Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Opioids | Study protocol

Implementing contingency management for stimulant use in opioid treatment programs: protocol of a type III hybrid effectiveness-stepped-wedge trial

Authors: Sara J. Becker, Kira DiClemente-Bosco, Kelli Scott, Tim Janssen, Sarah M. Salino, Fariha N. Hasan, Kimberly R. Yap, Bryan R. Garner

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Contingency management (CM) is an evidence-based intervention for stimulant use and is highly effective in combination with medication for opioid use disorder. Yet, uptake of CM in opioid treatment programs that provide medication for opioid use disorder remains low. This paradox in which CM is one of the most effective interventions, yet one of the least available, represents one of the greatest research-to-practice gaps in the addiction health services field. Multi-level implementation strategies are needed to address barriers to CM implementation at both the provider- and organization-level. This type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse to evaluate whether a multi-level implementation strategy, the Science of Service Laboratory (SSL), can effectively promote CM implementation in opioid treatment programs. Specific aims will test the effectiveness of the SSL on implementation outcomes (primary aim) and patient outcomes (secondary aim), as well as test putative mediators of implementation outcomes (exploratory aim).

Methods

Utilizing a fully powered type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial with a stepped wedge design, we propose to randomize a cohort of 10 opioid treatment programs to receive the SSL across four steps. Each step, an additional 2–3 opioid treatment programs will receive the SSL implementation strategy, which has three core components: didactic training, performance feedback, and external facilitation. At six intervals, each of the 10 opioid treatment programs will provide de-identified electronic medical record data from all available patient charts on CM delivery and patient outcomes. Staff from each opioid treatment program will provide feedback on contextual determinants influencing implementation at three timepoints.

Discussion

Between planning of this protocol and receipt of funding, the landscape for CM in the USA changed dramatically, with multiple Departments of Health launching state-wide CM initiatives. We therefore accelerated the protocol timeline and offered some cursory training resources to all sites as a preparation activity. We also began partnering with multiple Departments of Health to evaluate their rollout of CM using the measures outlined in this protocol.

Trial registration

This study protocol is registered via ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05702021. Date of registration: January 27, 2023.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Bolivar HA, Klemperer EM, Coleman SRM, DeSarno M, Skelly JM, Higgins ST. Contingency management for patients receiving medication for opioid use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiat. 2021;78(10):1092–102.
2.
Griffith JD, Rowan-Szal GA, Roark RR, Simpson DD. Contingency management in outpatient methadone treatment: a meta-analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2000;58(1–2):55–66.PubMed
3.
Resnick RB, Galanter M, Pycha C, Cohen A, Grandison P, Flood N. Buprenorphine: an alternative to methadone for heroin dependence treatment. Psychopharmacol Bull. 1992;28(1):109–13.PubMed
4.
5.
Krupitsky E, Nunes EV, Ling W, Illeperuma A, Gastfriend DR, Silverman BL. Injectable extended-release naltrexone for opioid dependence: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2011;377(9776):1506–13.PubMed
6.
Ling W, Casadonte P, Bigelow G, Kampman KM, Patkar A, Bailey GL, et al. Buprenorphine implants for treatment of opioid dependence: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2010;304(14):1576–83.PubMed
7.
Schottenfeld RS, Chawarski MC, Pakes JR, Pantalon MV, Carroll KM, Kosten TR. Methadone versus buprenorphine with contingency management or performance feedback for cocaine and opioid dependence. Am J Psychiatry. 2005;162(2):340–9.PubMed
8.
Tsui JI, Mayfield J, Speaker EC, Yakup S, Ries R, Funai H, et al. Association between methamphetamine use and retention among patients with opioid use disorders treated with buprenorphine. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2020;109:80–5.PubMed
9.
Petry NM. Contingency management treatments. Br J Psychiatry. 2006;189:97–8.PubMed
10.
Petry NM, DePhilippis D, Rash CJ, Drapkin M, McKay JR. Nationwide dissemination of contingency management: the Veterans Administration initiative. Am J Addict. 2014;23(3):205–10.PubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Hartzler B, Donovan DM, Tillotson CJ, Mongoue-Tchokote S, Doyle SR, McCarty D. A multilevel approach to predicting community addiction treatment attitudes about contingency management. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2012;42(2):213–21.PubMed
12.
McGovern MP, Fox TS, Xie H, Drake RE. A survey of clinical practices and readiness to adopt evidence-based practices: dissemination research in an addiction treatment system. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2004;26(4):305–12.PubMed
13.
Becker SJ, Scott K, Murphy CM, Pielech M, Moul SA, Yap KR, et al. User-centered design of contingency management for implementation in opioid treatment programs: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):1–19.
14.
Kirby KC, Benishek LA, Dugosh KL, Kerwin ME. Substance abuse treatment providers’ beliefs and objections regarding contingency management: Implications for dissemination. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006;85(1):19–27.PubMed
15.
Becker SJ, DiClemente-Bosco K, Rash CJ, Garner BR. Effective, but underused: lessons learned implementing contingency management in real-world practice settings in the United States. Prev Med. 2023:107594. Online ahead of print.
16.
Walker R, Rosvall T, Field CA, Allen S, McDonald D, Salim Z, et al. Disseminating contingency management to increase attendance in two community substance abuse treatment centers: lessons learned. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2010;39(3):202–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Ducharme LJ, Knudsen HK, Roman PM, Johnson JA. Innovation adoption in substance abuse treatment: exposure, trialability, and the clinical trials network. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2007;32(4):321–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Becker SJ, Kelly LM, Kang AW, Escobar KI, Squires DD. Factors associated with contingency management adoption among opioid treatment providers receiving a comprehensive implementation strategy. Subst Abus. 2019;40(1):56–60.PubMed
19.
Squires DD, Gumbley SJ, Storti SA. Training substance abuse treatment organizations to adopt evidence-based practices: the addiction technology transfer center of New England science to service laboratory. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2008;34(3):293–301.PubMed
20.
Becker SJ, Squires DD, Strong DR, Barnett NP, Monti PM, Petry NM. Training opioid addiction treatment providers to adopt contingency management: a prospective pilot trial of a comprehensive implementation science approach. Subst Abus. 2016;37(1):134–40.PubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Helseth SA, Janssen T, Scott K, Squires DD, Becker SJ. Training community-based treatment providers to implement contingency management for opioid addiction: time to and frequency of adoption. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2018;95:26–34.PubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Miller WR, Yahne CE, Moyers TB, Martinez J, Pirritano M. A randomized trial of methods to help clinicians learn motivational interviewing. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72(6):1050–62.PubMed
23.
Sholomskas DE, Syracuse-Siewert G, Rounsaville BJ, Ball SA, Nuro KF, Carroll KM. We don’t train in vain: a dissemination trial of three strategies of training clinicians in cognitive-behavioral therapy. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73(1):106–15.PubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Becker SJ, Murphy CM, Hartzler B, Rash CJ, Janssen T, Roosa M, et al. Project MIMIC (Maximizing Implementation of Motivational Incentives in Clinics): a cluster-randomized type 3 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2021;16(1):61.PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346:e7586.PubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Curran GM, Bauer M, Mittman B, Pyne JM, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Med Care. 2012;50(3):217–26.PubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Stitzer ML, Petry NM, Peirce J. Motivational incentives research in the national drug abuse treatment clinical trials network. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2010;38 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S61–9.PubMed
28.
Garner BR. Research on the diffusion of evidence-based treatments within substance abuse treatment: a systematic review. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2009;36(4):376–99.PubMed
29.
Garner BR. The relationship between several mechanism of change measures and an independently rated measure of implementation integrity. Seattle: Society for Implementation Research Collaboration Conference; 2017.
30.
Hemming K, Taljaard M. Reflection on modern methods: when is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial a good study design choice? Int J Epidemiol. 2020;49(3):1043–52.PubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Moullin JC, Dickson KS, Stadnick NA, Rabin B, Aarons GA. Systematic review of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework. Implement Sci. 2019;14(1):1.PubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Comer SD, Sullivan MA, Yu E, Rothenberg JL, Kleber HD, Kampman K, et al. Injectable, sustained-release naltrexone for the treatment of opioid dependence: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63(2):210–8.PubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Petry NM, Weinstock J, Alessi SM. A randomized trial of contingency management delivered in the context of group counseling. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011;79(5):686–96.PubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Petry NM, Alessi SM, Ledgerwood DM. Contingency management delivered by community therapists in outpatient settings. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2012;122(1–2):86–92.PubMed
35.
Petry N. Contingency management for substance abuse treatment: a guide to implementing this evidenced-based practice. New York: Routledge; 2012.
36.
Petry NM, Alessi SM, Carroll KM, Hanson T, MacKinnon S, Rounsaville B, et al. Contingency management treatments: reinforcing abstinence versus adherence with goal-related activities. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2006;74(3):592–601.PubMed
37.
Petry NM, Alessi SM, Marx J, Austin M, Tardif M. Vouchers versus prizes: contingency management treatment of substance abusers in community settings. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73(6):1005–14.PubMed
38.
Lussier JP, Heil SH, Mongeon JA, Badger GJ, Higgins ST. A meta-analysis of voucher-based reinforcement therapy for substance use disorders. Addiction. 2006;101(2):192–203.PubMed
39.
Petry NM, Alessi SM, Ledgerwood DM, Sierra S. Psychometric properties of the contingency management competence scale. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2010;109(1–3):167–74.PubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Garner BR, Gotham HJ, Chaple M, Martino S, Ford Ii JH, Roosa MR, et al. The implementation and sustainment facilitation strategy improved implementation effectiveness and intervention effectiveness: results from a cluster-randomized, type 2 hybrid trial. Implement Res Pract. 2020;1:2633489520948073.PubMedPubMedCentral
41.
42.
Garner BR, Hunter BD, Modisette KC, Ihnes PC, Godley SH. Treatment staff turnover in organizations implementing evidence-based practices: turnover rates and their association with client outcomes. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2012;42(2):134–42.PubMed
43.
Garner BR, Hunter BD. Examining the temporal relationship between psychological climate, work attitude, and staff turnover. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2013;44(2):193–200.PubMed
44.
Garner BR, Hunter BD, Godley SH, Godley MD. Training and retaining staff to competently deliver an evidence-based practice: the role of staff attributes and perceptions of organizational functioning. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2012;42(2):191–200.PubMed
45.
Glasgow RE, Harden SM, Gaglio B, Rabin B, Smith ML, Porter GC, et al. RE-AIM planning and evaluation framework: adapting to new science and practice with a 20-year review. Front Public Health. 2019;7:64.PubMedPubMedCentral
46.
Chamberlain P, Brown CH, Saldana L. Observational measure of implementation progress in community based settings: the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC). Implement Sci. 2011;6:116.PubMedPubMedCentral
47.
Saldana L, Chamberlain P, Bradford WD, Campbell M, Landsverk J. The Cost of Implementing New Strategies (COINS): a method for mapping implementation resources using the stages of implementation completion. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2014;39:177–82.PubMed
48.
Ehrhart MG, Aarons GA, Farahnak LR. Assessing the organizational context for EBP implementation: the development and validity testing of the Implementation Climate Scale (ICS). Implement Sci. 2014;9:157.PubMedPubMedCentral
49.
Lyon AR, Cook CR, Brown EC, Locke J, Davis C, Ehrhart M, et al. Assessing organizational implementation context in the education sector: confirmatory factor analysis of measures of implementation leadership, climate, and citizenship. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):5.PubMedPubMedCentral
50.
Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, et al. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017;12:1–12.
51.
Muthén LK, Muthén B. Mplus Version 8 User's Guide. Muthén & Muthén, editors. 8th ed. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 2017.
52.
53.
54.
Ondersma SJ, Svikis DS, Lam PK, Connors-Burge VS, Ledgerwood DM, Hopper JA. A randomized trial of computer-delivered brief intervention and low-intensity contingency management for smoking during pregnancy. Nicotine Tob Res. 2012;14(3):351–60.PubMed
55.
Moore BA, Rosen MI, Wang Y, Shen J, Ablondi K, Sullivan A, et al. A remotely-delivered CBT and contingency management therapy for substance using people with HIV. AIDS Behav. 2015;19 Suppl 2(02):156–62.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Implementing contingency management for stimulant use in opioid treatment programs: protocol of a type III hybrid effectiveness-stepped-wedge trial
Authors
Sara J. Becker
Kira DiClemente-Bosco
Kelli Scott
Tim Janssen
Sarah M. Salino
Fariha N. Hasan
Kimberly R. Yap
Bryan R. Garner
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keywords
Opioids
Opioids
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01297-w

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Implementation Science 1/2023 Go to the issue

Systematic review

Built to last? Barriers and facilitators of healthcare program sustainability: a systematic integrative review

Study protocol

A sequential, multiple assignment randomized trial comparing web-based education to mobile video interpreter access for improving provider interpreter use in primary care clinics: the mVOCAL hybrid type 3 study protocol

Research

Comparing the CFIR-ERIC matching tool recommendations to real-world strategy effectiveness data: a mixed-methods study in the Veterans Health Administration

Research

Results of a cluster randomized trial testing the Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach to increase cervical cancer screening in family planning clinics in Mombasa County, Kenya

Research

Scaling up an intervention to protect preterm infants from neurodevelopmental disabilities — findings from a qualitative process evaluation comparing standard with enhanced quality improvement support packages for maternity units in England

Study protocol

Implementing pharmacist-prescriber collaboration to improve evidence-based anticoagulant use: a randomized trial