An interventional study of Cash CM and Voucher CM in Substance Related Disorders, Drug Addiction and Substance Abuse, sponsored by Treatment Research Institute. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-03-28.
Sponsored by Treatment Research Institute · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
Contingency management (CM) is a demonstrably efficacious intervention for substance abuse and dependence. Although CM protocols have employed a variety of reinforcers, they have almost exclusively relied upon non-cash privileges (e.g., take-home methadone doses), prizes, or vouchers that can be exchanged for goods or services. Despite the strong empirical support for CM, our research suggests that concerns relating to its cost and safety (e.g., potential for harm caused by rewards undermining intrinsic motivation or being sold to purchase drugs) have hindered its transfer to real-world practice. The exclusive use of non-cash CM likely stems from the untested assumption that clients will use cash incentives to buy drugs or engage in other high-risk behaviors. This assumption is problematic for two reasons. First, the use of non-cash incentives may add substantial costs and complexity to CM protocols. Second, the use of non-cash incentives may reduce the efficacy of CM interventions, as research suggests that cash may be a more effective reinforcer than vouchers. This study examines both practical and ethical issues relating to cash-based CM procedures. This study consists of three phases; a main experiment, a "Cash Bowl" pilot, and a "Thinning" Pilot.
In the main phase of the study, we used a 3-group randomized study to compare the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and ethics of a (1) voucher-based CM intervention, (2) cash-based CM intervention, and (3) non-CM intervention. Two hundred thirty seven consenting cocaine-dependent clients were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions. In this main we examined outcomes related to (1) efficacy, including UDS-confirmed abstinence and counseling attendance; (2) cost-effectiveness; and (3) ethics, including the effects on intrinsic motivation, drug use, and other high-risk behavior. This investigation addressed practical issues pertaining to the transfer of CM interventions into community-based treatment programs, and provided empirical evidence refuting ethical criticisms that have been levied against the use of cash and CM interventions.
The second phase expanded on the main study with a pilot examination of a probabilistic reinforcement CM schedule. Probabilistic methods are considered less expensive to implement yet equally efficacious, as a reward is not provided each time target behaviors are exhibited, yet similar outcomes result. In this pilot study, an additional 70 participants were randomized into either a traditional voucher-based probability reinforcement CM schedule, ("FishBowl" CM), a cash-based probability reinforcement CM schedule ("CashBowl" CM), or a standard non-CM intervention. As in the main study, we examined these conditions in terms of efficacy, associated costs and cost-effectiveness, and potential ethical risks.
The third phase of this study is a pilot that seeks to examine the efficacy of a traditional "thinning" reinforcement schedule compared to an escalating reinforcement schedule or a treatment-as-usual (non-contingency management control) condition in improving the during-treatment and post-treatment outcomes of cocaine dependent outpatients in community-based treatment. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions: Escalating CM Condition (n = 15), Traditional ("thinning") CM Condition (n = 15), and Non-CM Control Condition (n = 15). The intervention will last a total of 16 weeks. Participants assigned to each of the experimental conditions will receive different contingency and reward procedures during study weeks 1-12; they will receive identical contingency and reward procedures during study weeks 13-16. Participants assigned to the control condition will not receive any contingencies or rewards during the entire 16 week study. As in the main study, we will examine these conditions in terms of efficacy, associated costs and cost-effectiveness, and potential ethical risks.
2,124 studies on the registry are indexed under Substance-Related Disorders; 393 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 352 is above the median of 108 across 1,727 interventional studies indexed under Substance-Related Disorders.
Browse Substance-Related Disorders studies →Treatment Research Institute is the lead sponsor of 19 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Participants in the voucher condition will earn voucher incentives according to the schedule developed by Higgins (1993, 1994). It involves a 12-week escalating schedule of reinforcement to initiate cocaine abstinence.
Behavioral: Voucher CM
Participants in the cash CM condition will be assigned to the identical 12-week escalating schedule of reinforcement, except that the contingencies will be provided in cash rather than vouchers, and no negotiation process will be involved (although counselors may recommend how clients might best spend their money).
Behavioral: Cash CM
Participants in the non-CM control condition will provide urine specimens during the 12-week period as do the two experimental conditions, but will receive no contingent rewards other than praise from the RAs.
Participants in the cash CM condition will be assigned to the identical 12-week escalating schedule of reinforcement, except that the contingencies will be provided in cash rather than vouchers, and no negotiation process will be involved (although counselors may recommend how clients might best spend their money).
Participants in the voucher condition will earn voucher incentives according to the schedule developed by Higgins (1993, 1994). It involves a 12-week escalating schedule of reinforcement to initiate cocaine abstinence.
Drug abstinence among cocaine-dependent outpatients in community-based treatment.
Determine the differential efficacy of cash CM, voucher CM and standard (non-CM) outpatient treatment in improving during-treatment and post-treatment outcomes (i.e., drug abstinence, treatment attendance, and reduction in psychosocial problems) among cocaine-dependent outpatients in community-based treatment.
Time frame: During treatment (12 weeks)
Incremental costs
Determine the incremental costs of implementing cash CM and voucher CM and non-CM outpatient treatment for cocaine-dependent outpatients in community-based treatment.
Time frame: During Treatment (12 weeks)
Cost-effectiveness
Determine the cost-effectiveness of implementing cash CM and voucher CM and non-CM outpatient treatment for cocaine-dependent outpatients in community-based treatment.
Time frame: During Treatment (12 weeks)
This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Treatment Research Institute