Citation

Alemi F, Haack M, Nemes S. Addict. Behav. 2004; 29(4): 685-698.

Affiliation

College of Nursing and Health Science, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030-4444, USA. falemi@gmu.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.addbeh.2004.02.027

PMID

15135550

Abstract

At any point in time, a patient's return to drug use can be seen either as a temporary event or as a return to persistent use. There is no formal standard for distinguishing persistent drug use from an occasional relapse. This lack of standardization persists although the consequences of either interpretation can be life altering. In a drug court or regulatory situation, for example, misinterpreting relapse as return to drug use could lead to incarceration, loss of child custody, or loss of employment. A clinician who mistakes a client's relapse for persistent drug use may fail to adjust treatment intensity to client's needs. An empirical and standardized method for distinguishing relapse from persistent drug use is needed. This paper provides a tool for clinicians and judges to distinguish relapse from persistent use based on statistical analyses of patterns of client's drug use. To accomplish this, a control chart is created for time-in-between relapses. This paper shows how a statistical limit can be calculated by examining either the client's history or other clients in the same program. If client's time-in-between relapse exceeds the statistical limit, then the client has returned to persistent use. Otherwise, the drug use is temporary. To illustrate the method, it is applied to data from three family drug courts. The approach allows the estimation of control limits based on the client's as well as the court's historical patterns. The approach also allows comparison of courts based on recovery rates.

Language: en