Stinence via urinalysis), and provision of an incentive quickly immediately after its detection (Petry, 2000).

Stinence via urinalysis), and provision of an incentive quickly immediately after its detection (Petry, 2000). Meta-analytic critiques of CM note its robust, trustworthy therapeutic effects when implemented in addiction remedy settings (Griffith et al., 2000; Lussier et al., 2006; Prendergast et al., 2006). Several empiricallysupported applications are readily available to community therapy settings, such as opioid treatment programs (OTPs) wherein agonist medication is paired with counseling and other services in maintenance therapy for opiate dependence. Readily available CM applications consist of: 1) privilege-based (Stitzer et al., 1977), where conveniences like take-home medication doses or preferred dosing occasions earned, 2) stepped-care (Brooner et al., 2004), where reduced clinic needs are gained, 3) voucher-based (Higgins et al., 1993), with vouchers for goods/services awarded, four) prize-based (Petry et al., 2000), with draws for prize things offered, 5) socially-based (Lash et al., 2007), exactly where status tokens or public recognition reinforce identified milestones, and 6) employment-based, with job prospects at a `therapeutic workplace’ (Silverman et al., 2002) reinforcing abstinence. Despite such possibilities, CM implementation remains restricted, even among clinics affiliated with NIDA’s Clinical Trials Network [CTN; (Roman et al., 2010)]. A recent review suggests guidance by implementation science theories may facilitate additional helpful CM dissemination (Hartzler et al., 2012). A hallmark theory is Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion Theory, a widely-cited and comprehensive theoretical framework primarily based on decades of cross-disciplinary study of innovation adoption. Diffusion theory outlines processes whereby innovations are adopted by members of a social system and individual characteristics that impact innovation receptivity. As for prior applications to addiction therapy, diffusion theory has identified clinic traits predicting naltrexone PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21079607 adoption (Oser Roman, 2008). Additionally, it is generally referenced in many evaluations (Damschroder Hildegorn, 2011; Glasner-Edwards et al., 2010; Manuel et al., 2011) and interpretation of empirical findings regarding innovation adoption (Amodeo et al., 2010; Baer et al., 2009; Hartzler et al., 2012; Roman et al., 2010). In diffusion theory, KIRA6 web Rogers (2003) differentiates two processes whereby a social program arrives at a selection about irrespective of whether or to not adopt a new practice. Inside a collective innovation choice, men and women accept or reject an innovation en route to a consensus-based selection. In contrast, an authority innovation decision requires acceptance or rejection of an innovation by a person (or subset of persons) with higher status or power. The latter approach additional accurately portrays the pragmatism inherent in innovation adoption decisions at most OTPs, highlighting an influential function of executive leadership that merits scientific attention. In line with diffusion theory, executives could possibly be categorized into 5 mutually-exclusive categories of innovativeness: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. Table 1 outlines individual qualities related with every category, as outlined by Rogers (2003). Efforts to categorize executive innovativeness in accordance with such personal traits is well-suited to qualitative study approaches, that are under-represented in addiction literature (Rhodes et al., 2010). Such procedures reflect a selection of elicitation methods, of which two examples would be the et.