Iatrogenic effects of psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders: prevalence, predictors, prevention.

Moos RH. Iatrogenic effects of psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders: prevalence, predictors, prevention. Addiction. 2005 May 1; 100(5):595-604.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• RCS 90-001 – Research Career Scientist Award

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

AIMS: To examine the prevalence and personal and intervention-related predictors of potential iatrogenic effects associated with psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders and provide a conceptual framework to guide further research on such effects. METHOD: A review of relevant studies focuses on the prevalence and predictors of potential iatrogenic effects of psychosocial treatment and prevention programs for substance use disorders. RESULTS: Between 7% and 15% of patients who participate in psychosocial treatment for substance use disorders may be worse off subsequent to treatment than before. In addition, several controlled trials of substance use prevention have shown some apparent iatrogenic effects, including more positive expectations about substance use and a rise in alcohol use and alcohol-related problems. Probable person-related predictors of deterioration associated with treatment include younger age and unmarried status, more serious current diagnoses and substance use problems and more psychiatric and interpersonal problems. Probable intervention-related predictors of deterioration include lack of bonding; lack of monitoring; confrontation, criticism and high emotional arousal; deviancy modeling; and stigma, low or inappropriate expectations and lack of challenge. CONCLUSION: A significant minority of individuals with substance use problems appear to deteriorate during or shortly after participation in treatment or prevention programs. Safety standards and monitoring procedures are needed to routinely identify potential adverse consequences of intervention programs; research is needed to clarify whether deterioration is due to iatrogenic effects of interventions and to identify new approaches to counteract any such effects.