Tag: High OAT

A SASSI-4 Profile Analysis: Drug Offender with SAT As Highest Score

The following profile result is of a 35-year-old male referred for screening and possible assessment after a drug-related arrest. He completed the FVA/FVOD side of the questionnaire based on his entire life timeframe. His RAP score was 0, indicating no random responding and that the result should be valid. His Prescription Drug Scale score (Rx) was 1, so he did not meet the cutoff for High Probability of Prescription Drug Abuse.

Looking at this profile, we see that he was classified as high probability of a substance use disorder based on the following Decision Rules:

  • Decision Rule 1 with a FVOD score of 32.
  • Decision Rule 3 with an OAT score of 9.
  • Decision Rule 4 with a SAT score of 14.
  • Decision Rule 5 with a SYM score of 6 (5 or more) and a SAT score of 14 (4 or more).
  • Decision Rule 7 with an OAT score of 9 (7 or more) and a SAT score of 14 (6 or more).

Looking at the graph on the SASSI Adult Male Profile sheet, we see an extremely high elevation on the FVOD scale score which is significantly above the 98th percentile. Individuals who score this high on the FVOD are able to acknowledge currently having or having had numerous negative consequences and problems as a result of their use of drugs. This can include loss of control of the drug use as well as using a coping mechanism.  It is important to note that, since he was asked to use the “entire life” timeframe for the FVA and FVOD scales, his admission of having these consequences and problems with drugs may be related to some time in his past and not necessarily currently. For example, the client’s score on the SYM scale (which is similar to the FVA/FVOD in what it is measuring), is not nearly as elevated as his score on the FVOD even though the questions are not that dissimilar from the FVOD questions.

This suggests that he is not showing as much acknowledgement on the SYM scale of the symptoms of substance misuse that he admitted to on the FVOD scale. This could be related to the fact that the SYM scale (like all scales on the True/False side of the questionnaire) has no specific timeframe associated with it and therefore the client may have the belief that, while he has had significant problems with drugs in the past, he may not believe his current drug use is as much of a problem currently. It is highly recommended that clinicians do a content analysis of the client’s answers to the FVOD and SYM scale questions as this will provide more insight into the client’s acknowledged problems with drugs.   

This client’s elevated OAT scale score, like the elevated FVOD scale score, suggests a capacity to acknowledge and identify with many of the typical negative attributes (general personality and behavioral characteristics) and personal limitations that are often common among those with substance use disorders – e.g. impatience, resentment, self-pity, impulsiveness).  While the client can often see these “character defects”, they may not always feel motivated to change them or feel capable of changing. Given that the OAT score in this case is above the 98th percentile, it is highly probable that this individual may be able to closely identify with individuals in recovery from substance use disorder, such as those found at recovery support groups, and therefore may be more willing to trust these recovering individuals and follow their recovery advice.

The client’s highly elevated SAT score (the highest score on this profile), which is higher on the graph than the OAT score, suggests that despite the client’s capacity to acknowledge the more obvious problems and negative consequences associated with his use of drugs, there are subtle aspects of his behavior, personality, and addiction that are extremely hard for him to acknowledge. In other words, he may not be able recognize the pervasiveness of his addiction, how it negatively affects and rules every aspect of his life with deeply held negative thinking patterns, beliefs and negative coping patterns driving his addictive behaviors.

Clients with a pattern of scores like this client who tend to be able to acknowledge heavy usage, negative consequences and problem behaviors, may still be convinced, sincerely deluded into thinking that they are not truly addicted. They will often present as more “superficial” saying things like “well, I go to work every day and do my job so I couldn’t be addicted”. Clients with elevated SAT scores (especially higher on the graph than their OAT score) tend to be more initially resistant to the need for treatment and are more likely to relapse. These clients tend to be detached from their feelings and have relatively little insight into the basis and causes of their problems (namely substance addiction). These clients typically need a more intensive level of treatment where they can receive constant support for their recovery efforts and can get the kind of group processing therapy needed to help them connect with their feelings and learn how to cope with them without drugs.

In providing treatment to this type of client it is important to recognize that underneath the many excuses (other than substance addiction) for their problems, there is an individual with a substance use disorder who is likely in pain and scared. Individuals with high SAT scores may not be in touch with the pain and fear, largely because they immediately numb any negative feelings with substances as soon as they appear, but the pain and fear. In this case, intensive treatment and group work has to be accompanied by sensitive and skillful clinical intervention that lets the individual know that somebody is aware of their fear deep within and that it will be a relief to let it out to begin healing.

We hope you find this useful information regarding clinical issues.  As always, the Clinical Helpline at 888-297-2774 is open to serve you Monday through Friday, 9 am to 5 pm (EST).

PDF Version Available for Download

An Adolescent Trying to Mix Things Up!

The message this Adolescent was trying to send is as confused as he must be. A lot of contradictions in the numbers needed to be sorted out and made sense of.

This 16-year-old male responded to the FVA and FVOD questions for his whole lifetime.

The Prescription Drug Scale result was zero.

The VAL check was 4.

He met the criteria for a High Probability of a Substance Use Disorder based on Rules 1, 5, 6 and 7. A reminder, it requires only 1 yes to the 8 rules to meet the criteria for High Probability. More “yes’s” does not mean a more severe problem. Severity of a Substance Use Disorder is determined with a diagnosis from the DSM-5.

Another reminder, content analysis of the Face Valid scales i.e. FVA, FVOD, FRISK, ATT, SYM and Rx individual items can be examined to generate information regarding under what circumstances substances are used and with whom, along with underlying emotional reasons.

The FVA of 7 is elevated enough to meet the criteria of Rule 1.  The FVOD of 2 is below average and within the norm.

The FRISK score of 0 proves to be interesting given the context of the psychosocial history of this individual. It may be he did not want to disclose information regarding his friends or family.

The ATT score of 6 is highly elevated above the 98th percentile. This indicates he has a strong value and belief system regarding the use of substances. He may believe that everyone uses and that may be the case in his world.

The SYM score of 3 is within the norm so from his perspective, he has experienced minimal symptoms or consequences of his usage.

The OAT score of 7 is elevated above the 85th percentile so clinically significant but coupled with an higher SAT score of 6 as graphed is somewhat muted. On the one hand, an elevated OAT score indicates he can acknowledge personal limitations and shortcomings and may identify with other substance users though he may not want to change. On the other hand, the elevated SAT score can indicate denial or lack of awareness and insight or detachment from feelings.

The DEF score of 6 is within the norm and below average which can indicate self-esteem issues. It is a bit surprising the DEF score, in this case, is not elevated. The client was not defensive completing this questionnaire.

The SAM score, by itself, has no clinical interpretation.

The COR score of 5 is within the norm so there is no clinical interpretation.

What the psychosocial interview revealed: The client had a history of vaping nicotine with friends and had completed a Substance Use Education course. However, the client was smoking pot at home and minimizing his use. He was described as lying and manipulative. It was also disclosed his father is in recovery. As we all know, attitudes around Marijuana not being addictive or even a “drug” have been rapidly changing along with the legalization of Marijuana. However, the client’s risk of developing a significant risk of a substance use disorder is escalated by a family history of addiction.

Addressing the VAL score of 4:  With the High Probability of a Substance Use Disorder result, the VAL check score does NOT come into play. It would only be impactful if he had come up with a LOW Probability of a SUD. However, this score is quite high, and the administrator would rightly suspect the client was trying to skew the results even if it had no impact on the result.

Adolescent SASSI-A3 Review: High Probability Result with a VAL of 6

This adolescent male profile presents some initial complications for the reviewer in regards to the clinical interpretation as seen on the graph. The face valid scales fall either within the norm or below the norm. One of the subtle scales is above the 85th percentile so is clinically significant, and another is below the norm. An examination of the scales produces useful information to guide the discussion of the results with the client and directing appropriate treatment considerations.

This 17-year-old male completed the FVA/FVOD side of the questionnaire for his whole lifetime.

The VAL is 6.

Rx Scale is 0.

High Probability of a Substance Use Disorder is based on Rule 6.

Rule 6: a. FVOD 7 or more. (8)

            b. FRISK or ATT or SYM is 3 or more. (SYM – 3).

            c. OAT 5 or more (7).

Clinical Discussion

The FVOD of 8 is above average and should be noted. Examining those particular questions, he endorsed will provide the groundwork for how and under what circumstance he is using drugs. With the FRISK (0) and ATT (1) scores so low, his use is not necessarily tied to his peers, nor does he have a belief or value system that supports the idea that everyone uses substances. Looking at his one ATT score will help to evaluate any beliefs he may hold around substances.

The SYM (3) score is above average and again, because it is a face valid scale, content analysis will provide information regarding the consequences that he does acknowledge.

The OAT (7) scale is significant because it is elevated above the 85th percentile. This is the subtle scale that you want elevated as it indicates someone who can acknowledge limitations and shortcomings. He can probably identify with other substance users and those behaviors represented in that population such as impatience, resentment, self-pity, or impulsiveness. This, of course, does not mean he wants to or believes that he can change. But this information can be used as a positive to recognize the insights he may have around his use.

The low SAT (1) score (below the 15th percentile) gives some clues on how best to approach this client. This score indicates he is very hypersensitive to what others think about him. He may come across as having a chip on his shoulder so tread lightly!

The DEF (8) score, though above average, is still within the norm so does not indicate significant defensiveness on the client’s part.

The SAM (3) and COR (3) have no clinical significance.

Does the VAL score of 6 impact the results? Given the outcome was High Probability based on Rule 6, the impact is nil. The VAL is significant only if the outcome was Low Probability. However, with that score, the evaluator may hypothesize that perhaps the client was trying to skew the results but failed.

Questions remain regarding the current use of substances by the client. Is he minimizing his use or is he presenting an accurate picture? He was not defensive so perhaps his overriding concern was how he was viewed by the evaluator.

Treatment Considerations

Recommendations for the level of treatment need to be considered if he does have a diagnosable disorder based on the DSM-5. Actual current use also needs to be established. The elevated OAT score does indicate he will not feel out of place in a group setting. Prior history of substance use issues also need to be considered. It would appear, however, that outpatient treatment would be a consideration with the level of intervention to be determined by the overall assessment.

We recommend administrators of the SASSI have access to The Adolescent SASSI-A3 User Guide and Manual. It contains information on scoring, interpreting profiles and includes examples of profiles. It defines all the scales, what they represent, clinical considerations and giving feedback. The Manual also contains the research and validation information. Please call our Customer Service number for more information on how to order – 800-726-0526.

PDF Version Available for Download

Adolescent A3 – Emphasis on COR Scale

This profile is a good example of needing to be careful with assumptions.

Overview of CORRECTIONAL (COR) SCALE

The COR scale provides information pertaining to the possibility that the client may have a relatively high risk of experiencing legal problems. It is composed of items that differentiated between people who had a history of involvement in the juvenile justice system and those who did not.

It is very important not to over-interpret elevated COR scores. Teens who have elevated COR scores are responding similarly to individuals who have violated the law. This does not mean that all clients with elevated COR scores have broken laws. Also, there is no empirical evidence that these clients are at risk for future offenses.

If a client has an elevated COR score, it is worth exploring those behaviors which may be leading the client to make poor choices, especially after using substances and magnifying the tendency to exhibit those behaviors. These include anger management issues, impulsivity, risk taking behaviors, low frustration tolerance or poor social skills. The task of the clinician is to help the client see the relationship of their behavior to the consequences they have experienced and introduce alternatives to regulate their emotions and behavior.

The SASSI A3 was administered on a 15-year-old male and the time frame for the FVA/FVOD was for the past 6 months. The caller explained this time frame was used as the client identified that his substance use became problematic during this time. He indicated he had initially started smoking marijuana but in the last 6 months started abusing Percocet.

There is a lot to look at in this profile below.

He meets Rules 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 so met the criteria of a High Probability of having a Substance Use Disorder. A reminder that more “yeses” does not necessarily mean a more severe problem or meets the DSM-5 criteria for severity.

His Rx scale score was 1.

The FVA (2) is below average and within the norm.

The FVOD (18) is highly elevated and close to the 98th percentile so he is very open about his use and under what circumstances he is using.

As seen on the profile graph, both the FRISK (2) and ATT (3) are within the norm though above average.  These scores indicate he is not necessarily using due to peer pressure nor does he have a strong belief or value system that endorses substance use.

The SYM (9) is off the chart. He is endorsing negative consequences and symptoms of his use as well as loss of control.

It is worth taking the time to look at how he has answered his face valid scales and do content analysis of his answers because these will generate a lot of information for clinical insight and discussion on how and why he is using substances. As a reminder, the face valid scales are the FVA, FVOD, FRISK, ATT, SYM and Rx scales. You cannot do content analysis on the subtle scales.

Both the OAT (8) and SAT (7) are above the 85th percentile. Although the OAT indicates he can acknowledge personal limitations, the higher SAT score indicates a level of denial or lack of awareness or detachment from feelings and may present himself functioning well.

The DEF (4) score is very significant as it is below the 15th percentile. This indicates severe emotional pain, and he may be exhibiting depressive symptoms so it is suggested a mental status exam should be conducted.

As usual, there is no individual clinical interpretation to SAM (4).

The last scale, COR (10) is highly elevated above the 98th percentile. He is identifying with those issues that are normally seen in juveniles with legal issues.

This is where one must be careful with assumptions because this client has had no legal issues for any reason. It is more productive to explore those issues he is identifying with and affecting his choice making.

It is also curious that one can be very open (based on the FVOD and SYM) yet have an elevated SAT score as well. This may be due to the DEF score and the emotional pain he is in. Hypothetically, he may believe that if he was not “depressed” he would not be abusing drugs.

Another aspect of the profile is to explore his Rx result. According to the client’s report, he is primarily abusing Percocet. His score may reflect he is getting it illicitly and not through a doctor.

Finally, regarding treatment considerations, the caller reported he has tried to quit using the Percocet for a week but relapsed. A treatment plan including inpatient should be considered considering his reported relapse.

We hope this is helpful to you.

The clinical helpline line is open for your inquiries, M-F, 12- 5 (EST) at 888-297-2774 and you will be directed to a clinical consultant. If we are not available, please leave a message and we will return your call.

And as always, Thank you for your interest in the SASSI.

PDF Version Available for Download

Profile Configurations: When the OAT is higher than the SAT vs when the SAT is higher than the OAT     

One question we field often on the clinical helpline is what does it mean when either the OAT (Obvious Attributes) is higher than the SAT (Subtle Attributes) or when the SAT is higher than the OAT when both are elevated above the 85th percentile?

Read more

A SASSI-4 Profile Analysis: Prescription Drug Abuse

A caller requested help interpreting the result of a SASSI-4 questionnaire on a male client who presented himself as having an opioid addiction.

‘Curtis’ is a 36-year-old married man. He and his wife have no children. He works as a landscaper which he describes as physically very demanding. His parents smoked marijuana while he was growing up and Curtis also smokes marijuana. His older brother died ten years ago, and Curtis is still grieving. His brother also had substance use issues. Curtis also may have a history of being molested as a child which he does not remember, but his brother relayed that they were both molested by a babysitter.

Curtis reports a four-year history of opioid addiction which started as a result of a herniated disc in his back. He was initially prescribed hydrocodone for pain. He tried to quit once three years ago. Currently, he is ordering “stuff off the internet” or getting oxycontin from friends. He has been taking 180 mg/day with a maximum of 240 mg per day. It takes 150 mg. for him not to get “sick.” Curtis continues to smoke marijuana on the weekends about one time per week. He has a legal history of possession of marijuana in 2004 and attended an outpatient treatment program doing “what I had to do.”

He has been slowly tapering off the opioids for the past five weeks and currently is down to 80 mg/day.  His goal is to completely get off the opioids but he is not interested in residential treatment at this time because it is his busiest time of year. Although he has attended NA, he does not like it. Curtis is more drawn to Smart Recovery.

The SASSI-4 was administered for lifetime use on the face valid side of the questionnaire.

What were his SASSI-4 results?  Curtis has a ‘High Probability of having a Substance Use Disorder’ and a ‘High Probability of Prescription Drug Abuse.’

This looks like a straightforward profile on the face of it. His score of 42 on the FVOD and 18 on the SYM indicate someone who is very open concerning his drug use, and because these are face valid scales, content analysis could provide useful information to further explore with the client.

The OAT score of 6 is right at the 85th percentile. The client may be able to identify with some of the characteristics of substance users such as impatience, resentment, self-pity and impulsiveness. However, the SAT score of 8 is higher than the OAT and may blunt the ability for Curtis to have insight into his behavior. When the SAT is higher than the OAT, the client may exhibit a lack of awareness or simply denial around the impact drugs are having on his life. In this case and not unusual, opioid users do not see themselves as “typical” addicts. That may account for the OAT score.

The DEF score of 2 can be a ‘red-flag’ as it is below the 15th percentile. A score this low can indicate someone with poor ego strength, feeling helpless and hopeless and may be exhibiting symptoms that look like depression. The clinician may want to do a mental health screening or refer the client for screening.

The FAM score of 5 is also very low, below the 15th percentile. This can indicate the client is focused on himself and not that concerned about others. This does not indicate a personality disorder but given the client’s circumstances, makes sense that he would be more internally focused.

The COR score of 8 is elevated above the 85th percentile. He has answered in a similar way to people who have had legal issues for any reason. We suggest screening for those behaviors or characteristics we often see in that population. These can range from poor social skills, low frustration tolerance, risk-taking behaviors, anger management issues or impulse control issues. These issues could be impacting on Curtis’s choice-making abilities.

Finally, looking at the Prescription Drug Scale. With the score of 14, it is quite clear that he is identifying behaviors associated with prescription drug abuse. Again, as a face valid scale, looking at these individual items will generate a lot of information for the clinician. The clinician will need to look at treatment readiness, discuss medication needs, possible referral and other reported clinical issues.

PDF Version Available for Download

A SASSI-4 Profile Analysis: Context Matters

If you have attended one of our trainings either in-person or online, you know the section on how to administer the SASSI to a client is one of the most important. A thoughtful approach can set the tone for the entire assessment by helping a client feel more at ease and engaged in the treatment process. We emphasize the importance of first establishing rapport with the client. The questionnaire is presented as an aid, not a test with right or wrong answers. We instruct to administer the true/false side first, then checking the appropriate time frame for the face valid side.  Letting the client know s/he will have a chance to discuss the results at a later time increases the client’s comfort level.

Our protocol is based on the recommended one-on-one consultation.  We realize that is not always possible. Administrators of the SASSI work in a variety of settings including schools, probation departments, EAP, treatment agencies, institutions and private practice. Since the SASSI does not require a professional to administer it, a variety of personnel can be trained, but both the context and the administrator can have a significant impact on the receptivity of the client.

This example of the context of a SASSI given to a client dramatically shows the difference the setting can make in the results. One of our clinicians fielded this call. The administrator did not know which results to use even though both profiles came up with a high probability of having a Substance Use Disorder.

The client is a 46-year-old male who was given the SASSI at the Courthouse in a packet of material he was instructed to complete. Two weeks later he was given another SASSI to complete. This time with a counselor assigned to evaluate him.

Here are the results of the first SASSI he completed at the Courthouse:

As you can see, he meets Decision Rule # 9.  Looking at the graph, some scales and numbers stand out.  On his face valid scales, including SYM, his numbers were within the norm, between the 15th and 85th percentile. His OAT score is extremely low which indicates he has a hard time acknowledging personal limitations or shortcomings and may have difficulty in groups. The other significant score is the DEF score of 8. In spite of the elevated DEF score, he did meet one rule. The SAM is almost at the 85th percentile so, in my mind, I might be more inclined to say he was defensive about his substance use and perhaps minimizing on the face valid scales. This hypothesis would depend on the rest of the assessment with any additional information. However, he was given the SASSI to complete within a packet of materials, and it is very unclear what instructions he was given, if any, on how to complete the SASSI.

Let’s look at the results of the 2nd administration given just two weeks later in the office of the counselor who was evaluating him after meeting and talking with the counselor.

In this profile, the client meets multiple decision rules including numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 10. All it takes is one rule to meet high probability and more than one does not mean a more severe substance use disorder. Diagnosis and severity are based on the DSM-5 criteria.  It is evident his raw scores have changed to impact the decision rule results.

There is a significant change in his Face Valid Scales with an FVA of 11 and an FVOD of 14. His SYM score of 6 also shows elevation. OAT has changed from a 0 to a 9. He is now indicating a willingness to acknowledge shortcomings and limitations. In addition, he probably can identify with other substance abusers so a referral to a group treatment program can be considered.

The significant drop in the DEF score from an 8 to a 5 is nice to see.  The client met with the counselor who was able to establish rapport by making the client more comfortable and explaining what the SASSI is and how it will be used in the context of the assessment. The low FAM score reflects the client’s internal state of mind. He is probably very concerned about what is going on within himself and not so concerned about others.

The final interesting scale change is the COR score and probably more representative of the client’s self- assessment at this point. Perhaps he is more able to identify impulsive or anger management issues, risk-taking behaviors, low frustration issues, or poor social skills. It gives the counselor some insight on what to explore, regarding behaviors which are impacting the client’s choices.

The most important difference in these two profiles was how the SASSI was presented to the client. Context, and establishing rapport can produce a more useful SASSI by obtaining a depth of clinical information. As an aside, we were not informed on why the SASSI was administered twice within a two-week time frame. We do not usually recommend doing so. It may have been the counselor was unaware of the first SASSI administration until receiving the completed materials from probation.

We hope you find this useful information regarding clinical issues.  As always, the Clinical Helpline at 888-297-2774 is open to serve you Monday through Friday, 9 am to 5 pm (EST).

PDF Version Available for Download

SASSI Identifies Rx Abuse (with video)

 ‘Reggie’ is a 37-year-old married man. He and his wife have two children. He works as a warehouse worker where he was recently injured in a shipping dock accident. He recently returned to work after being on worker’s comp for several months during which time he was prescribed opioids for his pain. He was sent to his employer’s EAP provider for evaluation after returning to work and struggling with coping with the continued pain and poor job performance.

Reggie T’s responses illustrate another profile often seen in people who acknowledge that they use drugs excessively and that it negatively impacts on their functioning and relationships.

Given Reggie’s high level of drug use and consequences, you might consider a more comprehensive evaluation to determine whether he may need supervised detoxification or other intensive intervention.

You may find Reggie ready to acknowledge that he uses drugs frequently and that he may also drink too much. However, he may not see that his behavior varies dramatically from others who don’t have a substance use disorder. Feedback on where his scores fall on the profile sheet may help him see that his behaviors are not typical. It may be useful to know that Reggie’s wife is currently in treatment for drug and alcohol abuse due to a DUI. Their mutual abuse of substances may help promote their beliefs that their substance use is normal. Examining the items that Reggie endorsed on the FVA, FVOD, SYM and Rx scales may provide useful insight into his motivations for using and help him see the consequences that result from his use.

In this first video watch Reggie’s initial EAP visit in which he was asked to take the SASSI.

This second video is the follow-up session where he discusses his SASSI results with the EAP provider.

A Review of a SASSI-4

The SASSI-4 I am reviewing is interesting for what it is not.

The client was instructed to complete the FVA/FVOD for the last 12 months.
The client is a 34 year old male with a history of drug and alcohol use. He reports that two and a half years ago he successfully completed treatment. He stopped doing drugs but continues to consume alcohol. He was being evaluated by the order of the court for an “altercation with his ex-spouse”. He does meet multiple rules and comes up with a high probability of a substance use disorder. Remember the number of Rules met does not mean a more significant disorder. The diagnosis is based on the DSM-5 with the designation of mild, moderate or severe based on the number of symptoms met.

As seen on the profile sheet, he has a number of elevated scales including the FVA, SYM, OAT, SAT and COR. What is interesting, is that his DEF is not elevated and is below average staying within the norm. For domestic violence cases, this is fairly unusual. Often we see an elevated DEF above the 85th percentile. The FVA and SYM scores indicate an openness and acknowledgment of his use as well as symptoms and consequences. The elevated SYM also indicates he is either hanging out with or from a family of heavy users. In this case, he disclosed his family has a history of alcohol abuse.

The elevated OAT score indicates that he can probably identify with other substance users and those behaviors we often see with substance abusers i.e. impatience, resentment, self-pity and impulsiveness. On the other hand, his elevated SAT indicates a lack of awareness or insight or simple denial of the impact alcohol is having on him. He readily acknowledges his past drug issues but has put alcohol in a separate category. His final elevated scale is COR. Regardless of any past or present legal issues, we encourage evaluating for those behaviors that impact the ability to make good choices. These behaviors can range from poor social skills, low frustration tolerance, risk-taking behaviors to impulse control or anger management issues.

Utilizing the results: The evaluation started out as a domestic violence case but transitioned to also include substance use. The fact that the client was open about his alcohol use, not defensive and has a successful treatment history suggests he may be willing to take a look at his alcohol use and its impact on his behavior. His elevated OAT score does indicate treatment readiness and he is not going to feel out of place in a group setting. The emphasis will be to help him connect the dots between his alcohol use and any impulsive behaviors. This does not take the place of any recommended intervention for anger management issues he may have. The administrator has a good opportunity to facilitate the client to continue the work needed on his recovery and deal with all his issues.

We hope this is helpful for you in your work with your clients. As usual, the free clinical helpline is open for your questions M-F, 11-5, (EST). Don’t hesitate to call us whether you are new to the SASSI or an old hand.

PDF Version Available for Download

Interpreting the Results of an Adolescent SASSI-A3 with a High OAT Score

Happy New Year everyone!

I received my first Adolescent A-3 call on the helpline and was so excited and when I heard the numbers, I knew exactly why the clinician was calling.

As you look at the profile, you can see most of the numbers are within the norm. He meets Rule 6 so comes up with a High Probability of a Substance Use Disorder and no Prescription Drug Abuse.  So, what clinical information can the scale scores give you with so few scales outside the norm?

Although the FVOD is within the norm, it is above average and as recommended, you can do content analysis of his Face Valid scales. Another scale to pay attention to is the OAT score of 7 which is elevated. This suggests the client can acknowledge personal limitations and shortcomings and identify with other substance abusers. However, he may not want to or think he can change. The other significant score is SAT with a score of 1 which is below the 15th percentile. This suggests he may be hypersensitive to others and comes across as having a chip on his shoulder. This gives you good information on how to approach this client, especially when giving him feedback as you process the results with him because he is not giving you a whole lot of direct information regarding his use.

A word about the VAL of 6. If the numbers had resulted in a Low Probability of a Substance Use Disorder, you would question the results and do further investigation. Because he met Rule 6, there is no need to address the VAL. That said, with the VAL being so high, was this individual trying to manipulate the questionnaire and didn’t succeed?

Finally, users of the older version will notice that the SCS has been eliminated. This will require your use of the DSM-5 to determine the diagnosis and level of severity from your assessment.

Hope this information is instructive and assists you in your practice. And remember, as usual, we are here to help, so give the clinical line a call at 800-726-0526, press 2.

PDF Version Available for Download