Bridging Disciplinary Boundaries (January 11 - 14, 2007)

Objective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of Strengths Oriented Family Therapy (SOFT) and The Seven Challenges® (7C) group treatment for adolescent substance abuse. This study was part of a larger program called Project Iowa SCY.

Method. Participants received baseline assessments as part of the study screening process that involved a two-session assessment and referral service. During the initial visit the teen was interviewed with the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (GAIN-I) while the parent completed collateral measures (i.e., GAIN-CI). Upon completion of these assessments, the youth and parent set a return appointment to discuss the results of the assessment, a called Strengths Oriented Referrals for Teenagers (SORT). At the time of the SORT they received clinical recommendations and were informed of study eligibility if recommendations were for outpatient treatment. Then, a research assistant met with eligible teens and parents to inform them about and invite them to participate in our study. If the youth and parent chose to participate in the study, the research assistant oriented them to study procedures. After signing a consent document, the research assistant asked for information to locate the family and youth in the future and administered additional intake measures supplementing the GAIN I assessment. Participants were then randomized to treatment condition. Finally, the research assistant scheduled follow-up sessions with the youth for 3, 6, 9, and 12-month follow up interviews. Parents participated in the 6 and 12 interviews. Enrollment into the randomized study ended in August 2005. This study reports on all clients that had completed six month follow ups through September 30th, 2005. Retention was at least 85% for both 3 and 6 month follow-ups.

Results. Youth participants in both treatment conditions improved significantly on substance use frequency, substance problems, and emotional problems. However, analyses revealed that treatment condition by participant characteristic interactions (i.e., conduct disorder, victimization) and between group differences were not significant. Finally, we found satisfaction to be high for both treatments, but higher for SOFT, and that services were delivered as planned.

Conclusion. Although SOFT and 7C produced significant clinical improvement at 6 months, differences between groups at 3 and 6 month follow-up points were not significant. These results were comparable to existing adolescent treatment models.

Implications for Policy & Practice. Social workers have been involved in drug treatment and family treatment for decades. This study allowed the comparison of two models of treatment for adolescent drug abuse by coordinating the efforts of social workers, chemical addiction counselors, psychologists, public health workers, educators and physicians. We emphasized the social work person-in-environment approach for all disciplines involved which helped unify our effort.