Posted: September 22nd, 2023

Substance Use Disorder prevention model

Substance Use Disorder prevention model

Instructions

The purpose of this assignment is to help familiarize you with the SUD prevention model.

Use the SAMHSA Resource to complete this assignment.

Visit this website and write up a brief synopsis of your favorite SUD prevention model and explain why you picked it. Your paper should be two pages in length.

Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded. Writing Assignment Rubric
Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a
reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically
listed on the rubric.

Substance use disorder (SUD) poses significant health and social challenges. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, an estimated 20.3 million Americans aged 12 or older had a SUD related to alcohol or illicit drugs in 2019 (SAMHSA, 2020). The economic costs associated with excessive alcohol consumption and substance misuse total over $740 billion annually in the United States (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2021). While treatment and intervention efforts are crucial, preventing substance misuse from occurring in the first place is ideal. This article will explore SUD prevention models and strategies.
The Public Health Model
One framework for conceptualizing SUD prevention is the public health model. Rooted in epidemiology, the public health approach views substance misuse as the result of complex interactions between individual, relationship, community, and societal factors (Strathdee & Patterson, 2016). Prevention strategies based on this model aim to reduce risk factors and enhance protective influences across multiple levels.
Individual-level approaches target knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors that influence substance use. School-based life skills programs that teach decision-making, refusal skills, and coping strategies have shown promise in reducing underage drinking and marijuana use (Tobler et al., 2000). Screening and brief intervention protocols delivered in primary care settings can also motivate individuals exhibiting risky use to modify their behavior (Saitz, 2014).
Relationship-level strategies work to strengthen interpersonal bonds and support networks. Family-focused programs teach parents effective communication and monitoring techniques (Kumpfer et al., 2008). Peer-led programs empower youth to resist social pressures to use substances from their friends (Hecht & Miller-Day, 2007). Mentoring relationships with non-parental adults can also buffer youth from risk factors (DuBois et al., 2002).
Community-level efforts aim to shape the social and physical environment. Enforcing minimum legal drinking age laws and regulating alcohol outlet density near schools are two structural interventions that research links to lower rates of underage drinking and binge drinking (Wagenaar & Toomey, 2002; Livingston et al., 2007). Community coalitions bring together multiple stakeholders like schools, law enforcement, businesses, and civic groups to implement comprehensive prevention strategies tailored to local needs (Feinberg et al., 2008).
Societal approaches address cultural and policy influences. Mass media campaigns combine paid advertising with earned media coverage to shift social norms favoring substance use (Hornik, 2002). Raising tobacco and alcohol excise taxes is another population-level strategy supported by strong evidence of reducing consumption (Chaloupka et al., 2002; Tauras et al., 2005). Advocacy for policies restricting marketing of addictive products to youth can also curb early initiation of use (Smith & Foxcroft, 2009).
The public health model recognizes that no single intervention alone can adequately address the multifactorial nature of SUDs. An integrated approach applying strategies across multiple levels has greater potential for creating sustainable reductions in substance misuse problems.
The Stages of Change Model
Another useful framework for conceptualizing SUD prevention is the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change, also known as the Stages of Change model. Proposed by Prochaska and DiClemente (1983), this model posits that behavior change involves progress through six distinct stages: precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, and termination.
In the precontemplation stage, individuals are not considering changing their substance use in the next six months. Prevention strategies appropriate for this stage aim to raise awareness of risks and consequences. The contemplation stage involves actively considering change within the next six months. Providing decisional balance exercises weighing pros and cons can be effective. In preparation, individuals intend to take action within the next month. Helping develop concrete plans and strategies supports this stage.
The action stage involves overt modifications in problematic substance use behaviors. Supporting new behaviors with reinforcement and substitution strategies is key. Maintenance refers sustaining changes for more than six months. Helping individuals develop coping strategies to prevent relapse aids this stage. Termination means having no temptation or desire to return to previous substance use patterns. Relapse prevention plans remain important even at this stage.
Matching prevention approaches to an individual’s readiness to change can enhance effectiveness. For example, confronting those in precontemplation about their substance use may backfire by increasing resistance, while decisional balance exercises are better suited. The Stages of Change model provides a framework for conceptualizing the process of behavior change and tailoring interventions accordingly (DiClemente & Scott, 1997).
Selecting an Evidence-Based Model
When selecting a SUD prevention model to implement, choosing one with empirical support is prudent. Several options have accumulated evidence of effectiveness through rigorous research. Here are brief descriptions of four evidence-based models:
LifeSkills Training (LST)
A school-based program targeting middle school students designed to prevent alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use. LST consists of 15 sessions delivered over a 3-year period. Multiple randomized controlled trials and longitudinal follow-up studies link LST to reductions in substance initiation and use (Botvin et al., 2006; Spoth et al., 2013).
Strengthening Families Program (SFP)
A family skills training intervention to enhance protective factors against adolescent substance use and other problem behaviors. SFP comprises seven sessions conducted separately with parents and youth, then together. Several randomized trials demonstrate SFP lowers rates of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use onset among high-risk youth (Kumpfer et al., 2008).
Communities That Care (CTC)
A community prevention system utilizing risk and protective factor research to guide selection, implementation, and evaluation of evidence-based programs. CTC involves forming a coalition to assess local needs and implement a comprehensive plan. Evaluation of CTC communities shows reductions in rates of adolescent substance use, delinquency, and violence (Feinberg et al., 2014).
Project ALERT
A classroom-based prevention curriculum targeting middle school students. Project ALERT consists of 11 lessons addressing social influences on substance use through interactive activities. Multiple randomized trials link Project ALERT to decreased rates of tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana initiation (Hansen & McNeal, 1997; Spoth et al., 2008).
When selecting a model, considering factors like target population, desired outcomes, available resources, and cultural appropriateness will help determine the best fit. Consulting experts and reviewing evaluation literature can also aid the decision process. Implementing an evidence-based model increases the likelihood of achieving intended prevention goals.
Conclusion
Substance use disorder prevention requires a comprehensive public health approach applying strategies across multiple levels. The Stages of Change model provides a framework for conceptualizing behavior change processes and tailoring interventions accordingly. LifeSkills Training, Strengthening Families Program, Communities That Care, and Project ALERT represent evidence-based prevention models with demonstrated effectiveness through rigorous research. Choosing a model aligned with needs and capacities increases the chances of creating sustainable reductions in substance misuse problems within communities. Continued evaluation will further advance the field’s understanding of prevention science.
References
Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., Diaz, T., & Ifill-Williams, M. (2001). Drug abuse prevention among minority adolescents: Posttest and one-year follow-up of a school-based preventive intervention. Prevention Science, 2(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010025311161
DiClemente, C. C., & Scott, C. W. (1997). Stages of change: Interactions with treatment compliance and involvement. In L. S. Onken, J. D. Blaine, & J. J. Boren (Eds.), Beyond the therapeutic alliance: Keeping the drug-dependent individual in treatment (pp. 131–156). NIDA Research Monograph 165. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Feinberg, M. E., Jones, D., Greenberg, M. T., Osgood, D. W., & Bontempo, D. (2010). Effects of the Communities That Care model in Pennsylvania on change in adolescent risk and problem behaviors. Prevention Science, 11(2), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-009-0161-x
Hansen, W. B., & McNeal, R. B., Jr. (1997). How D.A.R.E. works: An examination of program effects on mediating variables. Health Education & Behavior, 24(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819702400205
Spoth, R., Trudeau, L., Shin, C., Ralston, E., Redmond, C., Greenberg, M., & Feinberg, M. (2013). Longitudinal effects of universal preventive intervention on prescription drug misuse: Three randomized controlled trials with late adolescents and young adults. American Journal of Public Health, 103(4), 665–672. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301209
SAMHSA. (2020). Key substance use and mental health research essay writing service indicators in the United States: Results from the 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/
Strathdee, S. A., & Patterson, T. L.

________________________
Study Bay Notes:
Substance Use Disorder Prevention Model

Substance use disorder (SUD) is a chronic condition that affects millions of people worldwide. It is characterized by the compulsive and harmful use of psychoactive substances, such as alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs, despite negative consequences for the individual and society. SUD can impair physical and mental health, social and occupational functioning, and personal and interpersonal relationships. SUD can also increase the risk of infectious diseases, violence, accidents, and criminal behavior.

Preventing SUD is a public health priority that requires a comprehensive and evidence-based approach. One of the most widely used and effective models for SUD prevention is the Risk and Protective Factor Model (RPFM), which identifies the factors that influence the likelihood of substance use and abuse among individuals and populations. The RPFM assumes that substance use is influenced by a complex interaction of biological, psychological, social, and environmental factors, which can be classified into two categories: risk factors and protective factors.

Risk factors are those that increase the probability of substance use and abuse, such as genetic predisposition, early initiation of substance use, peer pressure, family conflict, low academic achievement, poverty, and exposure to substance availability and pro-substance norms. Protective factors are those that decrease the probability of substance use and abuse, such as positive family relationships, parental monitoring, school engagement, social support, coping skills, self-esteem, and exposure to anti-substance norms and policies.

The RPFM suggests that SUD prevention programs should aim to reduce risk factors and enhance protective factors at multiple levels: individual, family, school, community, and society. By addressing the root causes and underlying determinants of substance use and abuse, prevention programs can reduce the demand for substances and promote healthy behaviors and lifestyles. Prevention programs can also target different stages of substance use: universal prevention for the general population, selective prevention for high-risk groups, and indicated prevention for those who have already initiated substance use.

Some examples of evidence-based prevention programs based on the RPFM are:

– Life Skills Training (LST): a school-based program that teaches students social and personal skills to resist peer pressure, cope with stress, communicate effectively, and make healthy decisions.
– Strengthening Families Program (SFP): a family-based program that improves family functioning, parent-child bonding, parenting skills, and family communication.
– Communities That Care (CTC): a community-based program that mobilizes stakeholders to assess local needs and resources, implement prevention strategies, and monitor outcomes.
– Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT): a health care-based program that identifies individuals with risky substance use patterns, provides brief motivational counseling, and refers them to appropriate treatment services.

These programs have been shown to reduce substance use initiation and frequency, delay substance use onset, prevent substance use escalation and progression to SUD, improve academic and social outcomes, and save costs in the long term.

Works Cited

Botvin GJ. Life Skills Training: Preventing Substance Misuse by Enhancing Individual
and Social Competence. New Directions for Youth Development. 2010;2010(125):57-65.
doi:10.1002/yd.353

Kumpfer KL. Family-Based Interventions for the Prevention of Substance Abuse
and Other Impulse Control Disorders study bay services in Girls. ISRN Addiction. 2014;2014:308789.
doi:10.1155/2014/308789

Hawkins JD et al. Communities That Care: Prevention Strategies That Work.
Prevention Researcher. 2009;16(3):3-6.

Babor TF et al. Screening, Brief Intervention And Referral To Treatment (SBIRT):
Toward A Public Health Approach To The Management Of Substance Abuse.
Substance Abuse. 2007;28(3):7-30.
doi:10.1300/J465v28n03_03

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Do my assignment, Substance Use Disorder prevention model, Write a paper