Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 1/2020

01-12-2020 | Substance Abuse | Research

Factors predicting satisfaction in outpatient substance abuse treatment: a prospective follow-up study

Authors: Katja Kuusisto, Tomi Lintonen

Published in: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

While treatment satisfaction has been associated with better outcomes in substance abuse treatment, there is an obvious need for a more profound understanding of what predicts client’s satisfaction with treatment. This study elucidates factors relevant to treatment outcome measured at follow-up in terms of satisfaction with the treatment received.

Methods

The research was implemented as a multisite study in outpatient clinics (N = 7) in southern and western Finland. Data consists of therapists (N = 33) and their clients (N = 327). Each consenting client beginning a treatment period was accepted as a research subject and all therapists at the clinics in question participated. The study was conducted as part of the clinic’s normal activity. Clients were allocated to therapists according to a randomization list drawn up in advance. Apart from the randomisation and the completion of questionnaires, it did not interfere with the progress of treatment. Follow-up lasted 6 months. Multiple Classification Analysis (MCA) was used through combinations of variables organized by content, e.g. client demographics, previous substance use, therapist’s characteristics and client’s expectations. The analyses were based in part on conventional statistical testing (t -test, χ2-test, ANOVA).

Results

Among 37 independent variables few were statistically significant in the final model. The results suggest that high treatment expectations at baseline are a strong predictor of satisfaction at follow-up. Also, previous substance use predicted treatment satisfaction; people using multiple substances were less satisfied than those taking only one substance. Stronger predictors reduced the statistical significance of those independent variables that were statistically significant in the first analyses. Therefore, therapist’s role in recovery and readiness to change should be also seen as antecedents to treatment satisfaction.

Conclusions

It seems that treatment expectations are fulfilled among those participating in follow-up. Yet many are lost during treatment and by follow-up. Service users have experiential knowledge that differs from professionals’ and policymakers’ knowledge. It is clinically relevant to understand what factors affect client’s satisfaction. Hence, it is possible to identify the population whose treatment should receive the most attention, how the client’s experience, their commitment to treatment, and treatment effectiveness could be improved.
Footnotes
1
The reliability of the scale is only reported according to gender (0.86 for males, 0.84 for females) in Spielberger [26].
 
2
The tests of significance were carried out before a specifying elaboration. After this, the stability of inter-variable variance and the variation in the different categories were controlled.
 
3
R2 can be interpreted as a percentage of how much of the overall variance in satisfaction with treatment is explained by the selected explanatory variables included in the model.
 
Literature
5.
go back to reference Shorter GW, Heather N, Bray JW, Berman AH, Giles EL, O’Donnell AJ, Barbosa C, Clarke M, Holloway A, Newbury-Birch D. Prioritization of outcomes in efficacy and effectiveness of alcohol brief intervention trials: international multi-stakeholder e-Delphi consensus study to inform a core outcome set. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2019;80(3):299–309. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.2019.80.299.CrossRefPubMed Shorter GW, Heather N, Bray JW, Berman AH, Giles EL, O’Donnell AJ, Barbosa C, Clarke M, Holloway A, Newbury-Birch D. Prioritization of outcomes in efficacy and effectiveness of alcohol brief intervention trials: international multi-stakeholder e-Delphi consensus study to inform a core outcome set. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2019;80(3):299–309. https://​doi.​org/​10.​15288/​jsad.​2019.​80.​299.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Ruggeri M, Dall’Agnola RB, Bisoffi G, Greenfield TK. Factor analysis of the Verona service satisfaction Scale-82 and development of reduced versions. Int J Meth Psych Res. 1996;6(1):23–38.CrossRef Ruggeri M, Dall’Agnola RB, Bisoffi G, Greenfield TK. Factor analysis of the Verona service satisfaction Scale-82 and development of reduced versions. Int J Meth Psych Res. 1996;6(1):23–38.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO. Toward a comprehensive, transtheoretical model of change. In: Miller W, Heather N, editors. Treating addictive behaviors. New York: Plenum Press; 1998. DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO. Toward a comprehensive, transtheoretical model of change. In: Miller W, Heather N, editors. Treating addictive behaviors. New York: Plenum Press; 1998.
26.
go back to reference Spielberger C. STAXI-2. State-trait anger expression inventory-2. Professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Recources; 1999. Spielberger C. STAXI-2. State-trait anger expression inventory-2. Professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Recources; 1999.
27.
go back to reference Waldron HB, Miller WR, Tonigan JS. Client anger as a predictor of differential response to treatment. In: Longabaugh R, Wirtz PW, editors. Project MATCH hypothesis: results and causal chain analyses. Project MATCH monograph series Vol. 8. Bethesda: NIAAA; 2001. Waldron HB, Miller WR, Tonigan JS. Client anger as a predictor of differential response to treatment. In: Longabaugh R, Wirtz PW, editors. Project MATCH hypothesis: results and causal chain analyses. Project MATCH monograph series Vol. 8. Bethesda: NIAAA; 2001.
29.
go back to reference Najavits LM, Crits-Christoph P, Dierberger A. Clinicians’ impact on the quality of substance use disorder treatment. Subst Use Misuse. 2000;35(12–14):2161–90.CrossRef Najavits LM, Crits-Christoph P, Dierberger A. Clinicians’ impact on the quality of substance use disorder treatment. Subst Use Misuse. 2000;35(12–14):2161–90.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Attkisson CC, Greenfield TK. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) scales and the Service Satisfaction Scale-30 (SSS-30). In: Sederer LI, Dickey B, editors. Outcome Assessment in Central Practice. Baltimore: Lippincott William and Wilkins; 1996. p. 120–7. Attkisson CC, Greenfield TK. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) scales and the Service Satisfaction Scale-30 (SSS-30). In: Sederer LI, Dickey B, editors. Outcome Assessment in Central Practice. Baltimore: Lippincott William and Wilkins; 1996. p. 120–7.
35.
52.
go back to reference Carkhuff R, Berenson B. Beyond counseling and therapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1977. Carkhuff R, Berenson B. Beyond counseling and therapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1977.
53.
go back to reference Andrews F, Morgan J, Sonquist J. Multiple classification analysis: a report on a computer program for multiple regression using categorical predictors. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research; 1967. Andrews F, Morgan J, Sonquist J. Multiple classification analysis: a report on a computer program for multiple regression using categorical predictors. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research; 1967.
55.
go back to reference Alkula T, Pöntinen S, Ylöstalo P. Sosiaalitutkimuksen kvantitatiiviset menetelmät. Helsinki: WSOY; 1995. Alkula T, Pöntinen S, Ylöstalo P. Sosiaalitutkimuksen kvantitatiiviset menetelmät. Helsinki: WSOY; 1995.
56.
go back to reference Jokivuori P, Hietala R. Määrällisiä tarinoita. Monimuuttujamenetelmien käyttö ja tulkinta. Helsinki: WSOY; 2007. Jokivuori P, Hietala R. Määrällisiä tarinoita. Monimuuttujamenetelmien käyttö ja tulkinta. Helsinki: WSOY; 2007.
61.
go back to reference Stout R, Del Boca F, Carbonari J, Rychtarik R, Litt MD, Cooney NL. Primary treatment outcomes and matching effects: Outpatient arm. In: Babor TF, Del Boca FK, editors. Treatment matching in alcoholism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003. p. 105–34. Stout R, Del Boca F, Carbonari J, Rychtarik R, Litt MD, Cooney NL. Primary treatment outcomes and matching effects: Outpatient arm. In: Babor TF, Del Boca FK, editors. Treatment matching in alcoholism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003. p. 105–34.
64.
go back to reference Cooney NL, Babor TF, DiClemente CC, et al. Clinical and scientific implications of project MATCH. In: Babor TF, Del Boca FK, editors. Treatment matching in alcoholism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003. Cooney NL, Babor TF, DiClemente CC, et al. Clinical and scientific implications of project MATCH. In: Babor TF, Del Boca FK, editors. Treatment matching in alcoholism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003.
Metadata
Title
Factors predicting satisfaction in outpatient substance abuse treatment: a prospective follow-up study
Authors
Katja Kuusisto
Tomi Lintonen
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1747-597X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-020-00275-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 1/2020 Go to the issue