{"title":"物质戒断的经济激励:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Damon Phillips-Chantelois, Kelsey Sharrad, Shagufta Perveen, Tahlia Gammatopoulos, Nawal Usmani, Karen Szumlinski, Kristin Carson-Chahhoud","doi":"10.1093/ntr/ntaf038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Substance Use Disorder (SUD) increased by 45% globally in the past 10 years, representing one of the largest increases in risk factors for disease. Financial incentives (FI) are a promising tool to promote health behavior change, including substance abstinence. We aim to address a 10-year gap in the evidence and identify key characteristics for optimal treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was undertaken per Cochrane guidelines and the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Medline, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched up to 11th September 2024. Included studies offered FI to substance users in exchange for substance abstinence compared to an alternative intervention control. The primary outcome extracted was substance abstinence at latest follow-up. Secondary outcomes such as cost-effectiveness, adverse events, and motivational assessments were also extracted. Risk of bias was analyzed using the RoB 1 tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5,042 studies identified, 246 were shortlisted for full-text review and included 39 RCTs (N = 27,845) for meta-analysis. SUD categories spanning nicotine (n = 30, OR = 1.83; 95%CI = 1.65-2.03, p < .001), alcohol (n = 3, OR = 4.69, 95%CI = 1.59-13.86, p = .005), stimulants (n = 2, OR = 3.52; 95%CI = 0.36-34.18, p = 0.28), and polydrug (n = 2, OR = 3.11, 95%CI = 0.53-18.25, p = 0.21) were meta-analyzed for improving abstinence rates. Cannabis and opioid sub-groups could not be meta-analyzed. Overall effectiveness was significant for FI improving substance abstinence rates (OR=1.93, 95%CI=1.66-2.24, p<.001) with continued significance through 12-month or longer follow-ups (OR=1.78; 95%CI=1.50-2.12, p<.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings from this meta-analysis suggest that FI are an effective tool for increasing substance abstinence, particularly nicotine and alcohol, however, future research is recommended for other substances such as stimulants and opioids.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the use of financial incentives for substance use disorders provides the first update on trends in this field since 2014 and the first meta-analysis since 2006. Notably, this review challenges the concerns of sustainability and effects on motivation which have withheld the clinical application of financial incentives for substance use disorders.</p>","PeriodicalId":19241,"journal":{"name":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Financial incentives for substance abstinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Damon Phillips-Chantelois, Kelsey Sharrad, Shagufta Perveen, Tahlia Gammatopoulos, Nawal Usmani, Karen Szumlinski, Kristin Carson-Chahhoud\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ntr/ntaf038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Substance Use Disorder (SUD) increased by 45% globally in the past 10 years, representing one of the largest increases in risk factors for disease. Financial incentives (FI) are a promising tool to promote health behavior change, including substance abstinence. We aim to address a 10-year gap in the evidence and identify key characteristics for optimal treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was undertaken per Cochrane guidelines and the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Medline, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched up to 11th September 2024. Included studies offered FI to substance users in exchange for substance abstinence compared to an alternative intervention control. The primary outcome extracted was substance abstinence at latest follow-up. Secondary outcomes such as cost-effectiveness, adverse events, and motivational assessments were also extracted. Risk of bias was analyzed using the RoB 1 tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5,042 studies identified, 246 were shortlisted for full-text review and included 39 RCTs (N = 27,845) for meta-analysis. SUD categories spanning nicotine (n = 30, OR = 1.83; 95%CI = 1.65-2.03, p < .001), alcohol (n = 3, OR = 4.69, 95%CI = 1.59-13.86, p = .005), stimulants (n = 2, OR = 3.52; 95%CI = 0.36-34.18, p = 0.28), and polydrug (n = 2, OR = 3.11, 95%CI = 0.53-18.25, p = 0.21) were meta-analyzed for improving abstinence rates. Cannabis and opioid sub-groups could not be meta-analyzed. Overall effectiveness was significant for FI improving substance abstinence rates (OR=1.93, 95%CI=1.66-2.24, p<.001) with continued significance through 12-month or longer follow-ups (OR=1.78; 95%CI=1.50-2.12, p<.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings from this meta-analysis suggest that FI are an effective tool for increasing substance abstinence, particularly nicotine and alcohol, however, future research is recommended for other substances such as stimulants and opioids.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the use of financial incentives for substance use disorders provides the first update on trends in this field since 2014 and the first meta-analysis since 2006. Notably, this review challenges the concerns of sustainability and effects on motivation which have withheld the clinical application of financial incentives for substance use disorders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nicotine & Tobacco Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nicotine & Tobacco Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntaf038\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntaf038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在过去10年中,全球物质使用障碍(SUD)增加了45%,是疾病危险因素增加最多的因素之一。财政激励(FI)是一个有希望的工具,以促进健康行为的改变,包括物质戒断。我们的目标是解决10年的证据差距,并确定最佳治疗的关键特征。方法:根据Cochrane指南和PRISMA 2020检查表对随机对照试验(rct)进行荟萃分析。Medline、PsycINFO和EMBASE检索截止到2024年9月11日。纳入的研究为物质使用者提供FI,以换取物质戒断,而不是替代干预控制。在最近的随访中提取的主要结局是物质戒断。次要结果,如成本效益、不良事件和动机评估也被提取出来。使用RoB 1工具分析偏倚风险。结果:在确定的5042项研究中,246项纳入了全文综述,包括39项rct (N = 27,845)进行meta分析。跨越尼古丁的SUD类别(n = 30, OR = 1.83;95%CI = 1.65 ~ 2.03, p < 0.001)、酒精(n = 3, OR = 4.69, 95%CI = 1.59 ~ 13.86, p = 0.005)、兴奋剂(n = 2, OR = 3.52;95%CI = 0.36-34.18, p = 0.28)和多药(n = 2, OR = 3.11, 95%CI = 0.53-18.25, p = 0.21)对改善戒断率进行meta分析。大麻和阿片类药物亚组无法进行meta分析。FI改善物质戒断率的总体效果显著(OR=1.93, 95%CI=1.66-2.24)。结论:本荟萃分析的结果表明,FI是增加物质戒断的有效工具,特别是尼古丁和酒精,然而,未来的研究建议用于其他物质,如兴奋剂和阿片类药物。本系统综述和荟萃分析探讨了物质使用障碍的财务激励的使用,提供了自2014年以来该领域的第一次趋势更新,也是自2006年以来的第一次荟萃分析。值得注意的是,这篇综述挑战了对可持续性和对动机的影响的关注,这些动机阻碍了对物质使用障碍的财务激励的临床应用。
Financial incentives for substance abstinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Introduction: Substance Use Disorder (SUD) increased by 45% globally in the past 10 years, representing one of the largest increases in risk factors for disease. Financial incentives (FI) are a promising tool to promote health behavior change, including substance abstinence. We aim to address a 10-year gap in the evidence and identify key characteristics for optimal treatment.
Methods: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was undertaken per Cochrane guidelines and the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Medline, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched up to 11th September 2024. Included studies offered FI to substance users in exchange for substance abstinence compared to an alternative intervention control. The primary outcome extracted was substance abstinence at latest follow-up. Secondary outcomes such as cost-effectiveness, adverse events, and motivational assessments were also extracted. Risk of bias was analyzed using the RoB 1 tool.
Results: Of 5,042 studies identified, 246 were shortlisted for full-text review and included 39 RCTs (N = 27,845) for meta-analysis. SUD categories spanning nicotine (n = 30, OR = 1.83; 95%CI = 1.65-2.03, p < .001), alcohol (n = 3, OR = 4.69, 95%CI = 1.59-13.86, p = .005), stimulants (n = 2, OR = 3.52; 95%CI = 0.36-34.18, p = 0.28), and polydrug (n = 2, OR = 3.11, 95%CI = 0.53-18.25, p = 0.21) were meta-analyzed for improving abstinence rates. Cannabis and opioid sub-groups could not be meta-analyzed. Overall effectiveness was significant for FI improving substance abstinence rates (OR=1.93, 95%CI=1.66-2.24, p<.001) with continued significance through 12-month or longer follow-ups (OR=1.78; 95%CI=1.50-2.12, p<.001).
Conclusions: Findings from this meta-analysis suggest that FI are an effective tool for increasing substance abstinence, particularly nicotine and alcohol, however, future research is recommended for other substances such as stimulants and opioids.
Implications: This systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the use of financial incentives for substance use disorders provides the first update on trends in this field since 2014 and the first meta-analysis since 2006. Notably, this review challenges the concerns of sustainability and effects on motivation which have withheld the clinical application of financial incentives for substance use disorders.
期刊介绍:
Nicotine & Tobacco Research is one of the world''s few peer-reviewed journals devoted exclusively to the study of nicotine and tobacco.
It aims to provide a forum for empirical findings, critical reviews, and conceptual papers on the many aspects of nicotine and tobacco, including research from the biobehavioral, neurobiological, molecular biologic, epidemiological, prevention, and treatment arenas.
Along with manuscripts from each of the areas mentioned above, the editors encourage submissions that are integrative in nature and that cross traditional disciplinary boundaries.
The journal is sponsored by the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT). It publishes twelve times a year.