Oregon Gambling Treatment System Jeff Marotta, PhD Problem Gambling Services Manager Alberta Gaming Research Institute’s 6th Annual Conference Banff, Alberta March 31, 2007
Gambling treatment in the context of emerging evidenced based practices. This presentation will offer the Oregon experience in piecing the puzzle together: • Identifying challenges • Employing strategic models • Overview of the Oregon treatment system • Viewing system measures
158,337 square KM • Population 3,690,505 • 2006 Major Industries - timber, paper products, farming (wheat, cattle), mining (coal), computer equipment, electronics
Oregon Gambling Expenditures (2005) $1.3 billion* In 1986 this figure was $95 million Source: Eco Northwest, 2007 http://www.econw.com/
Oregon Gambling: Summarized Oregon has more forms of legalized gambling and offers easier access to gambling than almost any other U.S. state - AND - Oregon is a nationally recognized leader in prevention, harm reduction and treatment for gambling problems Source: National Ctr for the Study of Gambling, 2006
Efforts to Address Problem Gambling • 1% of Lottery revenues dedicated to a Gambling Treatment Fund administered by DHS
Designing a treatment system in a young field. Challenges: There have been few gambling treatment outcome studies. Therefore, data to date may not represent the full spectrum of recovery modes. Few randomized clinical trials in PG treatment research - meaningful comparisons across treatments difficult. Unclear how different subgroups of PGs, including comorbidity profiles, respond to different treatment approaches
Where to start • Without a menu of evidenced based treatments must rely on theory driven and monitored approaches • Philosophical Models • Surveillance and feedback systems • Flexible design structure to respond to data driven performance measures
Strategic Plan: Oregon Problem Gambling Services Oregon Problem Gambling Services Released September 19, 2000 Influenced by: • Stepped-care approach to treatment • Sobell & Sobell (1999) • Public health approach to gambling • Korn & Shaffer (1999)
A Stepped Care Approach • Treatment should be individualized. • The treatments selected should be consistent with the contemporary research literature. • The recommended treatment should be least restrictive but still likely to work. Three fundamental principles of health care (Sobell & Sobell, 1999) Sobell, M.B., & Sobell, L.C. (1999). Stepped care for alcohol problems: An efficient method for planning and delivering clinical services. In J.A. Tucker, D.A. Dovovan, & G.A. Marlatt (Eds.), Changing addictive behavior: Bridging clinical and public health strategies (pp. 331-343). New York: Guilford Press.
Public Health Approach(Korn & Shaffer, 1999). Adoption of strategic goals for gambling • preventing gambling-related problems • protecting vulnerable groups • promoting balanced and informed attitudes, behaviors, and policies Endorsement of public health principles • prevention is a community priority, with appropriate allocation of resources • incorporating a mental health promotion approach • fostering personal and social responsibility for gambling policies and practices Adoption of harm reduction strategies. • healthy-gambling guidelines for the general public • vehicles for early identification • flexible treatment goals • surveillance and reporting systems Allocation of resources to identify and treat level 2 gamblers. Korn, D., & Shaffer, H. (1999). Gambling and the health of the public: Adopting a public health perspective. Journal of Gambling Studies, 15, 289–365.
System Components • Treatment • Prevention and outreach • Quality control and evaluation • Workforce development • Partnerships
Treatment Continuum of Care Gambling Evaluation and Reduction Program (GEAR) Corrections Program 27 outpatient treatment centers 3 crisis-respite programs 1 residential treatment program
Oregon Problem Gambling Help Line (05-06): • 2,129 calls for help • 93% resulted in referrals for service
Evidenced Based Process • Program development is data based and systematically monitored • Less concern about component analysis • Focus on outputs and outcomes • Require programs to adapt and develop their approach to optimize outcomes
System Evaluation Results • Treatment is working • 81% of clients reported either no gambling or reduced gambling at 6-months post-treatment1 • The system is working: • Oregon is one of the few states that appears to have averted a significant increase in problem gambling prevalence while expanding legalized gambling2 • Moore & Marotta, in press • National Center For the Study of Gambling, 2006.
Putting it all together We need more work to establish evidence based approaches, in the meantime, data driven processes can and must make do!
Further information can be found at: http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/addiction/gambling.shtml Or contact: Jeff Marotta, PhD Problem Gambling Services Manager Oregon Department of Human Services Addictions and Mental Health Division 503 945-9709 email@example.com Thank You