A pilot trial of contingency management for stimulant use in a low-barrier syringe service program
Résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVE: To pilot test the efficacy of contingency management (CM) for stimulant use disorder (StimUD) among syringe service program (SSP) recipients. METHODS: This randomized, parallel-groups, 12-week pilot trial was conducted in Burlington, Vermont from 02/24-07/24. Twenty-seven individuals with StimUD participating in SSP services were randomized to health education (HE) plus CM for session attendance (HE+Att-CM) (n = 13) or HE plus CM for stimulant abstinence (HE+Abs-CM) (n = 14). Stimulant use monitoring was examined twice-weekly using point-of-care urine drug tests (UDTs). HE+Att-CM participants earned incentives for UDT samples independent of results. HE+Abs-CM participants earned incentives for stimulant-negative UDT samples. The primary outcome was the percentage of participants stimulant-negative by week. Missing UDTs were treated as stimulant positive. Outcomes were compared between conditions using repeated measures mixed models for categorical data based on generalized estimating equations using a logistic link function. RESULTS: The percentage of participants stimulant-negative was greater in the HE+Abs-CM condition averaging 22.6% (weekly range, 7.1%-28.6%) compared to 3.2% (weekly range, 0%-7.7%) in the HE+Att-CM condition (p = .014). CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide preliminary experimental evidence that CM reduces stimulant use among individuals participating in low-barrier services at a community-based SSP.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- A pilot trial of contingency management for stimulant use in a low-barrier syringe service program
- Date Crossref
- 01/08/2026
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.