Residential Treatment of Methamphetamine Users

Correlates of Drop-Out from California Alcohol and Drug Data System (CADDS), 1994-1997

Published in: Addiction Research, v. 8, no. 1, 2000, p. 65-79

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2000

by Margaret A. Maglione, Brian Chao, M. Douglas Anglin

Read More

Access further information on this document at Addiction Research

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

This paper explores correlates of retention among 2,570 methamphetamine users entering public residential treatment programs in California from January 1, 1994 through September 30, 1997. A secondary analysis of the California Alcohol and Drug Data System (CADDS) was performed and predictors of drop-out before treatment completion (as measured by a retention of 90 days or more) were determined using logistic regression. Overall, 31.1% of methamphetamine users completed at least 90 days of treatment: very close to that for users of all other drugs (32.0%). As expected, methamphetamine users with more severe drug use (used daily or injected) were less likely to complete treatment. Those under coerced treatment were significantly more likely to complete treatment than other methamphetamine users. Clients who reported prior treatment experience were less likely to drop out. Surprisingly, men were significantly more likely than women to drop out of treatment before 90 days. Until studies currently collecting primary data on methamphetamine treatment are completed, the present secondary analysis provides a useful foundation upon which future research and intervention strategies may be based.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.