Transcript Open slides

Where have we been and where are we going?
Elizabeth Wells
Pacific Northwest Node
April 2010
“There are important gaps between the knowledge gained
from research, everyday practice in community-based drug
abuse treatment programs, and governmental policies
about drug abuse treatment at the local, state, and national
levels. Much has been learned about drug abuse treatment
at each of these levels—research, treatment, and policy. Yet
these groups make too little use of one another's knowledge
base.”
(Lamb, Greenlick & McCarty, 1998)
“…most CTN nodes have more sites using at least some of
the tested interventions, but why are not all sites using
almost all “effective” interventions? I am definitely not
suggesting these sites should be forced or even incentivized
to do those interventions that the CTN has found to be
effective. I am asking why more of these interventions are
not being used especially among those who have had the
most experience, or at least exposure to them?”
(McLellan, 2010)



Dissemination Subcommittee of SC 2001-2002
Subcommittee of the External Affairs Committee (EAC)
2002-2005
Research Utilization Committee 2005 – present
 Facilitates adoption of CTN-tested and successful





interventions within the CTN.
Facilitates sharing of cost effective dissemination strategies
among Nodes, Blending Teams, or Federal and State
partners.
Assists Nodes in developing internal dissemination projects
and developing partnerships for internal dissemination.
Tracks and describes dissemination activities within the CTN.
Promotes dissemination research using CTN as a platform.
Reports to Executive Committee as required
CHAIRS
NIDA
Paula Horvatich /
Richard Drandoff
 Greg Brigham
 John Hamilton
 Betsy Wells
 Jeffrey Selzer



Steve Martino
Mary Ann Stephens
 Theresa Montini
 Ming Shih
 Jack Stein
 Suman Rao King
 Ron Dobbins


Denny Pintello
Harold Perl

Miller, W.R., Sorensen, J.L., Selzer, J.A., & Brigham, G.S. (2006).
Disseminating evidence-based practices in substance abuse
treatment: A review with suggestions. Journal of Substance Abuse
Treatment, 31(1), 25-39.

Miller, W.R., Zweben, J.E., & Johnson, W.R. (2005). Evidence-based
treatment: Why, what, where, when, and how? Journal of
Substance Abuse Treatment, 29, 267-276.

Miller, W.R. & Manuel, J.K. (2008). How large must a treatment
effect be before it matters to practitioners? An estimation method
and demonstration. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27(5), 524-528.

Stitzer, M.L. & Kellogg, S. (2007). Large-scale dissemination
efforts in drug abuse treatment clinics. Pp. 241-260 in S.T.
Higgins, K. Silverman, & S.H. Heil (eds.). Contingency Management
in Substance Abuse Treatment. New York: Guilford Press.

Abraham, A.J., Knudsen, H.K., Rothrauff, T.C., & Roman, P.M. (2010). The
adoption of alcohol pharmacotherapies in the Clinical Trials Network: The
influence of research network participation., 275-283. Journal of
Substance Abuse Treatment , 38(3).

Baer, J.S., Wells, E.A., Rosengren, D.B., Hartzler, B., Beadnell, B.A., &
Dunn, C. (2009). Agency context and tailored training in technology
transfer: A pilot evaluation of motivational interviewing training for
community counselors. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 37(2), 191202.

Haug, N.A., Shopshire, M., Tajima, B.M., Gruber, V., & Guydish, J.R.
(2008). Adoption of evidence-based practices among substance abuse
treatment providers. Journal of Drug Education, 38(2), 181-192.

Guydish, J.R., Tajima, B.M., Manser, S.T., & Jessup, M.A. (2007).
Strategies to encourage adoption in multisite clinical trials. Journal of
Substance Abuse Treatment, 32(2), 177-188.





Buprenorphine Treatment: A Training for
Multidisciplinary Addiction Professionals.
Treatment Planning M.A.T.R.S. – Utilizing the ASI to
Make Required Data Collection Useful.
Short Term Opioid Withdrawal Using Buprenorphine
Promoting Awareness of Motivation Incentives
(PAMI)
Motivational Interviewing Assessment: Supervisory
Tools for Enhancing Proficiency (MIA-STEP)






RUC Blending Product
Workgoups
Training of Trainer (TOT)
events
Across-node training
needs assessments
Local Trainings
Regional Dissemination
Conferences
Interactive websites (e.g.,
for technical assistance
with Motivational
Incentives)
2010 - Albuquerque, NM
2008 - Cincinnati, OH
2006 - Seattle, WA
2005 - Miami Beach, FL
2004 - Detroit, MI
2003 - Westminster, CO
2002 - New York, NY
2000 - Los Angeles, CA

March 24, 2009 - Methods for Disseminating Evidence-based
Treatments from the Frontlines of Community Treatment
Programs
 Adapting Evidence-based Treatments to Clinical Practice: Contingency
Management in Action
 The Use of Written Materials to Disseminate Information about
Treatment and Recovery to Patients
 A Quality Improvement Initiative to Integrate Trauma Treatment in
Clinical Services: The Case of Seeking Safety at Residence XII
 Dissemination of Evidence-base Treatments through Organizational
Change: The Renewal Team Project at Connecticut Renaissance
 Disseminating Evidence-based Treatment through the CTN
Dissemination Library: A Live Demonstration
http://ctndisseminationlibrary.org
12000
10000
8000
6000
Visitors
4000
Articles Sent to Users by the Library
(Jan-Mar 2010: 104+)
2000
0
2009
350
Visitors to the Library
(Jan-Mar 2010: 3977 already!)
300
2006
2007
2008
250
200
Items Sent
150
100
After the
Workshop!
50
0
2006
2007
2008
2009
∙ Implementing Evidence-Based Treatments ∙
Dissemination Workshop Online
Methods from the Frontlines of Community Treatment Programs
Promotional push (free CEUs!) began in March - flyer
and email sent widely.
March 8 - March 31:
Went from 0 test-takers to 60!
From a substance abuse counselor in Oregon: “The web
information was easy to access and I like the variety in the
workshop discussions. . . It was designed with me in mind. If I
can do it, anyone can!”
Get started at the CTN Dissemination Library:
http://ctndisseminationlibrary.org
“…most CTN nodes have more sites using at least some of
the tested interventions, but why are not all sites using
almost all “effective” interventions? I am definitely not
suggesting these sites should be forced or even incentivized
to do those interventions that the CTN has found to be
effective. I am asking why more of these interventions are
not being used especially among those who have had the
most experience, or at least exposure to them?”
(McLellan, 2010)



“This meets a need our patients
have and it provides a more
standard way of dealing with it.”

“Is the outcome you obtained worth
what it will cost me to train
counselors and supervise them?”

“Will the extra cost be justified in
producing a lasting effect on my
clients?”

“We don’t have trained medical
personnel available.”

“The State won’t pay us for that.”
“The patients really liked
participating and responded well to
the intervention.”
“Data we collected indicated our
patients were doing well with this
intervention.”

“It was easy to learn, and the
counselors liked delivering it.”

“We’re a drug-free, abstinencebased program.”

“ The format fit within what the
state supports.”

“We’re just a small program.”
CONTINUE TO…





Foster training nationally
and in the nodes
Support development of
new Blending Products
Encourage platform
studies of technology
transfer methods
Assess training needs
Provide technical
assistance to CTPs trying
to implement EBPs
CONSIDER…
Fostering bidirectional
dialogue about what CTN
interventions should be
adopted
 Encouraging ongoing
collection of economic
evaluations in CTN protocols
to inform providers’ decisions
 Disseminating economic data
broadly to nodes and CTP
partners
