Encouraging Abstinence Behavior in a Drug Epidemic: Optimizing Dynamic Incentives
2 other identifiers
interventional
600
1 country
2
Brief Summary
Combatting the rise of the opioid epidemic is a central challenge of U.S. health care policy. A promising approach for improving welfare and decreasing medical costs of people with substance abuse disorders is offering incentive payments for healthy behaviors. This approach, broadly known as "contingency management" in the medical literature, has repeatedly shown to be effective in treating substance abuse. However, the use of incentives by treatment facilities remains extremely low. Furthermore, it is not well understood how to design optimal incentives to treat opioid abuse. This project will conduct a randomized evaluation of two types of dynamically adjusting incentive schedules for people with opioid use disorders or cocaine use disorders: "escalating" schedules where incentive amounts increase with success to increase incentive power, and "de-escalating" schedules where incentive amounts decrease with success to improve incentive targeting. Both schemes are implemented with a novel "turnkey" mobile application, making them uniquely low-cost, low-hassle, and scalable. Effects will be measured on abstinence outcomes, including longest duration of abstinence and the percentage of negative drug tests. In combination with survey data, variation from the experiment will shed light on the barriers to abstinence more broadly and inform the understanding of optimal incentive design.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Sep 2021
Longer than P75 for not_applicable
2 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
June 9, 2021
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
June 15, 2021
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
September 15, 2021
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
September 1, 2026
ExpectedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 1, 2026
February 12, 2026
February 1, 2026
5 years
June 9, 2021
February 9, 2026
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (2)
Percent of Negative Saliva Tests
Percent of tests negative for non-medical opioids, cocaine, or stimulant
month 3
Percent of App Acceptability
Percent of eligible population which accepts app
month 12
Secondary Outcomes (4)
Percent of Psychotherapy Visits Attended
month 3
Percent of Treatment Discharge Against Medical Advice
month 3
Percent of Relapse
month 3
Percent of transition to step-down care
Day 14
Study Arms (7)
Control
ACTIVE COMPARATORParticipants in this group will have access to the DynamiCare app; however, no behavioral incentives will be provided to this group.
Escalating Low
EXPERIMENTALParticipants will have access to the DynamiCare app. Through the app, participants will receive incentive amounts for drug negative saliva tests. Incentive amounts increase with every negative drug test up to a ceiling and "reset" to the lowest amount when a test is positive or missed. The "Low" group will receive incentives worth $2-$8.
Escalating High
EXPERIMENTALParticipants will have access to the DynamiCare app. Through the app, participants will receive incentive amounts for drug negative saliva tests. Incentive amounts increase with every negative drug test up to a ceiling and "reset" to the lowest amount when a test is positive or missed. The "High" group will receive incentives worth $4-$16.
De-Escalating Low
EXPERIMENTALParticipants will have access to the DynamiCare app. Through the app, participants will receive incentive amounts for drug negative saliva tests. Incentive amounts increase with every positive drug tests (up to a ceiling), and decrease by the same increment with every negative drug test (down to a floor). The "Low" group will receive incentives worth $6-12.
De-Escalating High
EXPERIMENTALParticipants will have access to the DynamiCare app. Through the app, participants will receive incentive amounts for drug negative saliva tests. Incentive amounts increase with every positive drug tests (up to a ceiling), and decrease by the same increment with every negative drug test (down to a floor). The "High" group will receive incentives worth $10-$20.
Constant High
EXPERIMENTALIn the Constant groups, incentive amounts will remain unchanged across time. The "High" group will receive incentives worth $16.
Constant Low
EXPERIMENTALIn the Constant groups, incentive amounts will remain unchanged across time. The "Low" group will receive incentives worth $8 every test.
Interventions
Participants will receive financial incentives for submitting randomly generated drug-negative saliva tests across the intervention period.
Participants get access to the DynamiCare app but will not be provided with financial incentives.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Age at least 18 years old;
- Meet DSM-5 OUD, CoUD, or MUD criteria as evidenced by an OUD CPT code F11\* (opioid related disorders), a CoUD CPT code F14\* (cocaine related disorders), a MUD CPT code F15.1/F15.2 or other clinical notes indicating illicit opioid/cocaine/methamphetamine use for treatment
- Have access to a smartphone (iOS or Android) with data plan and willing to download DynamiCare app;
- Have an email and can access it from their smartphone;
- Are in residential, day (PHP), partial day (IOP), or outpatient (OP) AODA treatment;
- Are likely to be helped by contingency management because at least ONE of the following conditions is true:
- Were first enrolled in residential, PHP, or IOP substance use treatment no longer than 2 treatment weeks (14 days/encounters of treatment) prior to providing informed consent.
- Used non-medical opioids, cocaine, and/or methamphetamine within the last 21 days.
- Understands English.
You may not qualify if:
- Have evidence of active (non-substance related) psychosis that might impair participation as determined by the PI.
- Has significant cognitive impairment that might confound participation as determined by the PI or are so significantly cognitively impaired that they have a legal guardian.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Wake Forest University Health Scienceslead
- University of Chicagocollaborator
- Rogers Behavioral Healthcollaborator
- University of California Santa Cruzcollaborator
Study Sites (2)
Rogers Behavioral Health
Oconomowoc, Wisconsin, 53066, United States
Advocate Aurora Behavioral Health Services
Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, 53212, United States
Related Publications (24)
Benishek LA, Dugosh KL, Kirby KC, Matejkowski J, Clements NT, Seymour BL, Festinger DS. Prize-based contingency management for the treatment of substance abusers: a meta-analysis. Addiction. 2014 Sep;109(9):1426-36. doi: 10.1111/add.12589. Epub 2014 May 23.
PMID: 24750232BACKGROUNDDavis DR, Kurti AN, Skelly JM, Redner R, White TJ, Higgins ST. A review of the literature on contingency management in the treatment of substance use disorders, 2009-2014. Prev Med. 2016 Nov;92:36-46. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.08.008. Epub 2016 Aug 8.
PMID: 27514250BACKGROUNDDutra L, Stathopoulou G, Basden SL, Leyro TM, Powers MB, Otto MW. A meta-analytic review of psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2008 Feb;165(2):179-87. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.06111851. Epub 2008 Jan 15.
PMID: 18198270BACKGROUNDHiggins ST, Washio Y, Lopez AA, Heil SH, Solomon LJ, Lynch ME, Hanson JD, Higgins TM, Skelly JM, Redner R, Bernstein IM. Examining two different schedules of financial incentives for smoking cessation among pregnant women. Prev Med. 2014 Nov;68:51-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.03.024. Epub 2014 Apr 2.
PMID: 24704135BACKGROUNDHutchinson ML, Chisolm MS, Tuten M, Leoutsakos JM, Jones HE. The efficacy of escalating and fixed contingency management reinforcement on illicit drug use in opioid-dependent pregnant women. Addict Disord Their Treat. 2012 Sep;11(3):150-153. doi: 10.1097/ADT.0b013e318264cf6d.
PMID: 23226717BACKGROUNDKirby KC, Carpenedo CM, Dugosh KL, Rosenwasser BJ, Benishek LA, Janik A, Keashen R, Bresani E, Silverman K. Randomized clinical trial examining duration of voucher-based reinforcement therapy for cocaine abstinence. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013 Oct 1;132(3):639-45. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.04.015. Epub 2013 May 13.
PMID: 23680075BACKGROUNDLamb RJ, Kirby KC, Morral AR, Galbicka G, Iguchi MY. Shaping smoking cessation in hard-to-treat smokers. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2010 Feb;78(1):62-71. doi: 10.1037/a0018323.
PMID: 20099951BACKGROUNDLing W, Hillhouse M, Ang A, Jenkins J, Fahey J. Comparison of behavioral treatment conditions in buprenorphine maintenance. Addiction. 2013 Oct;108(10):1788-98. doi: 10.1111/add.12266. Epub 2013 Jul 12.
PMID: 23734858BACKGROUNDLussier JP, Heil SH, Mongeon JA, Badger GJ, Higgins ST. A meta-analysis of voucher-based reinforcement therapy for substance use disorders. Addiction. 2006 Feb;101(2):192-203. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01311.x.
PMID: 16445548BACKGROUNDPacker RR, Howell DN, McPherson S, Roll JM. Investigating reinforcer magnitude and reinforcer delay: a contingency management analog study. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012 Aug;20(4):287-92. doi: 10.1037/a0027802. Epub 2012 Jun 11.
PMID: 22686494BACKGROUNDPetry NM, Alessi SM, Marx J, Austin M, Tardif M. Vouchers versus prizes: contingency management treatment of substance abusers in community settings. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005 Dec;73(6):1005-14. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1005.
PMID: 16392974BACKGROUNDPetry NM, Alessi SM, Barry D, Carroll KM. Standard magnitude prize reinforcers can be as efficacious as larger magnitude reinforcers in cocaine-dependent methadone patients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2015 Jun;83(3):464-72. doi: 10.1037/a0037888. Epub 2014 Sep 8.
PMID: 25198284BACKGROUNDPetry NM, Barry D, Alessi SM, Rounsaville BJ, Carroll KM. A randomized trial adapting contingency management targets based on initial abstinence status of cocaine-dependent patients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2012 Apr;80(2):276-85. doi: 10.1037/a0026883. Epub 2012 Jan 9.
PMID: 22229758BACKGROUNDPetry NM, Martin B. Low-cost contingency management for treating cocaine- and opioid-abusing methadone patients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2002 Apr;70(2):398-405. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.70.2.398.
PMID: 11952198BACKGROUNDPetry NM, Weinstock J, Alessi SM, Lewis MW, Dieckhaus K. Group-based randomized trial of contingencies for health and abstinence in HIV patients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2010 Feb;78(1):89-97. doi: 10.1037/a0016778.
PMID: 20099954BACKGROUNDPrendergast ML, Podus D, Chang E, Urada D. The effectiveness of drug abuse treatment: a meta-analysis of comparison group studies. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2002 Jun 1;67(1):53-72. doi: 10.1016/s0376-8716(02)00014-5.
PMID: 12062779BACKGROUNDRash CJ, Petry NM. Contingency management treatments are equally efficacious for both sexes in intensive outpatient settings. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2015 Oct;23(5):369-76. doi: 10.1037/pha0000035. Epub 2015 Jul 13.
PMID: 26167714BACKGROUNDRoll JM, Higgins ST. A within-subject comparison of three different schedules of reinforcement of drug abstinence using cigarette smoking as an exemplar. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2000 Feb 1;58(1-2):103-9. doi: 10.1016/s0376-8716(99)00073-3.
PMID: 10669060BACKGROUNDRoll JM, Higgins ST, Badger GJ. An experimental comparison of three different schedules of reinforcement of drug abstinence using cigarette smoking as an exemplar. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Winter;29(4):495-504; quiz 504-5. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-495.
PMID: 8995832BACKGROUNDRoll, John M., Huber, A., Sodano, R., Chudzynski, J.E., Moynier, E., Shoptaw, S. (2006). A Comparison of Five Reinforcement Schedules for Use in Contingency Management-Based Treatment of Methamphetamine Abuse. Psychological Record, 56(1), 67.
BACKGROUNDRomanowich P, Lamb RJ. Effects of escalating and descending schedules of incentives on cigarette smoking in smokers without plans to quit. J Appl Behav Anal. 2010 Fall;43(3):357-67. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2010.43-357.
PMID: 21358898BACKGROUNDRomanowich P, Lamb RJ. The effects of fixed versus escalating reinforcement schedules on smoking abstinence. J Appl Behav Anal. 2015 Spring;48(1):25-37. doi: 10.1002/jaba.185. Epub 2015 Jan 30.
PMID: 25640764BACKGROUNDSchottenfeld RS, Chawarski MC, Pakes JR, Pantalon MV, Carroll KM, Kosten TR. Methadone versus buprenorphine with contingency management or performance feedback for cocaine and opioid dependence. Am J Psychiatry. 2005 Feb;162(2):340-9. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.2.340.
PMID: 15677600BACKGROUNDSwensen, I.D. (2015). Substance-abuse treatment and mortality. Journal of Public Economics 122, 13-30.
BACKGROUND
Related Links
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Mercedes Robaina, PhD
Advocate Aurora Behavioral Health Services
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Ariel Zucker, PhD
University of California Santa Cruz
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- SUPPORTIVE CARE
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
June 9, 2021
First Posted
June 15, 2021
Study Start
September 15, 2021
Primary Completion (Estimated)
September 1, 2026
Study Completion (Estimated)
September 1, 2026
Last Updated
February 12, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-02
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share