I have conducted online 12 step meetings and found that some people had rather remain anonymous. In reference to homeless people, some of the men in the shelter I work in now have laptop computers, a sign of the times. I have always believed in using unconventional methods to help addicts. I have been using computers to help for many years. A sign of the times, if you will.

Go to http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/pap.dtl to access the article. This article was uploaded in advance of print publication.

Has anyone seen the actual article? I looked for this study in the May 1 issue of American Journal of Psyhicatry but couldn't find it.

What is clear from the comments is that people jump to conclusions from reading a very brief summary of a study. The reactions are based on opinions and your own biases; this is from an unpublished study. Read the study, then comment.

I question what is the sampling group are they the street addict or individuals part of a EAP program. Many people involved with drugs do not have a consistent home let alone a computer.

I agree with Laurie. The government has a tendency to take a study like this and run with it... to the extent that they might decide all clients seeking treatment must participate in 'online treatment' for XXX days before they qualify for more services. The current practice with insurance companies and treatment is that the addict must prove that they fail at outpatient treatment... then fail at short-term before they will be approved for long-term treatment. By that point, how many will be dead? The software sounds like a good idea as supplemental help. There is a certain level of confidence with the shield of anonymity (i.e. confession in Catholicism). Hopefully the implications of this study are minimal and more hurdles in the healthcare world are not erected.

The only new thing this study is saying is that computer based education is an effective method for addiction education, which should be a part of any credible treatment program. Good treatment is not just comprised of therapeutic and fellowship groups, but education about the disease of addiction as well as other recovery topics noted in the study.

I think it is pretty clear that this research shows that the increase in outcomes comes with BOTH counseling and the computer program TOGETHER. That is the key. Not just the computer, but as an addition to other continuing care recommendations, not instead of. Any services that we can provide to patients as they are bridging that gap from treatment to home is valuable and as shown in the study above, can help improve outcomes from this chronic disease.

I tend to agree to an extent with previous comment. My biggest fear is that managed care and other funding sources will see something like this and decide that the computer program ALONE will be just as effective.

In my opinion client's that get out of a treatment program would do much better if they attended an Aftercare program for at least 6 months and then maybe do something like this (over the computer). I believe people need to have that face to face, along with attending some type of 12-step program or church whatever their preference is in the early part of their recovery, or if they just get out of a treatment program and begin a computer basis then I believe they are going to isolate themselves as so many do, which puts them right back in to relapse mode. I really don't agree with this--at least not so new in recovery, but not a bad idea later on in their recovery. I no I wouldn't have made it with treatment and then a computer in the beginning of my recovery, I needed that face to face Aftercare and 12-step meetings. That interaction is so important. Thanks for listening to me ramble on.