service effectiveness. RESULTS Sixteen adequately designed randomized controlled trials of BMT indicated a high level of evidence for its positive impact on treatment retention and illicit opioid use. Seven reviews or meta-analyses were also included. When the medication was dosed adequately, BMT and MMT showed similar reduction in illicit opioid use, but BMT was associated with less risk of adverse events. Results suggested better treatment retention with MMT. BMT was associated with improved maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancy, compared with no medication-assisted treatment. Rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome were similar for mothers treated with BMT and MMT during pregnancy, but symptoms were less severe for infants whose mothers were treated with BMT. CONCLUSIONS BMT is associated with improved outcomes compared with placebo for individuals and pregnant women with opioid use disorders. BMT should be considered for inclusion as a covered benefit.

Trauma-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Children and Adolescents: Assessing the Evidence

OBJECTIVE Trauma-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (TF-CBT) is a conjoint parent-child treatment developed by Cohen, Mannarino, and Deblinger that uses cognitive-behavioral principles and exposure techniques to prevent and treat posttraumatic stress, depression, and behavioral problems. This review defined TF-CBT, differentiated it from other models, and assessed the evidence base. METHODS Authors reviewed meta-analyses, reviews, and individual studies (1995 to 2013). Databases surveyed were PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, PILOTS, the ERIC, and the CINAHL. They chose from three levels of research evidence (high, moderate, and low) on the basis of benchmarks for number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence of effectiveness. RESULTS The level of evidence for TF-CBT was rated as high on the basis of ten RCTs, three of which were conducted independently (not by TF-CBT developers). TF-CBT has demonstrated positive outcomes in reducing symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, although it is less clear whether TF-CBT is effective in reducing behavior problems or symptoms of depression. Limitations of the studies include concerns about investigator bias and exclusion of vulnerable populations. CONCLUSIONS TF-CBT is a viable treatment for reducing trauma-related symptoms among some children who have experienced trauma and their nonoffending caregivers. Based on this evidence, TF-CBT should be available as a covered service in health plans. Ongoing research is needed to further identify best practices for TF-CBT in various settings and with individuals from various racial and ethnic backgrounds and with varied trauma histories, symptoms, and stages of intellectual, social, and emotional development.

REPORT OF RECOMMENDATIONS: THE ANNAPOLIS COALITION CONFERENCE ON BEHAVIORAL HEALTH WORK FORCE COMPETENCIES

In May 2004, the Annapolis Coalition on Behavioral Health Workforce Education convened a national meeting on the identification and assessment of competencies. The Conference on Behavioral Health Workforce Competencies brought leading consumer and family advocates together with other experts on competencies from diverse disciplines and specialties in the fields of both mental health care and substance use disorders treatment. Aided by experts on competency development in business and medicine, conference participants have generated 10 consensus recommendations to guide the future development of workforce competencies in behavioral health. This article outlines those recommendations. A collaborative effort to identify a set of core or common competencies is envisioned as a key strategy for advancing behavioral health education, training, and other workforce development initiatives.

Assessing the evidence base for behavioral health services: introduction to the series.

The current policy environment provides the opportunity for federal and state agencies to work with private and nonprofit sectors to transform the American health care system through development of a comprehensive set of community-based, recovery-oriented, and evidence-based services for people with mental and substance use disorders. This Assessing the Evidence Base Series (AEB Series) provides science-supported information about selected mental health and substance abuse services for health care leaders. Series authors conducted reviews of research on 14 behavioral health services: behavioral management for children and adolescents, trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy for children and adolescents, recovery housing, residential treatment for individuals with substance use disorders, peer support services for individuals with serious mental illnesses, peer recovery support for individuals with substance use disorders, permanent supportive housing, supported employment, substance abuse intensive outpatient programs, skill building, intensive case management, consumer and family psychoeducation, medication-assisted treatment with methadone, and medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine. The goal of the AEB Series is to provide a framework for decision makers to build a modern addictions and mental health service system for the people who use these services and the people who provide them. The framework is intended to support decisions about the services that are likely to be most effective. This introduction to the AEB Series explains the methods used to conduct the reviews, rate the research evidence, and describe the effectiveness of the services. The rationale underlying recommendations for implementation of the services is also discussed, and suggestions are offered for future research.

Residential Treatment for Individuals With Substance Use Disorders: Assessing the Evidence

OBJECTIVE Residential treatment is a commonly used direct intervention for individuals with substance use or co-occurring mental and substance use disorders who need structured care. Treatment occurs in nonhospital, licensed residential facilities. Models vary, but all provide safe housing and medical care in a 24-hour recovery environment. This article describes residential treatment and assesses the evidence base for this service. METHODS Authors evaluated research reviews and individual studies from 1995 through 2012. They searched major databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, and Social Services Abstracts. They chose from three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low) and described the evidence of service effectiveness. RESULTS On the basis of eight reviews and 21 individual studies not included in prior reviews, the level of evidence for residential treatment for substance use disorders was rated as moderate. A number of randomized controlled trials were identified, but various methodological weaknesses in study designs-primarily the appropriateness of the samples and equivalence of comparison groups-decreased the level of evidence. Results for the effectiveness of residential treatment compared with other types of treatment for substance use disorders were mixed. Findings suggested either an improvement or no difference in treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Residential treatment for substance use disorders shows value and merits ongoing consideration by policy makers for inclusion as a covered benefit in public and commercially funded plans. However, research with greater specificity and consistency is needed.

Peer Recovery Support for Individuals With Substance Use Disorders: Assessing the Evidence

In recent years, peer recovery support services have become an accepted part of the treatment of substance use disorders, providing a more extensive array of services than typically associated with mutual support groups. Peer providers may help consumers set recovery goals, develop a plan, and work toward and maintain recovery. In this literature review, the last in the Assessing the Evidence Base (AEB) Series, the authors review the evidence supporting peer recovery support services, noting that more research is needed to distinguish the effects of peer recovery support from other recovery support activities.