An In-Depth Survey of the Screening and Assessment Practices of Highly Regarded Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment Programs

Abstract

Aims: To examine the quality of screening and assessment practices at some of the most highly regarded adolescent substance use treatment programs in the United States.

Methods: Between March and September 2005, telephone surveys were administered to directors of highly regarded programs. Several different publications and databases were then used to measure the quality of the screening and assessment instruments described by programs.

Results: For the 120 programs responding, 77 distinctly named instruments developed by outside sources were used at some point in the screening and assessment process, and the majority of programs also used instruments developed in-house. Fewer than half of these instruments were mentioned in the Substance Use Screening & Assessment Instruments Database. We were able to confirm that 87% of the instruments developed by others have a published manual, and 74% have been described in an article appearing in a peer-reviewed publication. Sixty-two percent were designed to be used with adolescents or adults and adolescents, while 19% were designed for adults only.

Conclusion: Although adolescent substance abuse treatment programs recognized the importance of screening and assessment, the quality of such practices varied significantly. A large number of different tools were used by some of the most highly regarded programs in the country, and many used questionnaires developed in-house that may not have had high standards of reliability and validity. Furthermore, numerous programs were using assessment instruments that were not uniquely designed for adolescents. Encouraging the adoption of standardized assessment practices would help those involved in treatment to evaluate programs and to understand the assessment process.

KEYWORDS:

• adolescent substance abuse, screening
• assessment
• treatment

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Erick G. Rojas, Chris Russell, and Laura Burnett. This research was supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The funding agreement ensured the authors' independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, and writing and publishing the report.

Notes

Note. “Other tools” include screening or assessment tools developed in-house and non-structured or non-clinical interviews.

^a Table includes instruments used in one of the three above stages of assessment by at least five programs.

^b Mentioned by Ken Winters in his article in Assessing Alcohol Problems: A Guide for Clinicians and Researchers (2003).

^c Mentioned in University of Washington's Substance Use Screening & Assessment Instruments Database (2006).

^d Marked in University of Washington's Substance Use Screening & Assessment Instruments Database (2006) as “widely used and have proven reliability and validity.” Reliability is measured by inter-rater (or joint), test-retest (or stability), and internal (or internal consistency). Validity is measured by construct, content, discriminate (convergent or divergent) and face validity. See http://lib.adai.washington.edu/instruments/glossary.htm.

*References upon request.