Success in addiction treatment can be defined in different ways, by negative urine drug tests, by continued participation in treatment, etc. The National Institute on Drug Addiction (NIDA) Estimates the average success rate for addiction treatment to be 40-60%. The Matrix Model has been shown to be superior to other treatment modalities in clinical trials, and outcomes are generally higher than 70% (see outcome data by clinic below).
Initial Pilot Study (Rawson et al. 1986)
The Matrix Model group maintained sobriety twice as long as those receiving standard treatment.
A pilot study conducted in 1985 documented the clinical progress of 83 cocaine abusers during 8 months following treatment admission. During an evaluation session, clients self-selected either no formal treatment (voluntary involvement in AA, CA, or NA), 28-day inpatient treatment, or The Matrix Model.
The Matrix Model
The Matrix clients used significantly less cocaine at follow-up. Clients reporting a return to monthly or more cocaine use:
Matrix group: 13%
Inpatient group: 43%
No formal treatment group: 47%
The Controlled Trial
A controlled trial of the model was conducted over a two-year period. In this study, 100 cocaine-dependent subjects were randomly assigned to either six month Matrix treatment or “other available community resources.”
There was a strong positive relationship between the amount of treatment received and the percent of cocaine-negative urine results for the Matrix subjects but not for the community-resources subjects.
Similarly, greater amounts of treatment participation for the Matrix subjects were associated with improvement on the ASI employment and family scales and on a depression scale.
Follow-Up Study on Methamphetamine Users (Rawson et al. 2002)
A sample of 114 clients out of the 500 referred to in the Huber et al. (1997) report was followed at 2–5 years after treatment.
There was a significant change in self-reported methamphetamine use in the 30 days prior to treatment (86% reporting use) and 30 days prior to follow-up (17.5% reporting use).
At treatment admission, 26% of the follow-up sample was employed compared to 62% at follow-up.
Matrix Model® vs Treatment As Usual (Rawson et al., 2004, Addiction)
978 Methamphetamine users seeking treatment
CSAT multi-site study; 1998-2002
Costa Mesa; San Diego; Hayward; Concord; San Mateo; Billings; Honolulu
Matrix Model® vs Treatment as Usual
The Matrix Model group stayed in treatment longer than the group receiving traditional treatment.
At Matrix, we closely track outcomes in each of our clinics. Below are the most recent outcome data from each clinic:
A. Huber,W. Ling, S. Shoptaw,V. Gulati, P. Brethen, and R. Rawson,”Integrating Treatments for Methamphetamine Abuse: A Psychosocial Perspective,” Journal of Addictive Diseases 16, no. 4 (1997): 41–50.
R.A. Rawson, A. Huber, P. Brethen, J. Obert,V. Gulati, S. Shoptaw, and W. Ling,”Status of Methamphetamine Users 2–5 Years after Outpatient Treatment,” Journal of Addictive Diseases 21, no. 1 (2002): 107–19.
R.A. Rawson, J. L. Obert, M. J. McCann, and A. J. Mann,”Cocaine Treatment Outcome: Cocaine Use Following Inpatient, Outpatient and No Treatment,” NIDA Research Monograph, no. 67 (1986): 271–77.
R.A. Rawson, J. L. Obert, M. J. McCann,W. Ling,”Psychological Approaches for the Treatment of Cocaine Dependence— A Neurobehavioral Approach,” Journal of Addictive Diseases 11, no. 2 (1991): 97–119.
R.A. Rawson, S. J. Shoptaw, J. L. Obert, M. J. McCann, A. L. Hasson, P. J. Marinelli-Casey, P. R. Brethen, and W. Ling, “An Intensive Outpatient Approach for Cocaine Abuse Treatment: The Matrix Model,” Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 12, no. 2 (1995): 117–27.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Principles of Drug Addiction Treatment:A Research-Based Guide, NIH publication no. 99-4180 (October 1999).
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Office of Applied Studies.