Hanife YILMAZ ÇENGEL
(İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Psikoloji Bölümü, İstanbul, Türkiye)
S. Utku UZUN
(Lüleburgaz Devlet Hastanesi, Kırklareli,Türkiye)
Müge BOZKURT
(İstanbul Üniversitesi,Tıp Fakültesi,Psikiyatri Anabilim Dalı,İstanbul,Türkiye)
E. Cüneyt EVREN
(Bakırköy Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi,Psikiyatri ve Nöroloji Anabilim Dalı,İstanbul,Türkiye)
Yıl: 2020Cilt: 21Sayı: 4ISSN: 1302-6631Sayfa Aralığı: 373 - 379İngilizce

69 0
Factors affecting treatment compliance in patients with substance use disorder under probation
Objective:The present study aims to determine the factors that affectingthe treatment compliance in patients with substance use disorder (SUD) under probation in terms of sociodemographics, substance use characteristics, addiction severity, perceived family support, treatment motivation and impulsiveness. Methods:In this study, 93substance use disorder patients who were taken three-month outpatient treatment program were included consecu-tively. Sociodemographic Data Form, Addiction Profile Index (API), Perceived Social Support from Family Scale (PSS-Fa), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale and Treatment Motivation Questionnaire were applied to patients before the treatment program. Results:At the end of three months follow-up period 55 (59.1%) of the 93 patients were treatment-incompatible while 38 (40.9%) were treatment-compatible.When the tests results are examined; the craving subscale score of API had significantly higher and the PSS-Fa scores had significantly lower in the treat-ment-incompatible group than the treatment-compatible group. Conclusion:In our study, craving and low per-ceived family support were found to be factors affecting treatment compliance in patients with SUD on probation. These results emphasized the importance of including the family in the treatment program, evaluating craving at each session and providing pharmacological or psychotherapeutic support for craving.
DergiAraştırma MakalesiErişime Açık
  • 1. Kaeble D, Glaze L, Tsoutis A, Minton T. Correcti-onal Populations in the United States, 2014. Bureau of Justice Statistics 2016; 1-19.
  • 2. Bilici R, Ögel K, Bahadır GG, Maçkan A, Orhan N, Tuna O. Treatment outcomes of drug users in probation period: three months follow-up. Psychi-atry Clin Psychopharmacol 2018; 28(2):149-155.
  • 3. Turan R, Yargic I. The relationship between sub-stance abusetreatment completion, sociodemog-raphics, substance use characteristics, and crimi-nal history. Subst Abus 2012; 33(2):92-98.
  • 4. Mackensen G, Cottone RR. Family structural issues and chemical dependency: A review of the literature from 1985 to 1991. Am J Fam Ther 1992; 20(3):227–241.
  • 5. Conner BT, Longshore D, Anglin MD. Modeling attitude towards drug treament: the role of internal motivation, external pressure, and dramatic relief. J Behav Health Serv 2009; 36(2):150-158.
  • 6. Evren C, Saatçioğlu Ö, Dalbudak E, Danışmant BS, Çakmak D, Ryan RM. Factorial structure and reliability and validity of Turkish version treatment motivation questionnaire (TMQ) in alcohol depen-dents. J Depend 2006; 90(216):117-122.
  • 7. Cuomo C, Sarchiapone M, Giannantonio M Di, Mancini M, Roy A. Aggression, impulsivity, per-sonality traits, and childhood trauma of prisoners with substance abuse and addiction. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2008; 34(3):339-345.
  • 8. Lane SD, Cherek DR, Rhoades HM, Pietras CJ, Tcheremissine OV. Relationships among labora-tory and psychometric measures of impulsivity: implications in substance abuse and dependence. Addict Disord Their Treat 2003; 2(2):33-40.
  • 9. Patkar AA, Murray HW, Mannelli P, Gottheil E, Weinstein SP, Vergare MJ. Pre-treatment mea-sures of impulsivity, aggression and sensation seeking are associated with treatment outcome for African-American cocaine-dependent patients. J Addict Dis 2004; 23(2):109-122.
  • 10. Berkowitz L. Is criminal violence normative behav-ior? J Res CrimeDelinq 1978; 15(2):148-161.
  • 11. Ogel K, Bilici R, Guvenc Bahadir G, Mackan A, Orhan N, Tuna O. The effectiveness of the tobac-co, alcohol and drug dependence treatment pro-gram (SAMBA) on drug users in probation. Ana-tolian Journal of Psychiatry 2016; 17(4):270-277.
  • 12. Ogel K, Evren C, Karadağ F, Tamar Gürol D. Bağımlılık Profil İndeksi’nin (BAPİ) geliştirilmesi, geçerlik ve güvenilirliği. Türk Psikiyatr Derg 2012; 23(4):264-273.
  • 13. Procidano ME, Heller K. Measures of perceived social support from friends and from family: three validation studies. Am J Community Psychol 1983; 11(1):1-24.
  • 14. Eskin M. Reliability of the Turkish version of the Perceived Social Support from Friends and Family scales, Scale for Interpersonal Behavior, and Suicide Probability Scale. J Clin Psychol 1993; 49(4):515-522.
  • 15. Güleç H, Tamam L, Güleç MY, Turhan M, Karakuş G, Zengin M, et al. Psychometric properties of the Turkish Version of the Barratt. Bull Clin Psycho-pharmacol 2008;18(March 2014):251-258.
  • 16.Ryan RM, Plant RW, O’Malley S. Initial motiva-tions for alcohol treatment: relations with patient characteristics, treatment involvement, and drop-out. Addict Behav 1995; 20(3):279-297.
  • 17. Brown R. Associations with substance abuse treatment completion among drug court partici-pants. Subst Use Misuse 2010; 45(12):1874-1891.
  • 18. Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Sup-port. J Pers Assess 1988; 52(1):30-41.
  • 19. Velleman R, Templeton L, Copello A. The role of the family in preventing and intervening with sub-stance use and misuse: a comprehensive review of family interventions, with a focus on young people. Drug Alcohol Rev 2005; 24(2):93-109.
  • 20. KnightDK, Logan SM, Simpson DD. Predictors of program completion for women in residential substance abuse treatment. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2001; 27(1):1-18.
  • 21. Evans E, Jaffe A, Urada D, Anglin MD. Differential outcomes of court-supervised substance abuse treatment among California parolees and proba-tioners. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2012; 56(4):539-556.
  • 22. Lang MA, Belenko S. Predicting retention in a resi-dential drug treatment alternative to prison pro-gram. J Subst Abuse Treat 2000; 19(2):145-160.
  • 23. Roque L, Lurigio AJ. An Outcome Evaluation of a Treatment Readiness Group Program for Proba-tioners with Substance Use Problems. J Offender Rehabil 2009; 48(8):744-757.
  • 24. Perry JL, Carroll ME. The role of impulsive behav-ior in drug abuse.Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2008; 200(1):1-26.
  • 25. Moeller FG, Dougherty DM, Barratt ES, Schmitz JM, Swann AC, Grabowski J. The impact of impul-sivity on cocaine use and retention in treatment. J Subst Abuse Treat 2001; 21(4):193-198.
  • 26. Carli V, Mandelli L, Zaninotto L, Alberti S, Roy A, Serretti A, et al. Trait-aggressiveness and impulsi-vity: Role of psychological resilience and child-hood trauma in a sample of male prisoners. Nord J Psychiatry 2014; 68(1):8-17.
  • 27. Cosden M, Basch JE, Campos E, Greenwell A, Barazani S, Walker S. Effects of motivation and problem severity on court-based drug treatment. Crime Delinq 2006; 52(4):599-618.
  • 28. Hiller ML, Knight K, Simpson DD. Risk factors that predict dropout from corrections-based treatment for drug abuse. Prison J 1999; 79(4):411-430.
  • 29. Bahr SJ, Harris PE (Lish), Strobell JH, Taylor BM. An evaluation of a short-term drug treatment for jail inmates. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2013; 57(10):1275-1296.

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © 2019 Tüm Hakları Saklıdır.