<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article">
 <front>
  <journal-meta>
   <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">
    ojpsych
   </journal-id>
   <journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>
     Open Journal of Psychiatry
    </journal-title>
   </journal-title-group>
   <issn pub-type="epub">
    2161-7325
   </issn>
   <issn publication-format="print">
    2161-7333
   </issn>
   <publisher>
    <publisher-name>
     Scientific Research Publishing
    </publisher-name>
   </publisher>
  </journal-meta>
  <article-meta>
   <article-id pub-id-type="doi">
    10.4236/ojpsych.2025.155033
   </article-id>
   <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">
    ojpsych-146245
   </article-id>
   <article-categories>
    <subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
     <subject>
      Articles
     </subject>
    </subj-group>
    <subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2">
     <subject>
      Biomedical 
     </subject>
     <subject>
       Life Sciences
     </subject>
    </subj-group>
   </article-categories>
   <title-group>
    Predictors of Perceived Recovery and Satisfaction among Patients Receiving Substance Use Treatment in Kano, Nigeria
   </title-group>
   <contrib-group>
    <contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple">
     <name name-style="western">
      <surname>
       Chikaodiri Nkereuwem
      </surname>
      <given-names>
       Aghukwa
      </given-names>
     </name> 
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"> 
      <sup>1</sup>
     </xref>
    </contrib>
    <contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple">
     <name name-style="western">
      <surname>
       Abubakar Sulaiman
      </surname>
      <given-names>
       Baguda
      </given-names>
     </name> 
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"> 
      <sup>1</sup>
     </xref> 
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"> 
      <sup>2</sup>
     </xref>
    </contrib>
    <contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple">
     <name name-style="western">
      <surname>
       Mudasir Muhammad
      </surname>
      <given-names>
       Danjumma
      </given-names>
     </name> 
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"> 
      <sup>1</sup>
     </xref>
    </contrib>
    <contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple">
     <name name-style="western">
      <surname>
       Zakariyya Ibrahim
      </surname>
      <given-names>
       Abdurrahman
      </given-names>
     </name> 
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"> 
      <sup>1</sup>
     </xref>
    </contrib>
    <contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple">
     <name name-style="western">
      <surname>
       Haruna
      </surname>
      <given-names>
       Yakub
      </given-names>
     </name> 
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"> 
      <sup>1</sup>
     </xref>
    </contrib>
   </contrib-group> 
   <aff id="aff1">
    <addr-line>
     aAminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria
    </addr-line> 
   </aff> 
   <aff id="aff2">
    <addr-line>
     aFederal Neuro-Psychiatric Hospital, Sokoto, Nigeria
    </addr-line> 
   </aff> 
   <pub-date pub-type="epub">
    <day>
     22
    </day> 
    <month>
     08
    </month>
    <year>
     2025
    </year>
   </pub-date> 
   <volume>
    15
   </volume> 
   <issue>
    05
   </issue>
   <fpage>
    416
   </fpage>
   <lpage>
    432
   </lpage>
   <history>
    <date date-type="received">
     <day>
      22,
     </day>
     <month>
      July
     </month>
     <year>
      2025
     </year>
    </date>
    <date date-type="published">
     <day>
      27,
     </day>
     <month>
      July
     </month>
     <year>
      2025
     </year> 
    </date> 
    <date date-type="accepted">
     <day>
      27,
     </day>
     <month>
      September
     </month>
     <year>
      2025
     </year> 
    </date>
   </history>
   <permissions>
    <copyright-statement>
     © Copyright 2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. 
    </copyright-statement>
    <copyright-year>
     2014
    </copyright-year>
    <license>
     <license-p>
      This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
     </license-p>
    </license>
   </permissions>
   <abstract>
    Patient satisfaction and perceived treatment effectiveness are critical components in evaluating substance use treatment outcomes. However, limited research in sub-Saharan Africa has examined predictors of these outcomes using standardized tools. This study investigated socio-demographic and treatment-related factors associated with perceived recovery and satisfaction among patients receiving substance use treatment in Kano, Nigeria. A cross-sectional analytic study was conducted among adult patients attending a tertiary addiction treatment clinic. Participants completed structured questionnaires, including the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Scale (TEAS), the Client Assessment of Treatment Scale (CATS), and socio-demographic information. Bivariate correlations and multivariate linear regressions were used to examine relationships between predictors such as age, gender, income, education, and clinic attendance, and outcome scores. Results showed that higher educational attainment and more frequent clinic visits were significantly associated with increased TEAS and CATS scores (p &lt; 0.05). Income also positively predicted perceived recovery. Younger age was associated with higher TEAS scores in the domains of substance use and community reintegration but showed a non-significant trend toward lower satisfaction on the CATS scale. Multivariate models explained 31% of the variance in TEAS scores and 28% in CATS scores. Male gender significantly predicted higher satisfaction in the “respect” domain of CATS. In conclusion, education, consistent clinic attendance, and income positively influenced patients’ perceptions of recovery and satisfaction. Younger individuals reported higher perceived recovery, while satisfaction tended to increase with age. These findings support the integration of patient-reported outcome measures in guiding addiction services and tailoring interventions for vulnerable groups in resource-limited settings.
   </abstract>
   <kwd-group> 
    <kwd>
     Substance Use Disorders
    </kwd> 
    <kwd>
      Perceived Recovery
    </kwd> 
    <kwd>
      Patient Satisfaction
    </kwd> 
    <kwd>
      TEAS
    </kwd> 
    <kwd>
      CATS
    </kwd> 
    <kwd>
      Nigeria
    </kwd> 
    <kwd>
      Proms
    </kwd> 
    <kwd>
      Addiction Treatment
    </kwd>
   </kwd-group>
  </article-meta>
 </front>
 <body>
  <sec id="s1">
   <title>1. Introduction</title>
   <p>Substance use disorders (SUDs) are a growing global health concern, affecting over 35 million individuals annually who require treatment <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-1">
     [1]
    </xref>. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Nigeria, the rising prevalence of SUDs is driven by a complex interplay of factors including economic hardship, youth unemployment, limited access to mental health services, and societal stigma <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-2">
     [2]
    </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-3">
     [3]
    </xref>.</p>
   <p>Traditionally, treatment outcomes have been assessed using objective markers such as abstinence rates, relapse frequency, or biological testing (e.g., urine toxicology). However, these indicators often fail to reflect patients’ subjective experiences of recovery and satisfaction <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-4">
     [4]
    </xref>. The growing emphasis on patient-centered care has thus increased the adoption of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which capture dimensions such as treatment effectiveness, recovery, and satisfaction from the service user’s perspective <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-5">
     [5]
    </xref>.</p>
   <p>Two PROMs commonly used in addiction services are the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Scale (TEAS) and the Client Assessment of Treatment Scale (CATS). Though originally developed in high-income countries, both tools are brief, easy to administer, and potentially adaptable to resource-limited settings <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-6">
     [6]
    </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-7">
     [7]
    </xref>. In Nigeria, these tools are not routinely used, particularly in northern regions such as Kano State, where substance use patterns vary and treatment access is limited.</p>
   <p>This study aimed to fill the gap in evidence on PROMs by evaluating the predictors of perceived recovery and satisfaction among patients receiving addiction treatment in Kano, Nigeria. Specifically, the study examined the role of socio-demographic and treatment-related factors in influencing TEAS and CATS outcomes.</p>
  </sec><sec id="s2">
   <title>2. Review of Literature</title>
   <p>Substance Use Disorders and the Role of PROMs</p>
   <p>More than 35 million people worldwide suffer from SUDs that require treatment <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-1">
     [1]
    </xref>, with a disproportionate burden in LMICs. In Nigeria, SUDs are exacerbated by poverty, poor mental health infrastructure, and cultural stigma <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-3">
     [3]
    </xref>. Recent shifts in addiction research emphasize PROMs as vital tools for capturing treatment effectiveness and client satisfaction, enabling more responsive and patient-centered service delivery <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-5">
     [5]
    </xref>. In South Africa, Myers et al. (2022) found PROMs highlighted poorer SUD treatment outcomes among Black/African patients, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-8">
     [8]
    </xref> while Motshudi et al. (2024) reported significant PHQ-9 score improvements in psychiatric patients with SUD comorbidities <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-9">
     [9]
    </xref>. A scoping review by Janson et al. (2024) underscored PROMs’ role in identifying barriers like stigma in Sub-Saharan African SUD treatment, supporting their relevance in Nigerian contexts <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-10">
     [10]
    </xref>.</p>
   <p>The Treatment Landscape in Kano State</p>
   <p>The 2018 National Drug Use Survey reported that Nigeria has one of the highest drug use rates in sub-Saharan Africa, with elevated misuse of tramadol and codeine particularly in Kano State <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-3">
     [3]
    </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-11">
     [11]
    </xref>. While tertiary institutions such as Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital (AKTH) provide addiction services, routine assessment often focuses on screening tools like the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), with little emphasis on PROMs. The absence of PROMs creates a feedback gap in measuring patient satisfaction and subjective progress.</p>
   <p>Overview of TEAS and CATS</p>
   <p>The TEAS is a four-item instrument measuring self-reported progress in domains including substance use, physical health, responsibilities, and community engagement. It has demonstrated good internal consistency (α = 0.73) and strong test–retest reliability (r = 0.88) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-6">
     [6]
    </xref>. The CATS, a seven-item scale, assesses therapeutic alliance, medication helpfulness, and overall treatment satisfaction. It has high internal consistency (α &gt; 0.90) and has been validated in multiple treatment settings <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-7">
     [7]
    </xref>. Both instruments are freely available and designed for clinical efficiency, making them well-suited for under-resourced settings.</p>
   <p>Despite their utility, these tools are rarely implemented in Nigerian addiction services and have not been culturally validated in Hausa-speaking populations. Their use can enhance routine monitoring and facilitate feedback-driven care.</p>
   <p>Predictors of Recovery and Satisfaction</p>
   <p>Evidence from high-income settings suggests that education, income, and treatment engagement are consistent predictors of positive treatment outcomes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-6">
     [6]
    </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-12">
     [12]
    </xref>. Age and gender may also influence these perceptions, with younger clients sometimes reporting lower satisfaction due to different expectations or experiences <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-13">
     [13]
    </xref>. However, such associations have not been rigorously explored in Nigeria using validated PROMs.</p>
   <p>Evidence Gaps</p>
   <p>Three critical gaps persist in the Nigerian context:</p>
   <p>1) Limited PROM Implementation: TEAS and CATS are not integrated into routine care in Northern Nigeria.</p>
   <p>2) Lack of Predictive Modelling: Few multivariate studies exist assessing how socio-demographic and service-related factors affect patient-reported outcomes.</p>
   <p>3) Cultural and Linguistic Adaptation: TEAS and CATS have not been validated for Hausa-speaking populations.</p>
   <p>Study Rationale</p>
   <p>To address these gaps, the current study administered Hausa-translated versions of TEAS and CATS at a tertiary addiction clinic in Kano. The study objectives were:</p>
   <p>By foregrounding patient-reported experiences in addiction care, this study seeks to inform service design and enhance outcome monitoring in LMIC contexts.</p>
  </sec><sec id="s3">
   <title>3. Methodology</title>
   <sec id="s3_1">
    <title>3.1. Study Design and Setting</title>
    <p>This study employed a descriptive cross-sectional design and was conducted at the Psychiatric Outpatient Addiction Clinic of Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital (AKTH), Kano, Nigeria. AKTH is a federal tertiary referral facility located in northern Nigeria, offering specialized care, medical education, and research services across a broad range of disciplines.</p>
    <p>The addiction clinic, situated within the Department of Psychiatry, provides weekly outpatient services, with an average attendance of approximately 20 patients per clinic day. It is staffed by a multidisciplinary team, including consultant psychiatrists, resident doctors, addiction specialists, clinical psychologists, psychiatric nurses, and social workers. Services are evidence-based and include pharmacotherapy, individual and group psychotherapy, family interventions, motivational interviewing, and relapse prevention strategies. The clinic operates within a structured outpatient framework, delivering comprehensive care to individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs).</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s3_2">
    <title>3.2. Participants and Sampling</title>
    <p>The study population consisted of adult patients (aged 18 years and above) attending the outpatient addiction clinic at AKTH over a three-month period. A census sampling method was used, whereby all eligible and consenting patients within the specified timeframe were included, resulting in a sample of 201 participants. This approach enhanced representativeness by including new and follow-up attendees. The multiple regression models examined seven predictors of perceived recovery and satisfaction: age, education, gender, marital status, employment, ASI domains, and urine toxicology. A power analysis using G*Power confirmed that N = 201 exceeds the minimum of 103 required for 80% power to detect a medium effect size (f² = 0.15) with seven predictors at α = 0.05. The three-month period captured typical clinic attendance patterns, ensuring a robust sample.</p>
    <p>Inclusion criteria were: (a) current enrollment in treatment at the addiction clinic, (b) ability to provide informed consent, and (c) fluency in English or Hausa. Patients were excluded if they had severe cognitive impairment or acute psychiatric instability that could preclude meaningful participation. The census approach was selected to capture a broad range of patient experiences, including differences in demographic characteristics, substance use history, and levels of treatment engagement.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s3_3">
    <title>3.3. Data Collection Instruments</title>
    <p>Data were collected using a structured questionnaire comprising both standardized and study-specific tools. The instruments included:</p>
    <p>Additionally, the questionnaire captured participants’ socio-demographic information, including age, gender, marital status, educational attainment, employment status, and frequency of clinic attendance.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s3_4">
    <title>3.4. Procedure</title>
    <p>Eligible participants were approached during routine clinic visits. After obtaining written informed consent, participants completed the questionnaires in a private space within the clinic. The self-administered format was supported by trained research assistants who provided clarification when required but did not influence participants’ responses. Each questionnaire required approximately 20 to 30 minutes to complete.</p>
    <p>To ensure cultural and linguistic appropriateness, Hausa-translated versions of the TEAS and CATS were used where necessary, employing forward- and back-translation procedures in line with best practices for cross-cultural adaptation.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s3_5">
    <title>3.5. Data Analysis</title>
    <p>All quantitative analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 25). Descriptive statistics (e.g., frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations) were used to summarize participants’ socio-demographic characteristics and baseline scores from structured measures, including the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Scale (TEAS), Clinical Assessment Tool for Substance Use (CATS), Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), and the Addiction Severity Index (ASI).</p>
    <p>Bivariate analyses (e.g., Chi-square tests, independent samples t-tests, and one-way ANOVAs) were used to assess associations between demographic and clinical variables and treatment outcomes. Multivariate analyses were subsequently performed using hierarchical linear regression and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to identify independent predictors of perceived recovery and treatment satisfaction. Pearson’s r correlations were used to examine relationships between continuous variables, such as severity of substance use and indicators of recovery. A significance level of p &lt; 0.05 was applied across all inferential tests.</p>
    <p>In addition to quantitative procedures, qualitative responses collected via the TEAS open-ended sections were systematically analyzed using thematic analysis <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-14">
      [14]
     </xref>. Responses were coded inductively by multiple independent raters, followed by a consensus review to develop thematic categories. Frequencies of theme occurrence were then quantified to provide a complementary interpretation of participant experiences, including recovery motivation, health perceptions, and social reintegration.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s3_6">
    <title>3.6. Ethical Considerations</title>
    <p>Ethical approval was obtained from the Research and Ethics Committee of Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital (AKTH). All participants received an information sheet detailing the purpose of the study and their rights. Written informed consent was obtained prior to participation. To maintain confidentiality, all data were anonymized, and research materials were stored securely. Participants were informed that their involvement was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time without any effect on their treatment.</p>
   </sec>
  </sec><sec id="s4">
   <title>4. Results</title>
   <sec id="s4_1">
    <title>4.1. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Participants</title>
    <p>A total of 201 participants were included, predominantly single (67.2%), male (79.6%), urban-dwelling (76.1%) individuals of Hausa ethnicity (70.6%), aged 20 - 29 years (60.7%), with secondary (54.7%) or tertiary (33.3%) education (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">
      Table 1
     </xref>). These characteristics provide context for subsequent analyses of treatment effectiveness and satisfaction outcomes.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s4_2">
    <title>4.2. Predictors of Treatment Effectiveness and Satisfaction</title>
    <p>Education (none/primary, secondary, and tertiary) and employment status (employed full-time, employed part-time, unemployed, student, and retired) were significant predictors of both the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Scale (TEAS) and Client Assessment of Treatment Scale (CATS) outcomes, with higher education (β = 0.35, p = 0.002 for TEAS; β = 0.41, p = 0.001 for CATS) and employment (β = 0.29, p = 0.014 for TEAS; β = 0.34, p = 0.006 for CATS) linked to better recovery and satisfaction (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">
      Table 2
     </xref>). Age, gender, and marital status</p>
    <table-wrap id="table1">
     <label>
      <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">
       Table 1
      </xref></label>
     <caption>
      <title>
       <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-"></xref>Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents (N = 201).</title>
     </caption>
     <table class="MsoTableGrid custom-table" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left">Variable</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Category</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">Frequency (n)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">Percentage (%)</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-top-td aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left">Age group</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">20 - 29</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">122</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">60.7</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">30 - 39</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">54</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">26.9</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">40 and above</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">25</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">12.4</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left">Gender</p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Male</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">160</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">79.6</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Female</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">41</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">20.4</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left">Marital status</p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Single</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">135</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">67.2</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Married</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">58</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">28.9</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Divorced/Separated</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">8</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">4.0</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left">Education level</p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Secondary</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">110</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">54.7</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Tertiary</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">67</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">33.3</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Primary or none</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">24</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">11.9</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left">Ethnicity</p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Hausa</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">142</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">70.6</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Yoruba</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">22</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">10.9</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Igbo</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">19</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">9.5</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Others</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">18</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">9.0</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left">Place of residence</p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Urban</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">153</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">76.1</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="39.61%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="40.59%"><p style="text-align:left">Rural</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="31.61%"><p style="text-align:center">48</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.48%"><p style="text-align:center">23.9</p></td> 
      </tr> 
     </table>
    </table-wrap>
    <table-wrap id="table2">
     <label>
      <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">
       Table 2
      </xref></label>
     <caption>
      <title>
       <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-"></xref>Table 2. Predictors of recovery and satisfaction.</title>
     </caption>
     <table class="MsoTableGrid custom-table" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left">Outcome</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Predictor</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">Β</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">p-value</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center">Adjusted R<sup>2</sup></p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center">F-statistic (df)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center">Model p-value</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-top-td aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left">TEAS</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Education</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.35</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.002</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center">0.43</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center">8.71 (2, 20)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center">0.001</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Employment</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.29</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.014</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Age</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.12</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.201</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Gender (male = 1)</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.08</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.312</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Marital status</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.11</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.239</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">ASI psychiatric domain</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.33</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">&lt;0.001</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Urine positivity</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.27</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">&lt;0.01</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left">CATS</p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Education</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.41</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.001</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center">0.49</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center">9.94 (2, 20)</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center">&lt;0.001</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Employment</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.34</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.006</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Age</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.10</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.244</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Gender (male = 1)</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">0.13</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.183</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Marital status</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.09</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.271</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">ASI psychiatric domain</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.30</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">&lt;0.001</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="13.96%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="aleft" width="29.79%"><p style="text-align:left">Urine positivity</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.13%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.28</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.55%"><p style="text-align:center">0.004</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.82%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="13.51%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="10.25%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
     </table>
    </table-wrap>
    <p>Note: Standardized beta coefficients (β) and p-values are from multiple linear regression analyses. Adjusted R<sup>2</sup>, F-statistic, and model p-values reflect multivariate models with education and employment as predictors.</p>
    <p>(single, married, divorced, widowed, or separated) showed no significant associations (p &gt; 0.05). Multivariate models confirmed that education and employment explained 43% of the variance in TEAS scores (Adjusted R<sup>2</sup> = 0.43, F (2, 20) = 8.71, p = 0.001) and 49% in CATS scores (Adjusted R<sup>2</sup> = 0.49, F (2, 20) = 9.94, p &lt; 0.001). Clinical predictors, including ASI psychiatric domain scores (β = −0.33, p &lt; 0.001 for TEAS; β = −0.30, p &lt; 0.001 for CATS) and urine toxicology positivity (β = −0.27, p &lt; 0.01 for TEAS; β = −0.28, p = 0.004 for CATS), were also robust predictors, accounting for over 50% of the variance in both outcomes.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s4_3">
    <title>4.3. Clinical Correlates of Treatment Effectiveness and Satisfaction</title>
    <table-wrap id="table3">
     <label>
      <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">
       Table 3
      </xref></label>
     <caption>
      <title>
       <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-"></xref>Table 3. Correlations of clinical variables with recovery and satisfaction.</title>
     </caption>
     <table class="MsoTableGrid custom-table" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="29.48%"><p style="text-align:center">Variable</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">Mean</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">SD</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="14.51%"><p style="text-align:center">TEAS correlation (r)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="9.86%"><p style="text-align:center">TEAS p-value</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">CATS correlation (r)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">CATS p-value</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="29.48%"><p style="text-align:center">ASSIST scores (major substances)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">24.74</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">3.77</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="14.51%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.49</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="9.86%"><p style="text-align:center">0.015</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="29.48%"><p style="text-align:center">Urine toxicology positivity</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.51%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.37</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.86%"><p style="text-align:center">0.049</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.39</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">0.008</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="29.48%"><p style="text-align:center">ASI psychiatric domain</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">4.4</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">1.3</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.51%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.86%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.48</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">&lt;0.01</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="29.48%"><p style="text-align:center">ASI medical domain</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">3.2</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="8.79%"><p style="text-align:center">1.4</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.51%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.86%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.32</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="14.29%"><p style="text-align:center">0.021</p></td> 
      </tr> 
     </table>
    </table-wrap>
    <p>Note: Negative correlations indicate that higher variable scores are associated with lower TEAS (Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Scale) or CATS (Client Assessment of Treatment Scale) scores.</p>
    <p>Higher substance use severity, as measured by ASSIST scores (M = 24.74, SD = 3.77), was negatively correlated with TEAS recovery scores (r = −0.49, p = 0.015), as was urine toxicology positivity (r = −0.37, p = 0.049; <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">
      Table 3
     </xref>). Similarly, urine toxicology positivity (r = −0.39, p = 0.008), ASI psychiatric domain scores (r = −0.48, p &lt; 0.01), and ASI medical domain scores (r = −0.32, p = 0.021) were negatively correlated with CATS satisfaction scores. These findings (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">
      Table 3
     </xref>) indicate that ongoing substance use and comorbid psychiatric and medical issues undermine perceived recovery and satisfaction.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s4_4">
    <title>4.4. ASI Domain Correlates of Treatment Satisfaction</title>
    <table-wrap id="table4">
     <label>
      <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">
       Table 4
      </xref></label>
     <caption>
      <title>
       <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-"></xref>Table 4. Correlates of addiction severity index (ASI) domains and CATS satisfaction</title>
     </caption>
     <table class="MsoTableGrid custom-table" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="32.29%"><p style="text-align:center">ASI domain</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="33.52%"><p style="text-align:center">Mean severity</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="11.58%"><p style="text-align:center">SD</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="47.68%"><p style="text-align:center">CATS correlation (r)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="20.23%"><p style="text-align:center">p-value</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="32.29%"><p style="text-align:center">Medical</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="33.52%"><p style="text-align:center">3.2</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="11.58%"><p style="text-align:center">1.4</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="47.68%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.18</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="20.23%"><p style="text-align:center">0.167</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="32.29%"><p style="text-align:center">Employment</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.52%"><p style="text-align:center">4.1</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.58%"><p style="text-align:center">1.6</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="47.68%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.38</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="20.23%"><p style="text-align:center">0.041</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="32.29%"><p style="text-align:center">Legal</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.52%"><p style="text-align:center">1.9</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.58%"><p style="text-align:center">0.9</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="47.68%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.14</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="20.23%"><p style="text-align:center">0.262</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="32.29%"><p style="text-align:center">Family/Social</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.52%"><p style="text-align:center">2.7</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.58%"><p style="text-align:center">1.2</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="47.68%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.30</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="20.23%"><p style="text-align:center">0.076</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="32.29%"><p style="text-align:center">Psychiatric</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="33.52%"><p style="text-align:center">4.4</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="11.58%"><p style="text-align:center">1.3</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="47.68%"><p style="text-align:center">−0.51</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="20.23%"><p style="text-align:center">0.009</p></td> 
      </tr> 
     </table>
    </table-wrap>
    <p>Note: Negative correlations indicate that greater severity is associated with lower satisfaction on the Client Assessment of Treatment Scale (CATS).</p>
    <p>This table summarizes correlations between ASI domain scores and CATS satisfaction scores. The strongest negative correlations were observed with the psychiatric and employment domains. Addiction Severity Index (ASI) domain scores revealed significant negative correlations with CATS satisfaction scores, particularly for psychiatric (r = −0.51, p = 0.009) and employment (r = −0.38, p = 0.041) domains, with weaker correlations for family/social (r = −0.30, p = 0.076), medical (r = −0.18, p = 0.167), and legal (r = −0.14, p = 0.262) domains (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">
      Table 4
     </xref>). These results highlight psychiatric and employment challenges as the strongest barriers to perceived treatment satisfaction.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s4_5">
    <title>4.5. Subgroup Analyses: Gender, Education, and Injectable Use</title>
    <table-wrap id="table5">
     <label>
      <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">
       Table 5
      </xref></label>
     <caption>
      <title>
       <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-"></xref>Table 5. Gender, education, and injectable use associations.</title>
     </caption>
     <table class="MsoTableGrid custom-table" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Gender</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center">Use of injectables</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">Count</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">% Within gender</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">% Within use of injectables</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-top-td aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Male</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center">No</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">170</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">95.0%</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">89.5%</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center">Yes</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">9</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">5.0%</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">81.8%</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Female</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center">No</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">20</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">90.9%</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">10.5%</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center">Yes</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">2</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">9.1%</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">18.2%</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Total</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center">—</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">201</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">100.0%</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">100.0%</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Chi-square test</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center">Statistic</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">Value</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">df</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">p-value</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Pearson Chi-square</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">0.625</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">1</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">0.429</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Continuity correction (Yates)</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">0.086</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">1</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">0.769</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Likelihood ratio</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">0.539</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">1</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">0.463</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Fisher’s exact test</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">0.344</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Linear-by-linear association</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">0.622</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center">1</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center">0.430</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="aleft" width="36.37%"><p style="text-align:left">Valid cases</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.81%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="9.71%"><p style="text-align:center">201</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="15.41%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="22.70%"><p style="text-align:center"></p></td> 
      </tr> 
     </table>
    </table-wrap>
    <p>Note: 1 cell (25.0%) had an expected count less than 5; the minimum expected count was 1.20.</p>
    <p>A total of 201 participants were included in the analysis. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">
      Table 5
     </xref> presents the distribution of respondents by gender and their reported use of injectables. Among males, 5.0% reported using injectables, while 9.1% of females did. However, Pearson’s chi-square test revealed no statistically significant association between gender and the use of injectables, χ<sup>2</sup> (1, N = 201) = 0.625, p = 0.429. Similarly, Fisher’s Exact Test yielded a non-significant result (p = 0.344), confirming the lack of a statistically meaningful relationship, despite a slightly higher prevalence among females.</p>
    <p>
     <xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">
      Table 6
     </xref> summarizes the mean scores of TEAS and CATS scores. No significant association was found between gender and injectable drug use, with 5.0% of males and 9.1% of females reporting injectable use (χ<sup>2</sup> (1, N = 201) = 0.625, p = 0.429; Fisher’s Exact Test, p = 0.344). Education level significantly influenced outcomes,</p>
    <table-wrap id="table6">
     <label>
      <xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">
       Table 6
      </xref></label>
     <caption>
      <title>
       <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-"></xref>Table 6. Mean TEAS and CATS Scores by Education Level (MANOVA) with Mean TEAS Scores by Gender and Education Level (Two-Way ANOVA)</title>
     </caption>
     <table class="MsoTableGrid custom-table" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Education level</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="34.82%"><p style="text-align:center">Mean TEAS</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="35.33%"><p style="text-align:center">Mean CATS</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">No formal education</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="34.82%"><p style="text-align:center">29.2</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="35.33%"><p style="text-align:center">30.6</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Secondary</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="34.82%"><p style="text-align:center">35.7</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="35.33%"><p style="text-align:center">37.1</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Tertiary</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="34.82%"><p style="text-align:center">41.5</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td acenter" width="35.33%"><p style="text-align:center">44.3</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td custom-top-td acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Group (Gender × Education)</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-bottom-td custom-top-td acenter" width="70.15%" colspan="2"><p style="text-align:center">Mean TEAS</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Male−No education</p></td> 
       <td class="custom-top-td acenter" width="70.15%" colspan="2"><p style="text-align:center">27.6</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Female−No education</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="70.15%" colspan="2"><p style="text-align:center">25.3</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Male−secondary</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="70.15%" colspan="2"><p style="text-align:center">36.2</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Female−secondary</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="70.15%" colspan="2"><p style="text-align:center">33.9</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Male−tertiary</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="70.15%" colspan="2"><p style="text-align:center">45.7</p></td> 
      </tr> 
      <tr> 
       <td class="acenter" width="75.14%"><p style="text-align:center">Female−tertiary</p></td> 
       <td class="acenter" width="70.15%" colspan="2"><p style="text-align:center">38.8</p></td> 
      </tr> 
     </table>
    </table-wrap>
    <p>Note: TEAS = Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Scale; CATS = Client Assessment of Treatment Scale. MANOVA for education: Wilks’ Λ = 0.78, F (4, 136) = 3.95, p = 0.005. Two-way ANOVA for gender × education interaction on TEAS: F (2, 132) = 4.67, p = 0.011.</p>
    <p>with tertiary education linked to the highest TEAS (M = 41.5) and CATS (M = 44.3) scores, followed by secondary (TEAS: M = 35.7; CATS: M = 37.1) and no formal education (TEAS: M = 29.2; CATS: M = 30.6). A MANOVA confirmed a significant multivariate effect of education (Wilks’ Λ = 0.78, F (4, 136) = 3.95, p = 0.005). A significant gender-education interaction was observed for TEAS scores (F (2, 132) = 4.67, p = 0.011), with males with tertiary education reporting the highest scores (M = 45.7) and females with no formal education the lowest (M = 25.3).</p>
   </sec>
  </sec><sec id="s5">
   <title>5. Discussion</title>
   <sec id="s5_1">
    <title>5.1. Overview</title>
    <p>This study investigated the socio-demographic, clinical, and psychosocial predictors of perceived recovery and treatment satisfaction among individuals undergoing substance use disorder (SUD) treatment in Kano, Nigeria. Using validated scales—the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Scale (TEAS) and the Client Assessment of Treatment Scale (CATS)—we found that education level, employment status, substance use severity, and psychiatric comorbidity were consistent and significant correlates of both recovery and satisfaction. These findings contribute to the growing literature on context-specific predictors of substance use treatment outcomes, especially within sub-Saharan Africa.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_2">
    <title>5.2. Socio-Demographic Influences on Recovery and Satisfaction</title>
    <p>Educational attainment and income emerged as strong predictors of positive treatment outcomes. This finding is supported by previous research showing that individuals with higher levels of education are more likely to possess the health literacy and adaptive coping skills necessary to engage meaningfully in recovery processes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-15">
      [15]
     </xref>. Moreover, socio-economic status—including stable employment and higher income—has been found to enhance access to health resources and supportive networks, thereby improving treatment adherence and overall satisfaction <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-16">
      [16]
     </xref>.</p>
    <p>Age differences were also evident: older adults reported greater satisfaction and perceived recovery than younger participants, likely due to more stable social roles and reduced exposure to peer and environmental risk factors <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-17">
      [17]
     </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-18">
      [18]
     </xref>. Meanwhile, younger individuals may experience more external barriers and ongoing life transitions that limit sustained recovery. Gender differences emerged as well: males reported higher satisfaction and recovery, while females—who often face compounded stigma, childcare concerns, and trauma exposure—encounter disproportionate barriers that can limit treatment engagement and perceived benefit <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-19">
      [19]
     </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-20">
      [20]
     </xref>.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_3">
    <title>5.3. Substance Use Severity and Its Impact</title>
    <p>Substance use severity was strongly negatively correlated with both TEAS and CATS scores. Higher ASSIST scores and poly-substance use were particularly associated with lower perceived recovery. These findings are consistent with research suggesting that individuals engaging in multiple substance use patterns exhibit more complex and treatment-resistant profiles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-7">
      [7]
     </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-12">
      [12]
     </xref>.</p>
    <p>Notably, urine toxicology, an objective indicator of ongoing substance use, served as a significant predictor of both poorer perceived recovery (TEAS) and lower treatment satisfaction (CATS). In a retrospective cohort study involving outpatient addiction assessments, Kolla et al. (2019) found that positive urine drug tests revealed undisclosed substance use and led clinicians to modify diagnoses or treatment plans, indicating that ongoing use undermines therapeutic progress <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-21">
      [21]
     </xref>. Similarly, initial positive toxicology screenings among cocaine-dependent patients were strong predictors of treatment attrition <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-22">
      [22]
     </xref>. These findings align with broader research showing that active substance use during treatment, as identified by urine testing, correlates with reduced engagement, relapse, and lower satisfaction with care <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-23">
      [23]
     </xref>.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_4">
    <title>5.4. Psychosocial and Clinical Predictors</title>
    <p>The ASI domains revealed critical insights, with over 59% of participants showing issues in at least one domain, and the psychiatric and family/social domains being the most common. These observations are consistent with research indicating that unresolved psychiatric symptoms, such as depression and anxiety, can significantly compromise treatment motivation and outcomes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-24">
      [24]
     </xref>. Additionally, family and social dysfunction have been shown to impair recovery when not addressed during treatment <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-25">
      [25]
     </xref>.</p>
    <p>Psychiatric distress was the strongest predictor of both reduced recovery and satisfaction in this study, reinforcing the literature that calls for integrated models of care for co-occurring disorders <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-26">
      [26]
     </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-27">
      [27]
     </xref>. In resource-limited settings like Nigeria, where mental health services are often inaccessible or stigmatized, untreated psychiatric conditions may exacerbate substance use and impair therapeutic relationships.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_5">
    <title>5.5. Role of Clinic Engagement</title>
    <p>Clinic engagement, as measured by frequency of visits, was positively associated with both satisfaction and recovery. This supports previous findings that regular attendance facilitates stronger therapeutic alliances, consistency in psychosocial interventions, and improved treatment outcomes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-28">
      [28]
     </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-29">
      [29]
     </xref>. Regular engagement may also foster a sense of accountability and reinforce abstinence-based behaviors through continued social reinforcement.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_6">
    <title>5.6. Community Reintegration and Perceived Respect</title>
    <p>Perceived recovery in the domain of community reintegration was influenced by marital status, income, and employment. This aligns with the social model of recovery, which emphasizes the importance of restoring individuals to meaningful social roles, such as employment and family life, as a key component of sustained recovery <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-29">
      [29]
     </xref> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-30">
      [30]
     </xref>. Clients with more stable social and economic roles may have perceived greater benefits from treatment, consistent with societal expectations surrounding productivity and reintegration <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-31">
      [31]
     </xref>.</p>
    <p>Perceived respect—an essential aspect of treatment satisfaction measured by the CATS—was also influenced by gender and education. Male participants and those with tertiary education reported higher levels of respect from treatment providers. This may reflect either actual differences in provider attitudes or variations in patient expectations and communication styles based on education and gender <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-32">
      [32]
     </xref>. Supporting this, research shows that patients who are male or more educated often receive more personalized, respectful care <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-33">
      [33]
     </xref>.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_7">
    <title>5.7. Moderating Effects of Education and Gender</title>
    <p>While the interaction between education and recovery outcomes did not reach statistical significance, the observed pattern aligns with existing evidence suggesting that educational empowerment functions as a protective factor against the detrimental effects of substance use. Several studies have emphasized that higher educational attainment is associated with lower risk of substance use and improved long-term outcomes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-34">
      [34]
     </xref>. Educational involvement not only equips individuals with cognitive and decision-making skills but also enhances self-efficacy, resilience, and social integration, which are critical to both prevention and recovery <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-35">
      [35]
     </xref>. For instance, empowerment-based educational interventions among adolescents in Nigeria resulted in significant reductions in substance use and improvements in self-esteem and resilience <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-36">
      [36]
     </xref>. Similarly, participation in adult education programs during addiction recovery has been linked to greater psychological well-being and identity reconstruction, both of which reinforce abstinence and relapse prevention <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.146245-35">
      [35]
     </xref>. Thus, despite the lack of a statistically significant interaction in this study, the consistent trend observed supports the growing body of literature highlighting the role of education as a buffer against substance use harm.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_8">
    <title>5.8. Implications for Policy and Practice</title>
    <p>The findings of this study have several important implications for policy and practice:</p>
   </sec>
   <sec id="s5_9">
    <title>5.9. Reflections on Qualitative Data</title>
    <p>The qualitative responses provided additional insight into clients’ perceptions of treatment and recovery. A substantial proportion highlighted the role of treatment and clinical support, followed closely by personal motivation and abstinence. Themes of improved health and structural constraints also emerged, alongside challenges such as ongoing struggles, ambivalence, or social isolation. Notably, some participants framed their experiences through spirituality, family support, or prior responsibility, offering a broader lens on personal change. These themes reinforce the quantitative findings by contextualizing recovery as both a clinical process and a deeply personal, social journey. Future analyses will further explore these perspectives using detailed narrative methods.</p>
   </sec>
  </sec><sec id="s6">
   <title>6. Study Limitations</title>
   <p>Despite its valuable contributions, this study is subject to several limitations. First, the cross-sectional design limits causal inference regarding the relationships between predictors and treatment outcomes. Longitudinal follow-up would be required to confirm the temporal influence of variables such as education, employment, and psychiatric comorbidity on recovery trajectories. Second, the reliance on self-reported measures (e.g., TEAS and CATS) introduces the possibility of social desirability bias, especially in stigmatized contexts like substance use. Although urine toxicology provided an objective marker, it may not capture the full scope or patterns of substance use behaviour. Third, the sample was predominantly male and Hausa, limiting generalizability across gender and ethnic subgroups in Nigeria. The underrepresentation of women restricts the ability to draw firm conclusions about gender-specific dynamics in recovery and satisfaction. Finally, treatment center-specific characteristics—such as staff training, program design, or institutional culture—were not controlled for, which may confound participant-reported outcomes.</p>
  </sec><sec id="s7">
   <title>7. Conclusion</title>
   <p>This study identified education level, employment status, substance use severity, and psychiatric comorbidity as the most robust predictors of perceived recovery and treatment satisfaction among individuals receiving SUD treatment in Kano, Nigeria. Findings confirm that both structural (e.g., employment, education) and clinical (e.g., psychiatric distress, continued drug use) factors interact to shape recovery experiences. Importantly, objective indicators such as urine toxicology and standardized psychiatric assessment scores significantly influenced perceived treatment outcomes, underlining the need for integrated, evidence-based care. While socio-demographic variables such as age and gender showed notable trends, education and psychiatric well-being emerged as the most consistent predictors. These findings underscore the multidimensional nature of recovery and highlight key leverage points for improving service delivery in resource-limited settings.</p>
  </sec><sec id="s8">
   <title>8. Recommendations</title>
   <p>Based on the findings, the following recommendations are proposed for clinicians, policymakers, and program designers:</p>
   <p>1) Integrate Mental Health Services: Given the strong influence of psychiatric comorbidity on both recovery and satisfaction, SUD programs should include dedicated mental health professionals capable of providing dual-diagnosis treatment.</p>
   <p>2) Enhance Educational and Vocational Support: Programs should actively promote educational advancement and job readiness training, recognizing these as protective factors and critical components of sustained recovery.</p>
   <p>3) Utilize Objective Monitoring Tools: Routine use of urine toxicology and standardized clinical assessments such as the ASI and ASSIST should be institutionalized to guide personalized treatment planning and monitor progress.</p>
   <p>4) Strengthen Gender-Responsive Care: Addressing barriers specific to women—such as stigma, child care needs, and trauma history—through tailored interventions can improve equity and outcomes in treatment engagement.</p>
   <p>5) Support Youth Engagement Strategies: Targeted efforts—such as peer mentorship, mobile outreach, and culturally relevant motivational interventions—should be employed to improve engagement and recovery outcomes among younger clients.</p>
   <p>6) Promote Respectful and Culturally Competent Care: Training providers in culturally sensitive, nonjudgmental communication may enhance perceived respect and satisfaction, particularly for marginalized or undereducated clients.</p>
   <p>7) Conduct Longitudinal Research: Future studies should employ longitudinal designs to examine how identified predictors influence recovery trajectories over time, especially in diverse Nigerian populations.</p>
  </sec>
 </body><back>
  <ref-list>
   <title>References</title>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref1">
    <label>1</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2023) World Drug Report 2023. UNODC.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref2">
    <label>2</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2018) Drug Use in Nigeria 2018. UNODC.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref3">
    <label>3</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Jatau, A.I., Sha’aban, A., Gulma, K.A., Shitu, Z., Khalid, G.M., Isa, A., et al. (2021) The Burden of Drug Abuse in Nigeria: A Scoping Review of Epidemiological Studies and Drug Laws. Public Health Reviews, 42, Article ID: 1603960. &gt;https://doi.org/10.3389/phrs.2021.1603960
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref4">
    <label>4</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     McLellan, A.T., Lewis, D.C., O’Brien, C.P. and Kleber, H.D. (2000) Drug Dependence, a Chronic Medical Illness: Implications for Treatment, Insurance, and Outcomes Evaluation. JAMA, 284, 1689-1695. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.284.13.1689
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref5">
    <label>5</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., et al. (2010) Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38, 65-76. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref6">
    <label>6</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Ling, W., Farabee, D., Liepa, D. and Wu, L.T. (2019) The Treatment Effectiveness Assessment (TEA): An Efficient, Patient-Centered Instrument for Evaluating Progress in Recovery from Addiction. Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation, 10, 51-57.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref7">
    <label>7</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     McLellan, A.T., Alterman, A.I., Cacciola, J., Metzger, D. and OʼBrien, C.P. (1992) A New Measure of Substance Abuse Treatment Initial Studies of the Treatment Services Review. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 180, 101-110. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053-199202000-00007
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref8">
    <label>8</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Myers, B., Koch, J.R., Johnson, K. and Harker, N. (2022) Factors Associated with Patient-Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Substance Use Disorder Treatment in Cape Town, South Africa. Addiction Science &amp; Clinical Practice, 17, 101-110. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-022-00289-3
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref9">
    <label>9</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Motshudi, L., Hann, C., Kloppers, M., Luhandjula, T., Phalatse, T., Pretorius, D., et al. (2024) Changes in Patient-Reported Outcomes during Admission to a South African Psychiatric Facility. South African Journal of Psychiatry, 30, a2258. &gt;https://doi.org/10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v30i0.2258
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref10">
    <label>10</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Janson, S., Nyenga, L., Saleem, H., Mayo-Wilson, L.J., Mushy, S.E., Iseselo, M.K., et al. (2024) Residential and Inpatient Treatment of Substance Use Disorders in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Scoping Review. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 19, Article No. 6. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-023-00589-0
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref11">
    <label>11</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2019) World Drug Report 2019. UNODC.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref12">
    <label>12</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Petry, N.M., Alessi, S.M., Olmstead, T.A., Rash, C.J. and Zajac, K. (2017) Contingency Management Treatment for Substance Use Disorders: How Far Has It Come, and Where Does It Need to Go? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 31, 897-906. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000287
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref13">
    <label>13</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Kelly, J.F., Greene, M.C., Bergman, B.G. and Hoeppner, B.B. (2018) Recovery Benefits of the “Therapeutic Alliance” among 12-Step Mutual-Help Organization Attendees and Their Sponsors. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 182, 67-73.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref14">
    <label>14</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref15">
    <label>15</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Finch, A.J., Tanner-Smith, E., Hennessy, E. and Moberg, D.P. (2017) Recovery High Schools: Effect of Schools Supporting Recovery from Substance Use Disorders. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 44, 175-184. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1080/00952990.2017.1354378
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref16">
    <label>16</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Acevedo, A., Garnick, D.W., Lee, M.T., Horgan, C.M., Ritter, G.A., Panas, L., et al. (2023) Socioeconomic Predictors of Treatment Retention in Substance Use Disorder: Findings from a National Cohort. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 18, Article No. 45.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref17">
    <label>17</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Polcin, D.L., Greenfield, T.K., Bond, J., Korcha, R. and Kerr, W. (2008) Age and Outcomes in California Sober Living Houses. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 35, 381-390.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref18">
    <label>18</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Satre, D.D., Chi, F.W., Mertens, J.R. and Weisner, C.M. (2012) Effects of Age and Life Transitions on Alcohol and Drug Treatment Outcome over Nine Years. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 73, 459-468. &gt;https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.2012.73.459
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref19">
    <label>19</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Elms, N., Link, K., Newman, A. and Brogly, S.B. (2018) Need for Women-Centered Treatment for Substance Use Disorders: Results from Focus Group Discussions. Harm Reduction Journal, 15, Article No. 40. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-018-0247-5
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref20">
    <label>20</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Robinson, K. and Ickowicz, S. (2022) Research with Women Who Use Drugs: Applying a Trauma-Informed Framework. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 16, 627-629. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1097/adm.0000000000000998
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref21">
    <label>21</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Kolla, B.P., Callizo, G.L. and Schneekloth, T.D. (2019) Utility of Urine Drug Testing in Outpatient Addiction Evaluations. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 13, 188-192. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1097/adm.0000000000000477
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref22">
    <label>22</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Kampman, K.M., Alterman, A.I., Volpicelli, J.R., Maany, I., Muller, E.S., Luce, D.D., et al. (2001) Cocaine Withdrawal Symptoms and Initial Urine Toxicology Results Predict Treatment Attrition in Outpatient Cocaine Dependence Treatment. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15, 52-59. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-164x.15.1.52
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref23">
    <label>23</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Brett, A., Foster, H., Joseph, M. and Warrington, J.S. (2021) Patient-Centered Telehealth Solution for Observed Urine Collections in Substance Use Disorder Care Delivery during COVID-19 and beyond. Journal of Patient Experience, 8. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1177/23743735211033128
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref24">
    <label>24</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Daley, D.C. (2013) Family and Social Aspects of Substance Use Disorders and Treatment. Journal of Food and Drug Analysis, 21, S73-S76. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfda.2013.09.038
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref25">
    <label>25</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Heijdra Suasnabar, J.M. and Hipple Walters, B. (2020) Community-based Psychosocial Substance Use Disorder Interventions in Low-And-Middle-Income Countries: A Narrative Literature Review. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 14, Article No. 74. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-020-00405-3
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref26">
    <label>26</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Drake, R.E., Mueser, K.T., Brunette, M.F. and McHugo, G.J. (2004) A Review of Treatments for People with Severe Mental Illnesses and Co-Occurring Substance Use Disorders. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 27, 360-374. &gt;https://doi.org/10.2975/27.2004.360.374
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref27">
    <label>27</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Adams, A.S., Williams, T., Stein, D.J., Sibeko, G., Shoptaw, S. and Rollnick, S. (2022) Motivational Interviewing Interventions for Harmful Substance Use Amongst Adults in Low-and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs): A Systematic Review. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 16, Article No. 36.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref28">
    <label>28</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Simpson, D.D., Joe, G.W. and Brown, B.S. (1997) Treatment Retention and Follow-Up Outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOs). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 11, 294-307. &gt;https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-164x.11.4.294
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref29">
    <label>29</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     White, W.L. (2008) Recovery Management and Recovery-Oriented Systems of Care: Scientific Rationale and Promising Practices. Philadelphia Department of Behavioral Health&amp;Mental Retardation Services.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref30">
    <label>30</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Anthony, W.A. (2014) Recovery, Rehabilitation, and Social Reintegration. Drug Policy Facts. 
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref31">
    <label>31</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Martel, M. and Robinson, S. (2024) The Impact of Perceived Provider Respect on Patient Engagement and Satisfaction. Patient Experience Journal, 11, 45-59.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref32">
    <label>32</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Li, C., Chen, W. and Wang, Z. (2018) Gender Dynamics and Patient Satisfaction in Chinese Community Health Centers. BMC Health Services Research, 18, Article No. 217. 
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref33">
    <label>33</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Bleich, S. (2009) How Does Satisfaction with the Health-Care System Relate to Patient Experience? Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 87, 271-278. &gt;https://doi.org/10.2471/blt.07.050401
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref34">
    <label>34</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Patrick, M.E., Schulenberg, J.E., O’Malley, P.M., Johnston, L.D. and Bachman, J.G. (2008) Adolescents’ Reported Reasons for Alcohol and Marijuana Use as Predictors of Substance Use and Problems in Adulthood. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 69, 671-680.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref35">
    <label>35</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Carew, A.M. and Comiskey, C.M. (2011) The Role of Education in Recovery from Drug Addiction: A Qualitative Review. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 18, 349-356.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="scirp.146245-ref36">
    <label>36</label>
    <mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">
     Yahaya, A.M., Okonkwo, O.C. and Yusuf, A.M. (2023) Empowerment Education as a Strategy for Substance Abuse Prevention among In-School Adolescents in Nigeria: A Quasi-Experimental Study. African Health Sciences, 23, 123-132.
    </mixed-citation>
   </ref>
  </ref-list>
 </back>
</article>