Drug use and treatment success among gang and non-gang members in El Salvador: a prospective cohort study

Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy

Thom Browne¹  Melissa H Abadi²  Linda Young²  Matthew W Courser²  Stephen R Shamblen²  Knowlton W Johnson² 

[1] Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State, 2201 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20520, USA;Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Inc., 300 S. Fourth Street, Ste. 300, Louisville, KY 40208, USA

关键词: Outcome evaluation;    Drug abuse treatment;    El Salvador;    Gangs;   

Others  :  834036
DOI  :  10.1186/1747-597X-8-20

 received in 2012-12-20, accepted in 2013-05-08,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

This article focuses on examining drug abuse treatment (DAT) in El Salvador highlighting gang vs. non-gang membership differences in drug use and treatment outcomes.

Methods

Cross-sectional and prospective cohort designs were employed to examine the study aims. The 19 centers that met the study’s inclusion criteria of one year or less in planned treatment offered varying treatment services: individual, group, family, and vocational therapy, dual diagnosis treatment, psychological testing, 12-step program, and outreach and re-entry aftercare. Most directors describe their treatment approach as “spiritual.” Data were collected from 625 patients, directors, and staff from the 19 centers at baseline, of which 34 patients were former gang members. Seventy-two percent (72%) of the former patients (448) were re-interviewed six-months after leaving treatment and 48% were randomly tested for drug use.

Results

Eighty-nine percent (89%) of the DAT patients at baseline were classified as heavy alcohol users and 40% were using illegal drugs, i.e., crack, marijuana, cocaine, tranquilizers, opiates, and amphetamines. There were large decreases after treatment in heavy alcohol and illegal drug use, crime, and gang related risk activities. Gang members reported illegal drug use, crime, and gang related risk activity more than non-gang members, yet only 5% of the study participants were gang members; further, positive change in treatment outcomes among gang members were the same or larger as compared to non-gang members.

Conclusions

Alcohol use is the drug of choice among DAT patients in El Salvador with gang member patients having used illegal drugs more than non-gang members. The study shows that DAT centers successfully reduced the use of illegal drugs and alcohol among gang and non-gang members. Although our study could not include a control group, we believe that the DAT treatment centers in El Salvador contributed to producing this treatment success among former patients. These efforts should be continued and complemented by funding support from the Salvadoran government for DAT centers that obtain certification. In addition, tailored/alternative treatment modalities are needed for gang members in treatment for heavy drinking.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Johnson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Obot IS: Limits of substance-use interventions in developing countries. Lancet 2007, 369:1323-1329.
• [2]Perngparn U, Assanangkamoachai S, Pilley C, Aramratanna A: Drug and alcohol services in middle-income countries. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2008, 21:229-233.
• [3]Thirtalli J, Chand PK: The implications of medication development in the treatment of substance use disorders in developing countries. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2009, 22(3):274-280.
• [4]Uchtenhagen A: Substance use problems in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2004, 82(9):641.
• [5]Dickson-Gomez J, Bodnar G, Guevara CE, Rodriguez K, Rivas De Mendoza L, Corbett AM: With God’s help I can do it: crack users’ formal and informal recovery experiences in El Salvador. Subst Use Misuse 2011, 46:426-439.
• [6]Dickson-Gomez J: Structural factors influencing patterns of drug selling and use and HIV risk in the San Salvador metropolitan area. Med Anthropology Quarterly 2010, 24:157-181.
• [7]Dickson-Gomez J: Factores Estructurales relacionados a las drogas y violencia en El Salvador. El impacto de las drogas en la violencia: buscando soluciones. El Salvador: United Nations Development Program; 2004.
• [8]Ribando C: Gangs in Central America. CRS Report for Congress. 2005. Retrieved April 20, 2011 from http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/47140.pdf webcite
• [9]Reisman L: Breaking the vicious cycle: responding to central American youth gang violence. School of Advanced Int Stud Rev 2006, 26:147-152.
• [10]Archibold RC: New York Times. Gangs’ truce buys El Salvador a tenuous peace. 2012. Retrieved November 24, 2012 from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/world/americas/in-el-salvador-gang-truce-brings-tenuous-peace.html?emc=eta1 webcite
• [11]Bremer C: El Salvador gangs big headache for new patient [Electronic Version]. Reuters. 2009. Retrieved July 5, 2010 from http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/17/idUSN17291185 webcite
• [12]Dickson-Gomez J, Bodnar G, Guevara A, Rodriguez K, Gaborit M: HIV risk among street gangs in El Salvador. J Gang Res 2006, 13(2):1-26.
• [13]Santacruz Giralt M, Concha-Eastman A: Barrio adentro: La solidaridad violenta de las pandillas. San Salvador, El Salvador: OAS, Instituto Universitario de Opinion Publica; 2001.
• [14]Dickson-Gomez J, McAuliffe T, Rivas de Mendoza L, Glasman L, Gaborit M: The relationship between community structural characteristics, the context of crack use, and HIV risk behaviors in San Salvador, El Salvador. Subst Use Misuse 2012, 47:265-277.
• [15]Carr D, Bodnar G, Guevara A, Rodriguez K, Guevara R: Estudio Nacional: Prevalencia del consume de substancias psicoactivas en El Salvador. San Salvador: Fundacion Antidrogas de El Salvador (FUNDASALVA); 2004.
• [16]WorldLifeExpectency.com: Health profile: El Salvador. 2012. Retrieved May 21, 2013 from http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/country-health-profile/el-salvador webcite
• [17]World Health Organization (WHO): El Salvador: Socioeconomic context. 2011. Retrieved June 7, 2012: http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/profiles/slv.pdf webcite
• [18]CICAD & OAS: Training and certification for drug treatment counselors makes its mark in El Salvador [Electronic Version]. 2008. Retrieved July 5, 2010 from http://www.cicad.oas.org/oid/NEW/Information/Observer/08_02/default.asp webcite
• [19]SAMHSA [Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration]: Substance abuse: Clinical issues in intensive outpatient treatment. Rockville (MD); 2006. [Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series, No. 47, Report No.: (SMA) 06–4182] Author
• [20]Courser M, Johnson K, Young L, Shamblen S, Vanderhoff J, Carr D: An outcome evaluation of drug treatment in El Salvador. Research Monograph. Louisville, KY: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation-Louisville Center; 2011.
• [21]Bollen KA, Lennox R: Conventional wisdom on measurement: a structural equation perspective. Psychol Bull 1991, 10:305-314.
• [22]Dempster A, Laird N, Rubin D: Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J R Stat Soc, Series B 1977, 39:1-38.
• [23]Heckman JJ: The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. Ann Econ Soc Meas 1976, 5:475-492.
• [24]Heckman JJ: Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 1979, 47:153-161.
• [25]Raudenbush SW, Bryk A: Hierarchical Linear Models. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002.
• [26]Cohen J: Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edition. New York: Academic Press; 1988.
• [27]Ribando-Seelke C: Gangs in Central America, CRS Report for Congress. 2011. Retrieved January 3, 2011 from http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34112_20110103.pdf webcite
• [28]Gossop M: The clinical fallacy and treatment outcomes. Addiction 2008, 103:89-90.
• [29]Simpson DD, Curry SJ: Special issue: drug abuse treatment outcome study (DATOS). Psychol Addict Behav 1997, 11:211-337.
• [30]Condelli WS, Hubbard RL: Relationship between time spent in treatment and patient outcomes from therapeutic communities. J Subst Abuse Treat 1994, 11:25-33.
• [31]Hubbard EL, Craddock SG, Flynn PM, Anderson J, Etheridge RM: Overview of 1-year follow-up outcomes in the drug abuse treatment outcome study (DATOS). Psychol Addict Behav 1997, 11:261-278.
• [32]Johnson KW, Young L, Pan T, Zimmerman RS, Vanderhoff KJ: Therapeutic Communities (TC) drug treatment success in Thailand: A 2006 follow-up study. Research Monograph. Louisville, KY: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation-Louisville Center; 2007.
• [33]Johnson K, Pan Z, Young L, Vanderhoff J, Shamblen SR, Browne T, et al.: Therapeutic community drug treatment success in Peru: a follow-up outcome study. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2008, 3:1-15. BioMed Central Full Text
• [34]Johnson K, Young L, Shamblen SR, Suresh G, Browne T, Chookhare W: Evaluation of the therapeutic community treatment model in Thailand: policy implications for compulsory and prison-based treatment. Subst Use Misuse 2012, 47:889-909.
• [35]Melnick G, Hawke J, Wexler HK: Client perceptions of prison-based therapeutic community drug treatment programs. Prison J 2004, 84:121-138.
• [36]National Institute on Drug Abuse: Principles of drug addiction treatment: A research-based guide. 3rd edition. National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: NIH Publication No. 12-4180; 2012.
• [37]Johnson KW, Young LC, Suresh G, Berbaum ML: Drug abuse treatment training in Peru: a social policy experiment. Eval Rev 2002, 26:480-519.
• [38]Scott C: A replicable model for achieving over 90% follow-up rates in longitudinal studies of substance abusers. Drug Alcohol Depend 2004, 74(1):21-36.
• [39]Ali MW, Talukder E: Analysis of longitudinal binary data with missing data due to dropouts. J Biopharm Stat 2005, 15:993-1007.