U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Adaptive Interventions in Drug Court: A Pilot Experiment

NCJ Number
224374
Journal
Criminal Justice Review Volume: 33 Issue: 3 Dated: September 2008 Pages: 343-360
Author(s)
Douglas B. Marlowe; David S. Festinger; Patricia L. Arabia; Karen L. Dugosh; Kathleen M. Benasutti; Jason R. Croft; James R. McKay
Date Published
September 2008
Length
18 pages
Annotation
The purpose of this study was to determine whether an adaptive algorithn could be successfully implemented in a drug court program and whether it showed promise for improving client outcomes.
Abstract
Results confirmed the adaptive intervention was acceptable to both clients and staff, was feasible to implement with greater than 85 percent fidelity, and showed promise for eliciting statistically significant and clinically meaningful effects on graduation rates and illicit drug use. Given the findings, there appears to be ample justification for moving forward with a fully powered experimental trial of the effects of the adaptive algorithm. Adaptive interventions adjust the dose or type of services that are administered to clients in response to clients’ clinical presentation or ongoing performance in treatment. Matching services to clients’ pretreatment characteristics is perhaps the simplest form of adapting treatment to the needs of the individual. Adaptive interventions have been shown to be effective in treating a wide range of substance abuse disorders. Several prior studies examined adaptive interventions for drug-abusing offenders. However, more research is needed to improve on procedures and elicit more robust effects. This pilot study experimentally examined the effects of an adaptive intervention in a misdemeanor drug court. The adaptive algorithm adjusted the frequency of court hearings and case management sessions according to prespecified criteria in response to participants’ (N=30) performance. Figure, tables and references