Evidence-based assessment/Substance use disorder (disorder portfolio)

What is a "portfolio?"
For background information on what assessment portfolios are, click the link in the heading above.

Want even 'more' information about this topic? There's an extended version of this page here.

Preparation Phase
Diagnostic Criteria for Substance Use Disorder ICD-11 Diagnostic Criteria for Substance Use Disorder DSM Diagnostic Criteria for Substance Use Disorder
 * Disorders due to substance use and addictive behaviours are mental and behavioural disorders that develop as a result of the use of predominantly psychoactive substances, including medications, or specific repetitive rewarding and reinforcing behaviours.
 * Note: The ICD-11 lists 20 additional subcategories of Substance Use Disorder. They can be found here.
 * Substance use disorder is a DSM disorder in the Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders chapter. It is characterized by the use of substances in a manner that leads to clinically significant impairment or distress.
 * The diagnostic criteria for Substance Use Disorder disorder changed slightly from DSM-IV to DSM-5. Summaries are available here.

Base rates of SUD in different populations and clinical settings
* Base rates by state and type of substance use disorder can be found in the following links: https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/reports/rpt35343/2020NSDUHsaeMaps112421/NSDUHsaeMaps2020.pdf

https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/reports/rpt35339/2020NSDUHsaePercents012422/NSDUHsaePercents2020.pdf

Recommended screening instruments for SUD
Note: Reliability and validity are included in the extended version here. This table includes measures with Good or Excellent ratings.

Likelihood ratios and AUCs of screening measures for (insert portfolio name)

 * For a list of the likelihood ratios for more broadly reaching screening instruments, click here.

Note: “LR+” refers to the change in likelihood ratio associated with a positive test score, and “LR-” is the likelihood ratio for a low score. Likelihood ratios of 1 indicate that the test result did not change impressions at all. LRs larger than 10 or smaller than 0.1 are frequently clinically decisive; 5 or 0.2 are helpful, and between 2.0 and 0.5 are small enough that they rarely result in clinically meaningful changes of formulation (Sackett et al., 2000).

 Search terms: [substance use OR substance use disorders] AND [sensitivity OR specificity] in Google Scholar and PsycINFO

Gold standard diagnostic interviews

 * For a list of broad reaching diagnostic interviews sortable by disorder with PDFs (if applicable), click here.

Recommended diagnostic interviews for substance use disorder
Note: Reliability and validity are included in the extended version here. This table includes measures with Good or Excellent ratings.

Outcome and severity measures
This table includes clinically significant benchmarks for (insert portfolio name here) specific outcome measures
 * Information on how to interpret this table can be found here.
 * Additionally, these vignettes might be helpful resources for understanding appropriate adaptation of outcome measures in practice.
 *  For clinically significant change benchmarks for the CBCL, YSR, and TRF total, externalizing, internalizing, and attention benchmarks,  see here.

Clinically significant change benchmarks with common instruments and mood rating scales {| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
 * colspan="7" |

Clinically significant change benchmarks with common instruments and mood rating scales

 * style="text-align:center;font-size:120%" width="300" |
 * colspan="3" style="text-align:center;font-size:120%" width="300" |  Cut* Scores
 * colspan="3" style="text-align:center;font-size:120%" |  Critical Change (Unstandardized Scores)
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:130%;" |  Measure
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:110%" |  A
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:110%" |  B
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:110%" |  C
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:110%" |  95%
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:110%" |  90%
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:110%" |  SEdifference
 * colspan="7" style="font-size:110%; text-align:center;" span |  Benchmarks Based on Published Norms
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" | Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span |0.8
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 4.9
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 4.0
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 4.1
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 3.5
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 2.1
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" | Alcohol Dependence Scale (ADS) (copyrighted)
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.2
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 9.9
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 7.8
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.4
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.2
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 0.7
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" | Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST)
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 0.1
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 2.6
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.8
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.6
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.3
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 0.8
 * }
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 2.6
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.8
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.6
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 1.3
 * style="text-align:center;font-size:100%;" span | 0.8
 * }

Note: "A" = Away from the clinical range, "B" = Back into the nonclinical range, "C" = Closer to the nonclinical than clinical mean.

Search terms: [substance use OR substance use disorder] AND [clinical significance OR outcomes] in Google Scholar and PsycINFO

Treatment
In the United States, according to SAMHSA, of the 8.9 million adults with a dual diagnosis, 44% received some form of treatment in the past year. Given the frequent co-occurrence of mood disorders and substance use disorders, the recommended first step in treatment is for clinicians to deliver a comprehensive screening evaluation that will inform their treatment approach. There are a host of empirically supported treatments for substance use disorders, though medication interventions and psychotherapy are most common.

Medication
Specifically, medications have been shown to be most effective in the treatment of alcohol and opioid dependence. Naltrexone (50 mg/day) administered for 12 weeks has been shown to decrease cravings for alcohol and the number of days in which alcohol was consumed. Disulfiram (250 mg/day), administered for one year, has been shown to help reduce drinking frequency after relapse. In the context of opioid dependence, Methadone has been the gold standard medication treatment for over 30 years. According to numerous studies, patients on higher doses of methadone (>50mg/day) report less illicit opioid use, as well as increased retention rates in treatment. Buprenorphine is an alternative to Methadone to treat opioid dependence and research similarly supports its clinical efficacy. Buprenorphine (60 mg/day) has been shown to bring about improved retention rates, as well as reduced illicit opioid use.

Therapy

 * Cognitive Behavioral Therapies
 * While medication serves as an effective intervention for some with drug dependence, behavioral interventions are also empirically supported. A number of studies suggest that CBT is an effective intervention for substance use. In a 2010 review, McHugh, Hearon and Otto found that CBT for substance use, which synthesizes cognitive and motivational elements, as well as skills-building interventions, is effective both as a stand-alone treatment and when combined with other treatments. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has also been used to treat substance-using populations with encouraging results. Specifically, Lanza and Menéndez employed a 16-session ACT in the treatment of incarcerated females. In this population, abstinence rates, as well as anxiety sensitivity and other comorbid psychopathology showed improvement. Another behavior intervention that has been successfully implemented is Mindfulness Therapy for Substance Use. Research indicates that this modality is effective across a range of populations through use of methods that help patients to develop nonreactive, acceptance behaviors.
 * Contingency Management
 * One common technique implemented as a treatment method across psychiatric disorders is contingency management, wherein the problematic behavior of the individual is closely monitored and reinforcers are delivered contingent upon detection of a target behavior. In the case of substance use, abstinence is monitored via urine screens or other objective methods and the patient is rewarded for abstinence through prizes or vouchers, which are conversely withheld in the event that the patient does not remain abstinent as determined by urine screening or related methods. Recent work has demonstrated that contingency management can be an effective method for delaying time to first use after treatment and achieving short-term sobriety in individuals with substance use disorders. However, the effects of this intervention seem to be contingent upon the magnitude of the reward, and effects are not evident long-term.
 * Motivational Interviewing
 * Motivational Interviewing is a treatment option that seems to be particularly useful for individuals who are ambivalent about changing behavior. This type of intervention requires the therapist to build a collaborative relationship with the patient, using empathic and non-confrontational approaches to help the patient enhance personal motivation to change. Finally, behavioral activation therapy attempts to address comorbid diagnoses commonly occurring with substance use disorders (i.e., depression) in an attempt to improve outcomes for individuals who may be harder to treat. This technique aims to increase positive reinforcers and decrease intensity and occurrences of negative consequences and life events. This treatment approach has been effective in reducing severity of depression and anxiety symptoms, and increasing enjoyment and reward value of posttreatment activities as compared to treatment as usual.

Web based resources

 * National Institute on Drug Abuse


 * Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)


 * The Addiction Recovery Guide


 * EffectiveChildTherapy.Org information on Substance Abuse


 * Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology