Views: 1,579 | Downloads:
181
| Responses: 0
| XML | Respond to this article | Alert & updates | Request permissions | Email to a friend |
Original ArticleOpen Access
Methamphetamine Dependence Treatment Rehabilitation in Thailand: A Model Assessment
Perngparn U 
,
Limanonda B ,
Aramrattana A ,
Pilley C ,
Areesantichai C ,
Taneepanichskul S
,
Limanonda B ,
Aramrattana A ,
Pilley C ,
Areesantichai C ,
Taneepanichskul S Objective: Assess the process and outcome of the treatment rehabilitation program in Thailand by comparing out-patientsand in-patients from drug dependent treatment centers (DDTCs) under Matrix and FAST Models.
Material and Method: In the DDTCs, male in-patient and out-patient volunteers aged 15-35 years were randomly selectedto assess demographic characteristics, socio-economic status, history of substance use, and other behavior related to theirhealth. Observations of the process of therapy and assessment of patients’ improvement were made. After completing therehabilitation, which lasted four months, trained field workers visited the patients at 1-, 3- and 6-month intervals. Analysesof rehabilitation focused on cognitive and behavioral changes at one and three months. Regarding the follow-up outcomes,comparison of Matrix and FAST Models relapse was analyzed by survival graph and Cox-regression of the days sincestopping illegal substance use.
Results: Ninety-two in-patients and forty-three out-patients were recruited. No significant difference was found in thecharacteristics of the patients between the two models or in the treatment centers. After assessing patients at 1-, 3-, and6-month, more improvement was noted among those in the FAST model than in the Matrix model.
Conclusion: This research confirmed improvement in attendees at the in-patient treatment model and the effectiveness ofrehabilitation.
Keywords: Methamphetamine dependent, Treatment rehabilitation, Assessment
Material and Method: In the DDTCs, male in-patient and out-patient volunteers aged 15-35 years were randomly selectedto assess demographic characteristics, socio-economic status, history of substance use, and other behavior related to theirhealth. Observations of the process of therapy and assessment of patients’ improvement were made. After completing therehabilitation, which lasted four months, trained field workers visited the patients at 1-, 3- and 6-month intervals. Analysesof rehabilitation focused on cognitive and behavioral changes at one and three months. Regarding the follow-up outcomes,comparison of Matrix and FAST Models relapse was analyzed by survival graph and Cox-regression of the days sincestopping illegal substance use.
Results: Ninety-two in-patients and forty-three out-patients were recruited. No significant difference was found in thecharacteristics of the patients between the two models or in the treatment centers. After assessing patients at 1-, 3-, and6-month, more improvement was noted among those in the FAST model than in the Matrix model.
Conclusion: This research confirmed improvement in attendees at the in-patient treatment model and the effectiveness ofrehabilitation.
Keywords: Methamphetamine dependent, Treatment rehabilitation, Assessment
Download:
PDF