Premium
The role of personality functioning in drug misuse treatment engagement
Author(s) -
Papamalis Fivos E.,
Kalyva Efrosini,
Teare M. Dawn,
Meier Petra S.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
addiction
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.424
H-Index - 193
eISSN - 1360-0443
pISSN - 0965-2140
DOI - 10.1111/add.14872
Subject(s) - dysfunctional family , psychosocial , concordance , personality , confidence interval , clinical psychology , facet (psychology) , psychology , medicine , psychiatry , big five personality traits , social psychology
Background and aim Personality functioning is predictive of drug misuse and relapse, yet little is known about the role of personality in engagement with the treatment process. This study aimed to estimate the extent to which broad‐ and facet‐level characteristic adaptations contribute to or hinder treatment engagement, while controlling for psychosocial indicators. Design Multi‐site cross‐sectional survey. Setting In‐patient treatment units covering 80% of residential treatment entries in Greece. Participants A total of 338 service users, 287 (84.9%) male, 51 (15.1%) female, average age 33.4 years. Measurements Expressions of personality functioning (characteristic adaptations) were assessed using the Severity Indices of Personality Problems (SIPP‐118). Treatment engagement was measured using the Client Evaluation of Self and Treatment, in‐patient version (CEST). Findings Dysfunctional levels of relational capacities predicted counselling rapport [β = 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.326–2.69, P = 0.013], treatment participation (β = 2.09, 95% CI = 1.15–3.11, P < 0.001) and treatment satisfaction (β = 1.65, 95% CI = 0.735–2.57, P < 0.001). Counselling rapport was also predicted by dysfunctional levels in self‐control (β = 1.78, 95% CI = 0.899–2.67, P < 0.001), self‐reflective functioning at the facet‐level (β = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.01–3.46, P < 0.001) and aggression regulation (β = 1.43, 95% CI = 0.438–2.42, P = 0.005). Dysfunctional levels on social concordance (β = −1.90, 95% CI = −2.87 to –0.941, P = 0.001), emotional regulation (β = 1.90, 95% CI = 0.87–2.92, P < 0.001) and intimacy (β = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.31–3.05, P < 0.001) were significant predictors of treatment participation. Treatment readiness and desire for help predicted treatment engagement. Conclusions In people attending substance use treatment services, maladaptive interpersonal patterns and relational intimacy, emotional dysregulation and impulse control may be associated with low levels of counselling rapport and treatment participation. Low frustration tolerance and aggressive impulses also appeared to predict low participation.