课题基金 / 基金详情

COMPARATIVE SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENTS FOR THE HOMELESS

COMPARATIVE SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENTS FOR THE HOMELESS
无家可归者的药物滥用治疗比较
批准号:
3546189
负责人:
JESSE B MILBY
金额:
$105.33万
依托单位国家:
美国
项目类别:
财政年份:
1990
资助国家:
美国
项目状态:
已结题
起止时间:
1990-09-25 至 1993-08-31

项目摘要

项目成果

JESSE B MILBY的其他基金

相似基金

相关文献

中文摘要
翻译
这份为期三年的合作协议申请的总体目标是 一个示范项目是比较两种干预措施的效果,一 常规护理干预与强化门诊干预 由初始干预部分和扩展干预部分组成,用于 有酗酒和/或药物滥用问题的无家可归者 大伯明翰地区。此应用程序源自一项协作 阿拉巴马大学伯明翰分校与 申请的分包商,伯明翰医疗保健公司 无家可归者联盟(BHCHC)。UAB的调查小组成员 在科学、评估、管理和 与药物滥用有关的方面。所提议的项目。调查性的 来自BHCHC的团队成员在提供 医疗、药物滥用、精神健康和支持服务 大伯明翰地区的无家可归者。总体而言, 调查小组代表着一个非常强大的群体参与 与NIAAA和NIDA的代表合作进行 提出合作示范项目。一种随机的、受控的 设计建议共有150名无家可归者参加 招募并随机接受两种干预中的一种,通常护理或 强化门诊干预。过程和结果衡量标准都将 在整个干预期和出院后六个月内使用 来比较这两组人。我们的主要假设包括:1)集约化 门诊干预将导致更大程度的减少 非常规护理的酒精和/或其他药物;2)重症门诊 干预将提高住房水平和居住稳定性。 3)强化门诊干预将 提高无家可归者的经济和就业状况 照常照看。
英文摘要
The overall goal of this three-year cooperative agreement application for a demonstration project is to compare the effects of two interventions, a usual care intervention and an intensive outpatient intervention consisting of both initial and extended intervention components, for homeless individuals with alcohol and/or substance abuse problems in the greater Birmingham area. This application arises from a collaborative effort between the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) and the sub-contractor for the application, the Birmingham Health Care for the Homeless Coalition (BHCHC). Investigative team members at UAB have extensive experience in scientific, evaluation, administrative, and substance abuse aspects relevant. to the proposed project. investigative team members from the BHCHC have extensive experience in providing medical, substance abuse, mental health, and supportive services for homeless persons in the greater Birmingham area. Collectively, the investigative team represents an extremely strong group to participate collaboratively with representatives of NIAAA and NIDA to conduct the proposed cooperative demonstration project. A randomized, controlled design is proposed with a total of 150 homeless participants to be recruited and randomized to one of the two interventions, usual care or intensive outpatient intervention. Both process and outcome measures will be used throughout the intervention period and six months after discharge to compare the groups. Our major hypotheses include: 1) the intensive outpatient intervention will result in greater reduction in consumption of alcohol and/or other drugs than usual care; 2) the intensive outpatient intervention will increase levels of shelter and residential stability more than usual care; and 3) the intensive outpatient intervention will enhance the economic and employment status of homeless persons more than usual care.
期刊论文(0)
专著(0)
科研奖励(0)
会议论文
COST EFFECTIVE TREATMENT FOR DUALLY DIAGNOSED HOMELESS
COST EFFECTIVE TREATMENT FOR DUALLY DIAGNOSED HOMELESS
COST EFFECTIVE TREATMENT FOR DUALLY DIAGNOSED HOMELESS
COST EFFECTIVE TREATMENT FOR DUALLY DIAGNOSED HOMELESS
海外基金