Dialectical behaviour therapy and 12‐step programmes for substance use disorder: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.
Saved in:
| Title: | Dialectical behaviour therapy and 12‐step programmes for substance use disorder: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Giannelli, Ezechiele, Gold, Christian, Bieleninik, Lucja, Ghetti, Claire, Gelo, Omar C. G. |
| Source: | Counselling & Psychotherapy Research. Sep2019, Vol. 19 Issue 3, p274-285. 12p. 1 Diagram, 2 Charts, 6 Graphs. |
| Subjects: | Substance abuse treatment, Alcoholics Anonymous, Comparative studies, Confidence intervals, Meta-analysis, Support groups, Systematic reviews, Treatment programs, Dialectical behavior therapy, Treatment effectiveness, Descriptive statistics |
| Abstract: | Background: Research on dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) or 12‐step programmes has shown inconclusive results; no systematic review has directly compared the two. Objectives: The goals of this meta‐analytic review were to assess if DBT is more effective than treatment as usual (TAU) and if DBT is more effective than 12‐step programmes (including twelve‐step facilitation [TSF] and self‐help groups like Alcoholics Anonymous) for substance use disorder (SUD). Methods: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and extracted data on the following outcomes: reduction in substance use, retention in treatment, severity of substance dependence/abuse and severity of mental health symptoms. Studies involved adult (>18 years) women with SUD, according to DSM‐5 or the equivalent diagnoses in DSM‐IV. Three RCTs met the inclusion criteria and contained appropriate data for meta‐analysis (75 participants). Results: No significant effects of DBT have been found compared to 12‐step programmes. Comparing DBT with TAU, we found a beneficial short‐term (1 RCT, n = 12, SMD = −0.84; 95% CI [−1.64, −0.04]) and long‐term (2 RCTs, n = 29, SMD = −1.26; 95% CI [−2.13, −0.40]) effect of DBT on severity of substance use. Conclusions: Despite the limited evidence of the present review, contextual evidence supports DBT and 12‐step programmes. RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed to better elucidate the impact of both treatments on SUD and facilitate the comparison between DBT and 12 steps programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Counselling & Psychotherapy Research is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Background: Research on dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) or 12‐step programmes has shown inconclusive results; no systematic review has directly compared the two. Objectives: The goals of this meta‐analytic review were to assess if DBT is more effective than treatment as usual (TAU) and if DBT is more effective than 12‐step programmes (including twelve‐step facilitation [TSF] and self‐help groups like Alcoholics Anonymous) for substance use disorder (SUD). Methods: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and extracted data on the following outcomes: reduction in substance use, retention in treatment, severity of substance dependence/abuse and severity of mental health symptoms. Studies involved adult (>18 years) women with SUD, according to DSM‐5 or the equivalent diagnoses in DSM‐IV. Three RCTs met the inclusion criteria and contained appropriate data for meta‐analysis (75 participants). Results: No significant effects of DBT have been found compared to 12‐step programmes. Comparing DBT with TAU, we found a beneficial short‐term (1 RCT, n = 12, SMD = −0.84; 95% CI [−1.64, −0.04]) and long‐term (2 RCTs, n = 29, SMD = −1.26; 95% CI [−2.13, −0.40]) effect of DBT on severity of substance use. Conclusions: Despite the limited evidence of the present review, contextual evidence supports DBT and 12‐step programmes. RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed to better elucidate the impact of both treatments on SUD and facilitate the comparison between DBT and 12 steps programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 14733145 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/capr.12228 |
