Validation of the Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) Identification Scale

Melinda Hohman
School of Social Work
San Diego State University
5500 Campanile Dr.
San Diego CA 92182-4119
USA
Phone: 619-594-5500
FAX: 949-363-7743
Email: mhohman@mail.sdsu.edu
 
John Clapp
School of Social Work
San Diego State University
5500 Campanile Dr.
San Diego CA 92182-4119
USA
Phone: 619-594-6859
FAX: 619-594-5991
Email: jdclapp@mail.sdsu.edu
 
Terry Carrilio
School of Social Work
San Diego State University
5500 Campanile Dr.
San Diego CA 92182-4119
USA
Phone: 619-594-0780
FAX: 619-594-5991
Email: TBEAR10009@aol.com
 
Purpose: Despite over a quarter of a century of research and educational training, helping professionals still have difficulty with the identification of those with alcohol and other drug (AOD) use problems.  Low rates of client AOD problem detection have been found among physicians, nurses, paraprofessional home visitors, probation officers, and social workers. Prior research has found that this may be due to lack of knowledge, attitudes towards substance users, or be related to job function.  This study sought to develop and validate a measure of the variables involved with problems in AOD identification to use for assessment and training purposes.

Methods: A large pool of items was generated based on the literature, the authors’ experiences, and those of other AOD practitioners.  These items were presented to a graduate social work AOD class for analysis and feedback, and 27 items were refined for the final scale.  The scale was then administered to undergraduate and graduate social work students enrolled in research classes, and to home visitors working in a community program, giving a final sample of 219.

Results:  Exploratory factor analysis using a rotated component matrix indicated that there were 14 items with factor loadings of .3 or greater. A three-factor solution included factors reflecting:  1) attitudes toward substance users, 2) impacts on client-worker relationships, and 3) knowledge of AOD use.  Internal consistency measures of the subscales were .80, .84, and .86, with an overall alpha of .86.

Implications: This study determined that the final version of the AOD Identification Scale had good overall internal consistency as well as supported previous findings that practitioner comfort with AOD identification may be related to attitudes, knowledge, and worker-client relationships. Workers’ concerns about relationships with clients may be related to lack of skill development in handling client anger that may arise when addressing sensitive issues.