La valutazione di efficacia dei trattamenti delle tossicodipendenze da un punto di vista epidemiologico: ieri oggi e domani

Author/s Arianna Cutilli, Roberta Potente, Sabrina Molinaro
Publishing Year 2014 Issue 2014/3 Language Italian
Pages 13 P. 63-75 File size 115 KB
DOI 10.3280/SISS2014-003005
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Drug abuse and addiction behaviors are a social and public health problem with serious consequences for the community, both in health and socio-economic fields. Therefore, it is essential to develop a culture and a system of evaluation of treatment’s outcomes delivered in public and private Addiction Services, to support either clinical practice or actions of social and health planning. In Italy, the "culture of data", as regards the field of addictions, and the evaluation of the treatment effectiveness are still limited and restricted to specific geographical areas. This paper presents an evaluation system based on the integration of the epidemiological information flow on Addiction (SIND) with other available flows and the application of specific statistical analyses, aiming at studying the effectiveness of the delivered treatments.

  1. Amato L., Mitrova Z., Davoli M. & Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group (2013). Cochrane systematic reviews in the field of addiction: past and future. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 6: 221-228. DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12067
  2. Bowen S., Witkiewitz K., Clifasefi S.L., Grow J., Chawla N., et al. (2014). Relative Efficacy of Mindfulness-Based Relapse Prevention, Standard Relapse Prevention, and Treatment as Usual for Substance Use Disorders: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Psychiatry. DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.4546
  3. Brownson R.C., Chriqui K.F., and Stamatakis K.A. (2009). Understanding Evidence-Based Public Health Policy. American Journal of Public Health, 99(9): 1576-1583. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.156224
  4. Colasante E., Gori M., Pitino A., Lovaste R., Molteni L. & Molinaro S. (2012). Determinants of successful methadone maintenance treatments in two groups of patients: a first study. Italian Journal of Public Health, 9(2): 93-98.
  5. Evans E., Grella C.E., Murphy D.A., Hser Y.I. (2010). Using administrative data for longitudinal substance abuse research. The Journal of Behavioral Health Service & Research, 37(2): 252-71. DOI: 10.1007/s11414-008-9125-3
  6. Ferri M., Saponaro A., Sanza M., Sorio C. (a cura di) (2010). Cocaina e servizi per le dipendenze patologiche. Interventi e valutazione in Emilia-Romagna. Milano: FrancoAngeli/Sanità.
  7. Fletcher B.W. & Battjes R.J. (1999). Introduction to the special issue: treatment process in DATOS. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 57(2): 81-7.
  8. Glasner-Edwards S. & Rawson R. (2010). Evidence-based practices in addiction treatment: review and recommendations for public policy. Health Policy, 97(2-3): 93-104. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2010.05.013
  9. Gossop M. (2006). Treating drug misuse problems: evidence of effectiveness. National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (NHS). National Addiction Centre, Maudsley Hospital Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London.
  10. Hendershot C.S., Witkiewitz K., George W.H. & Marlatt G.A. (2011). Relapse prevention for addictive behaviors. Substance Abuse, Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, (19), 6: 17. DOI: 10.1186/1747-597X-6-17
  11. Hser Y.I., Grella C.E., Hsieh S.C., Anglin M.D. & Brown B.S. (1999). Prior treatment experience related to process and outcomes in DATOS, Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 57(2): 137-150. DOI: 10.1016/S0376-8716(99)00081-2
  12. Hser Y.I., Hoffman V., Grella C.E. & Anglin M.D. (2001). A 33-year follow-up of narcotics addicts. Archivies of General Psychiatry, 58(5): 503-8. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.58.5.503
  13. Hser Y.I., Evans E. (2008). Cross-system data linkage for treatment outcome evaluation: lessons learned from the California Treatment Outcome Project. Eval Program Plann., 31(2): 125-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.02.003
  14. Hubbard R.L., Rachal J.V., Craddock S.G. & Cavanaugh E.R. (1984). Treatment Outcome Prospective Study (TOPS): Client characteristics and behaviors before, during, and after treatment. National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph, 51: 42-68.
  15. Klimas J., Field C.A., Cullen W., O’Gorman C.S., Glynn L.G. et al. (2012). Psychosocial interventions to reduce alcohol consumption in concurrent problem alcohol and illicit drug users. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 11:CD009269. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009269.pub2.doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009269.pub2
  16. Lee M.T., Horgan C.M., Garnick D.W., Acevedo A., Panas L. et al. (2014). A performance measure for continuity of care after detoxification: Relationship with outcomes. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2014.04.002.doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2014.04.002
  17. Lorenzoni V., Curzio O., Karakachoff M., Saponaro A., Sanza M., Mariani F., Molinaro S. (2012). The effects of the macro-environment on treatment retention for problem cocaine users. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 24(1): 52-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2012.07.001
  18. Luchansky B., He L, Krupski A., Stark K.D. (2000). Predicting readmission to substance abuse treatment using state information systems. The impact of
  19. client and treatment characteristics. Journal of Substance Abuse, 12(3): 255-70; DOI: 10.1016/S0899-3289(00)00055-9
  20. NIDA (2012). Principles of drug addiction treatment. A research-based guide. National Institute on Drug Abuse. National Institutes of Health U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
  21. Oliver K., Innvar S., Lorenc T., Woodman J. & Thomas J. (2014). A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Service Research. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-2
  22. Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri - Dipartimento Nazionale Politiche Antidroga (2013). Relazione annuale al Parlamento. Uso di sostanze stupefacenti e tossicodipendenze in Italia.
  23. Sells S.B. & Simpson D.D. (1980). The case for drug abuse treatment effectiveness, based on the DARP research program. British Journal of Addiction, 75(2): 117- 31. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1980.tb02437.x
  24. Simpson D. & Curry S. (eds.) (1997). Special issue: Drug abuse treatment outcome study (DATOS). Psychology of addictive behaviors, 11(4): 211-335. DOI: 10.1037/0893-164X.11.4.211
  25. Simpson D.D. & Friend H.J. (1988). Legal status and long-term outcomes for addicts in the DARP follow up project. National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph, 86: 81-98.
  26. Tiffany S.T., Friedman L., Greenfiel S.F., Hasin D.S. & Jackson R. (2012).
  27. Beyond drug use: a systematic consideration of other outcomes in evaluations of treatments for substance use disorders. Addiction, 107(4): 709-18. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03581.x
  28. UNODC (2012). World Drug Report 2012. United Nations publication, Sales No. E.12.XI.1.
  29. Witkiewitz K. & Marlatt G.A. (2004). Relapse prevention for alcohol and drug problems: that was Zen, this is Tao. The American psychologist, 59(4): 224-35. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.4.224

Arianna Cutilli, Roberta Potente, Sabrina Molinaro, La valutazione di efficacia dei trattamenti delle tossicodipendenze da un punto di vista epidemiologico: ieri oggi e domani in "SICUREZZA E SCIENZE SOCIALI" 3/2014, pp 63-75, DOI: 10.3280/SISS2014-003005