Abstinence Violation Effect AVE What It Is & Relapse Prevention Strategies

Some researchers propose that the self-control required to maintain behavior change strains motivational resources, and that this “fatigue” can undermine subsequent self-control efforts [78]. Consistent with this idea, EMA studies have shown that social drinkers report greater alcohol consumption and violations of self-imposed drinking limits on days when self-control demands are high [79]. Limit violations were predictive of responses consistent with the AVE the following day, and greater distress about violations in turn predicted greater drinking [80]. Findings also suggested that these relationships varied based on individual differences, suggesting the interplay of static and dynamic factors in AVE responses.

• Like the Sobells, Marlatt showed that reductions in drinking and harm were achievable in nonabstinence treatments (Marlatt & Witkiewitz, 2002).
• Elucidating the “active ingredients” of CBT treatments remains an important and challenging goal, Also, integration of neurocognitive parameters in relapse models as well as neural (such as functional circuitry involved in relapse) and genetic markers of relapse will be major challenges moving ahead19.
• Furthermore, 12-step programs often celebrate abstinence milestones and encourage participants to count abstinent days, leading to a perception that someone who resumes substance use is “going back to the beginning” and has not made progress in recovery.
• Marlatt and Gordon (1985) have proposed that the covert antecedent most strongly related to relapse risk involves the degree of balance in the person’s life between perceived external demands (i.e., “shoulds”) and internally fulfilling or enjoyable activities (i.e., “wants”).
• Relapse in addiction is of particular concern because it poses the risk of overdose if someone uses as much of the substance as they did before quitting.
• Central to the RP model is the role of cognitive factors in determining relapse liability.

Systematic reviews and large-scale treatment outcome studies

Cognitive restructuring, or reframing, is used throughout the RP treatment process to assist clients in modifying their attributions for and perceptions of the relapse process. In particular, cognitive restructuring is a critical component of interventions to lessen the abstinence violation effect. Thus, clients are taught to reframe their perception of lapses—to view them not as failures or indicators of a lack of willpower but as mistakes or errors in learning that signal the need for increased planning to cope more effectively in similar situations in the future. This perspective considers lapses key learning opportunities resulting from an interaction between coping and situational determinants, both of which can be modified in the future.

Empirical findings relevant to the RP model

Recognize that cravings are inevitable and do not mean that a person is doing something wrong. As with all things 12-step, the emphasis on accumulating “time” and community reaction to a lapse varies profoundly from group to group, which makes generalizations somewhat unhelpful. However, broadly speaking, there are clear features of 12-step programs that can contribute to the AVE.

Global Lifestyle Self-Control Strategies

Tonic processes include distal risks–stable background factors that determine an individual’s “set point” or initial threshold for relapse [8,31]. Personality, genetic or familial risk factors, drug sensitivity/metabolism and physical withdrawal profiles are examples of https://ecosoberhouse.com/ distal variables that could influence relapse liability a priori. Tonic processes also include cognitive factors that show relative stability over time, such as drug-related outcome expectancies, global self-efficacy, and personal beliefs about abstinence or relapse.

G Alan Marlatt

In developing a sense of objectivity, the client is better able to view his or her alcohol use as an addictive behavior and may be more able to accept greater responsibility both for the drinking behavior and for the effort to change that behavior. Clients are taught that changing a habit is a process of skill acquisition rather than a test of one’s willpower. As the client gains new skills and feels successful in implementing them, he or she can view the process of change as similar to other situations that require the acquisition of a new skill. The desire for immediate gratification can take many forms, and some people may experience it as a craving or urge to use alcohol. Although many researchers and clinicians consider urges and cravings primarily physiological states, the RP model proposes that both urges and cravings are precipitated by psychological or environmental stimuli. Ongoing cravings, in turn, may erode the client’s commitment to maintaining abstinence as his or her desire for immediate gratification increases.

• In contrast with the findings of Irvin and colleagues [36], Magill and Ray [41] found that CBT was most effective for individuals with marijuana use disorders.
• The RP model developed by Marlatt [7,16] provides both a conceptual framework for understanding relapse and a set of treatment strategies designed to limit relapse likelihood and severity.
• Thus, studies will need to emphasize measures of substance-related problems in addition to reporting the degree of substance use (e.g., frequency, quantity).
• In particular, cognitive restructuring is a critical component of interventions to lessen the abstinence violation effect.

Detailed discussions of relapse in relation to NDST and catastrophe theory are available elsewhere [10,31,34]. Understanding the AVE is crucial for individuals in recovery and those focused on healthier lifestyle choices. Instead of surrendering to the negative spiral, individuals can benefit from reframing the lapse as a learning opportunity and teachable moment.

2. Controlled drinking

It is important to highlight that most of the studies cited above did not provide goal-matched treatment; thus, these outcomes generally reflect differences between individuals with abstinence vs. non-abstinence goals who participated in abstinence-based AUD treatment. There has been little research on the goals of non-treatment-seeking individuals; however, research suggests that nonabstinence goals are common even abstinence violation effect among individuals presenting to SUD treatment. Among those seeking treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD), studies with large samples have cited rates of nonabstinence goals ranging from 17% (Berglund et al., 2019) to 87% (Enggasser et al., 2015). In Europe, about half (44–46%) of individuals seeking treatment for AUD have non-abstinence goals (Haug & Schaub, 2016; Heather, Adamson, Raistrick, & Slegg, 2010).

Critiques of the RP Model

About 26% of all U.S. treatment episodes end by individuals leaving the treatment program prior to treatment completion (SAMHSA, 2019b). Studies which have interviewed participants and staff of SUD treatment centers have cited ambivalence about abstinence as among the top reasons for premature treatment termination (Ball, Carroll, Canning-Ball, & Rounsaville, 2006; Palmer, Murphy, Piselli, & Ball, 2009; Wagner, Acier, & Dietlin, 2018). One study found that among those who did not complete an abstinence-based (12-Step) SUD treatment program, ongoing/relapse to substance use was the most frequently-endorsed reason for leaving treatment early (Laudet, Stanick, & Sands, 2009). A recent qualitative study found that concern about missing substances was significantly correlated with not completing treatment (Zemore, Ware, Gilbert, & Pinedo, 2021).

2. Relationship between goal choice and treatment outcomes

Thus, this perspective considers only a dichotomous treatment outcome—that is, a person is either abstinent or relapsed. In contrast, several models of relapse that are based on social-cognitive or behavioral theories emphasize relapse as a transitional process, a series of events that unfold over time (Annis 1986; Litman et al. 1979; Marlatt and Gordon 1985). According to these models, the relapse process begins prior to the first posttreatment alcohol use and continues after the initial use. This conceptualization provides a broader conceptual framework for intervening in the relapse process to prevent or reduce relapse episodes and thereby improve treatment outcome. In addition to issues with administrative discharge, abstinence-only treatment may contribute to high rates of individuals not completing SUD treatment.