A systematic review of brief, freely accessible, and valid self-report measures for substance use disorders and treatment.

Autor: Stewart RE; University of Pennsylvania, Department of Psychiatry, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: Rebecca.Stewart@pennmedicine.upenn.edu., Cardamone NC; University of Pennsylvania, Department of Psychiatry, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: Nicholas.Cardamone@pennmedicine.upenn.edu., Schachter A; University of Pennsylvania, Department of Psychiatry, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: aschach@sas.upenn.edu., Becker C; George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ross Hall, 2300 Eye Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20037, USA. Electronic address: cbecker@gwu.edu., McKay JR; University of Pennsylvania, Department of Psychiatry, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Crescenz Department of Veteran Affairs Medical Center, 3900 Woodland Ave, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: jimrache@pennmedicine.upenn.edu., Becker-Haimes EM; University of Pennsylvania, Department of Psychiatry, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Hall Mercer Community Mental Health, University of Pennsylvania, 800 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA. Electronic address: emily.haimes@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Drug and alcohol dependence [Drug Alcohol Depend] 2023 Feb 01; Vol. 243, pp. 109729. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Dec 09.
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2022.109729
Abstrakt: Background: Self-report measures can improve evidence-based assessment practices in substance use disorder treatment, but many measures are burdensome and costly, limiting their utility in community practice and non-specialty healthcare settings. This systematic review identified and evaluated the psychometric properties of brief, free, and readily accessible self-report measures of substance use and related factors.
Methods: We searched two electronic databases (PsycINFO and PubMed) in May 2021 for published literature on scales, measures, or instruments related to substance use, substance use treatment, and recovery, and extracted the names of all measures. Measures were included if they were: (1) brief (25 items or fewer), (2) freely accessible in a ready-to-use format, and (3) had published psychometric data.
Results: An initial search returned 411 measures, of which 73 (18%) met criteria for inclusion. Included measures assessed a variety of substances (e.g., alcohol, nicotine, opioids, cannabinoids, cocaine) and measurement domains (e.g., use, severity, expectancies, withdrawal). Among these measures, 14 (19%) were classified as psychometrically "excellent," 27 (37%) were rated as "good," 32 (44%) were "adequate."
Conclusions: Despite the shift toward evidence-based assessment in substance use disorder treatment in the last twenty years, key areas of public health concern are lacking pragmatic, psychometrically valid measures. Among the brief measures we reviewed, less than a fifth met criteria for psychometric "excellence" and most of these instruments fell into one measurement domain: screening for problematic substance use. Future research should focus both on improving the evidence base for existing brief self-report measures and creating new low-burden measures for specific substances and treatment constructs.
(Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: