Abstract
While tobacco helplines (quitlines) are thought to be effective, helplines which treat other substance use do not have an established evidence base. A review was conducted of the literature on illicit drug or alcohol (IDA) helplines. The literature search was conducted in five databases. Studies prior to 2014 were included if published in English, and involved the use of a telephone counselling helpline for the treatment of illicit drug or alcohol use. Review papers, opinion pieces, letters or editorials, case studies, published abstracts and posters were excluded. Initial searching identified 2178 articles and after removing duplicates and those meeting the exclusion criteria, there were 36 publications for review. A total of 29 articles provided descriptive information about 19 different IDA helplines which operated in the US (42%), Europe (21%), Australia (21%), Asia (11%) and Canada (5%). These services reported monthly call rates from 3.7 to over 23,000 calls per month. A total of nine articles provided evaluative information on eight different IDA helplines: four articles included a comparison of treatment outcomes against a control group and five articles included information on treatment satisfaction or service utilisation. Together they provide some evidence that these services are effective. Although there was little consistency in the measures used between articles which assessed helpline satisfaction, all but one reported high satisfaction. Although the evidence is mainly supportive of IDA helplines, further work is required to compare treatment outcomes in randomized groups.
Introduction
Telephone counselling services (helplines) are a significant part of global care for mental health concerns. These services were originally conceived to provide immediate and inexpensive crisis intervention via telephone. This description defined helpline operation for the last 40 years.1–4 More recently, advances in communications technology have resulted in a rapid expansion in the number and breadth of telephone counselling services available, and the development of new services, including videoconferencing, interactive voice response telephones and smartphone applications. In fact, in the medical health care and psychiatry field there are now phone-based services referred to as telemedicine 5 and telepsychiatry. 6 Telephone counselling, telemedicine and telepsychiatry services have received different levels of academic interest, ranging from a wealth of research in telehealth 5 to relatively little on telephone counselling helplines.
The bulk of research on helpline services has focussed on those designed to assist individuals with tobacco cessation (quitlines),4,7–10 and to a lesser extent, has identified efficacious services which can alleviate mental health disorders (typically depression)11,12 or diet and fitness concerns. 13 Although quitlines are considered to be a well-established treatment for tobacco smoking7,8 and thought to be cost-effective, 14 relatively little is known about the utility of helplines for treating substance use other than tobacco. As such, many illicit drug and/or alcohol (IDA) helpline services operate following the prima facie assumption that they are valuable.
There have been no previous systematic reviews of helplines whose primary focus is the use of IDA (IDA helplines). The present paper summarises the findings from a review of IDA helplines.
Methods
Literature published prior to January 2014 was located through online search of five electronic databases (Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library/EBM Reviews, Medline and PsycINFO). Search terms were grouped into two blocks: (1) helpline (including helpline, telephone counselling, telepsychiatry, telephone intervention and telecounselling); and (2) substance use (including drug use, substance use, alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, amphetamine, hallucinogen, opioid and inhalant). Article reference lists were also checked for additional articles. Non-English language papers, review papers, posters, opinion pieces, letters, editorials and published abstracts were excluded.
Initial searching resulted in the identification of 2178 articles which were reviewed to remove duplicates and any meeting the exclusion criteria. After removing 155 duplicates and 1987 which met the exclusion criteria, there were 36 relevant articles remaining. These were either: (1) purely descriptive (27 articles);15–41 (2) evaluations of helpline services including treatment outcomes (7 articles);42–48 or (3) included both descriptive and evaluative components (2 articles).49,50
Risk of bias
The risk of bias was evaluated for the nine controlled trials evaluating IDA helplines using a 23-item custom assessment following procedures from the Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, 51 the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group Data Collection Checklist 52 and Viswanathan and colleagues. 53 A ratio (reported as a percentage) was calculated to represent which of any appropriate risks of bias the article had adequately addressed compared to the number inadequately addressed. A score of 100% was awarded when the article addressed all appropriate risks of bias adequately. Judgements were made by the author and should not be interpreted as representing overall article quality, but as a guide to the validity of outcomes specific to telephone counselling services for the treatment of IDA use.
Illicit drug and alcohol helplines
Information from descriptive articles regarding helpline services for the treatment of illicit drug and/or alcohol use.
Clemens et al. (2006) included two studies in the manuscript. The first study is described here and the second study in described as part of the service outcome evaluation.
Zullig et al. (2010) was primarily a service outcome evaluation. However; as this article included descriptive information not reported elsewhere it is also included here.
These services reported monthly call rates from 3.7 to over 23,000 calls per month (mean 2134). The helpline callers were most commonly male (68% on average; range: 43–95%) and white Caucasian (81% on average; range: 56–97%). Most helplines did not limit their services to a particular substance use concern (44% of individual services), although it was also common to focus on alcohol use only (22%) or anabolic androgenic steroid use (17%). Alternatively, opiate- and cocaine-based services were less common (11% and 6%, respectively).
While these articles did not provide formal evaluation of the respective helplines, each supported their utility in assisting with IDA concerns. In particular, they provided information, support and treatment referrals to individuals who were typically calling in an early attempt to find assistance. In addition, the services were described as beginning with modest call rates, but showed an increase in call rates over time. No article described any negative aspects of these services, other than a need for advertising to increase service utilisation.
Effectiveness of helplines
A total of nine articles provided evaluative information on eight different IDA helplines which operated in Australia (50%), the US (25%) and Brazil (25%). These trials were divided into two groups: those which included a comparison of treatment outcomes against a control group (4 articles) and those which included information on treatment satisfaction or service utilisation (5 articles).
Controlled trials
Article descriptions of participant demographics and trial methods.
TCS = Telephone Counselling Service; MI = Motivational Interviewing; CBT = Cognitive Behavioural Therapy.
Brief study description and main treatment outcomes for helplines.
Treatment satisfaction and service utilisation
Although there was little consistency in the measures used between articles which assessed helpline satisfaction, each reported high satisfaction, with one exception. Specifically, Hughes and colleagues reported the results from a study on the perceived helpfulness of 30 US drug and alcohol helplines. 47 In this study, two trained psychologists were recruited to make a series of 346 scripted calls to IDA helplines (two to four calls to each helpline) and take note of whether the service was helpful, neutral or unhelpful. The subjective helpfulness ratings were not uniform across the different drugs of concern, although no particular substance use helpline was commonly thought to provide helpful advice. Calls made regarding an alcohol, cocaine or heroin concern were more commonly recorded to be helpful (43, 40 and 40% were helpful) than were calls about tobacco and cannabis concerns (28 and 25% were helpful). One study found that participant demographics and call content were not significant predictors of helpline satisfaction. However, the ease with which the participant’s call was made successfully and whether or not the participant’s needs were met during the call significantly predicted call satisfaction. 48 While not assessed statistically, the variables of ease of access and meeting information needs were also important in a final trial which reported high satisfaction with an Australian helpline for health workers. 46
In addition, two articles reported on the rate at which participants who had called an IDA helpline made use of external treatment referrals obtained during their call.48,50 The articles provided conflicting results, with rates of treatment access being low for callers to the cannabis-specific helpline (43%) 48 and high for the general substance use helpline (64%). This may be explained by the difference in the follow-up period between the trials (one week and one month). However, the cannabis helpline callers also stated that they would not be likely to follow-through with their treatment referral in future, but were more likely to call the helpline service instead. In addition, rates of treatment access following a call to the substance use helpline were reportedly significantly greater for females, those who were married, employed, educated beyond year 10, and those who had injected drugs. 50
Discussion
Results from the present literature review suggest that IDA helplines operate around the world and there is some initial evidence that these services are effective. The majority of articles reviewed were purely descriptive. However, they reported impressive call rates and the authors were uniformly eager to promote their respective helplines. There was an obvious scarceness of randomised controlled trials to support IDA helplines, particularly with trials including comparisons with alternative face-to-face treatments. Nonetheless, the preliminary evidence was positive.
The literature was uniformly supportive of IDA helplines with one exception from an initial investigation into US services which found the helplines to be mostly unhelpful. 47 In contrast, in the controlled trials, the IDA helplines were found to be more successful in assisting with cannabis and alcohol use concerns with favourable comparisons to no treatment or minimal treatment. In addition, helpline callers were consistently satisfied with the services provided. The importance of advertising and promoting services which did not otherwise attract high call rates was emphasised.
When considering these findings, it is important to note some limitations of the review. First, the assessment and evaluation of studies was not conducted by two independent raters. Moreover, no additional data was obtained from authors.
The available evidence, while chiefly supportive of IDA helplines, is limited in its generalizability. Unlike tobacco helplines, few IDA helplines have been compared to any form of alternative treatment, other than minimal self-help interventions. No controlled trials have been conducted for the treatment of any substances other than cannabis and alcohol. In addition, trials have been limited by a number of methodological problems such as a lack of control for substance use or external treatment access during the trial period, low rates of treatment completion and high rates of trial drop-out. Moreover, the follow-up period of controlled trials was no longer than 6 months with the exception of a single trial including 12 months follow-up of the use of a helpline in supporting an Internet-based intervention. 43
In conclusion, although the evidence is mainly supportive of IDA helplines, further work is required to compare treatment outcomes in randomized groups.
