Treatment Basics

Research on evidence-based practices for making Level of Care (LOC) recommendations - also referred to as patient placement decisions and treatment matching -demonstrates that mismatching clients to treatment, whether through under-treatment or over-treatment, reduces successful engagement in care (Magura et al., 2002) and leads to poorer treatment outcomes (Magura et al., 2002; McKay et al., 2000).

For this reason, it is imperative that assessors and case managers develop the knowledge and skills necessary to make informed, accurate level of care recommendations and to write clear, concise, and clinically defensible justifications to support those decisions.

Goal

To develop and/or enhance the knowledge and skills required to make informed and accurate level of care recommendations—and to write clear, concise clinical justifications for those decisions—using the ASAM Criteria (3rd Edition).

Learning Objectives

Participants will be able to:

• Identify and explain the rationale and benefits of using the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) Criteria.
• Identify and explain the key components of the ASAM Criteria.
• Identify the general characteristics that differentiate levels of care along the continuum of care.
• Identify and differentiate ASAM’s Six Dimensions of assessment.
• Identify clinical information and symptoms that correspond to each dimension’s assessment considerations and sub dimensions.
• Analyze and interpret clinical information necessary to determine risk ratings for ASAM’s Six Dimensions.
• Understand how to synthesize dimension risk ratings to formulate a level of care recommendation.
• Understand how to write clear and clinically defensible justifications for dimension risk ratings and level of care recommendations.
• Identify three common errors frequently made when writing clinical justifications.

Organizational Outcomes

Organizations whose staff successfully complete this workshop—and effectively transfer the acquired knowledge and skills to the workplace—should see measurable improvements in the accuracy of level of care recommendations and the quality of clinical justifications.

Improved treatment matching may also lead to increased rates of treatment initiation, engagement, and retention, as well as improved overall client outcomes.

Career and Professional Relevance

The ability to make informed clinical decisions using the ASAM Criteria—and to document those decisions with clear, concise, and clinically defensible justifications—is a highly valuable and marketable professional skill.

Approximately 30 states utilize the ASAM Criteria to varying degrees (Mee-Lee, 2005), and as many as 40 states employ utilization review mechanisms that require matching clients to appropriate levels of care using standardized criteria (Gregoire, 2000). Additionally, many treatment providers seek approval as substance use disorder service providers for insurance carriers, most of which require clinicians to demonstrate accurate decision-making and defensible documentation practices.

Mastery of the ASAM Criteria strengthens both clinical competence and professional credibility.