Page 117 - PhD GT

Table 5.1
measures
LDQ
SSQ
interview re coping
ICSdrg 1st pilot
interview re control
ICSdrg
CBIdrg
main substance/use data
The samples recruited for Study 3: sample size and measures administered to each.
sample2
n=45
(used for adapting CBI)
ü ü
sample 3
n=30
(used for adapting ICS)
ü ü
sample 4
n=118
(used for validating both)
ü
ü
sample 5
n=61
(used for retest both scales)
ü
ü
ü üüüü
age and gender ü ü
5.7.3 Procedures
Following discussions with Nick Heather (the first author of the ICS), I adapted individual items in the ICS by replacing the alcohol related words with heroin or heroin use related words and by replacing the instruction referring respondents to the past six months with a reference to the past three months. The guiding principle was to replace as few words as possible. The reason for modifying the instruction was two-fold: the planned follow-up periods for the main study were three and twelve months and therefore the results obtained at the first follow-up point needed to be based on the follow-up period. Further it was, and remains, my view that dependence and therefore also impaired control is capable of change in a period less than six months and that it is difficult for participants to give responses that are based on this length of time. The adapted instrument (see Appendix 4) was named ICSdrg and was administered to thirty attenders for problems of heroin use at the Leeds Addiction Unit (Sample 3). I interviewed the respondents as to the suitability of the items and the ability of these to reflect feelings they had about their drug use and its control.
No individual expressed difficulty with any of the adapted items, though a small number of people expressed difficulty with the length of the instructions in Part 2. Occasional complaints were made about repetition of the items in Parts 2 and 3 and these may have been the result of not reading the instructions. Possibly respondents were put off doing so by the length of these
ü
105