The authors compared a group-delivered, theory-based, motivation-enhancing program (PRIME For Life« PFL, ná=á450) to an intervention as usual (IAU, ná=á72). Individuals convicted of a substance related offense in North Carolina, typically first offense alcohol and drug-impaired driving, participated in a PFL or IAU group. The authors compare the interventions on program satisfaction and changes made from preintervention to postintervention, and examined the moderating effects of demographics and alcohol dependence level. When significant, findings varied in magnitude from small to medium effects. Participants in both interventions showed intentions to use statistically significantly less alcohol and drugs in the future compared to their previous use, and differences between the groups were not statistically significant. Otherwise, findings favored PFL. PFL exhibited greater benefit than IAU on understanding tolerance, perceived risk for addiction, problem recognition, and program satisfaction. Additionally, IAU perceived less risk for negative consequences postintervention than they had at preintervention. Moderation analyses showed that the between-condition findings occurred regardless of gender, age, education, and number of alcohol dependence indicators. Additionally, younger people and those with more dependence indicators -- groups of particular concern -- showed the greatest change. Findings suggest that a motivation-enhancing approach can be effective in producing short-term change in factors that can help facilitate and sustain behavioral change. This is consistent with previous research on the use of motivational approaches, and extends such findings to suggest promise in group-based settings and with people across demographic categories and dependence levels. Future research should focus on larger studies looking at long-term behavioral change, including recidivism. (A) Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.
Abstract