Andrew R Mayer1,2,3, Claire E Wilcox4, Andrew B Dodd1, Stefan D Klimaj1, Charlene J Dekonenko5, Eric D Claus1, Michael Bogenschutz6. 1. a The Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical and Environmental Research Institute , Albuquerque , NM , USA. 2. b Department of Psychology , University of New Mexico , Albuquerque , NM , USA. 3. c Neurology Department , University of New Mexico School of Medicine , Albuquerque , NM , USA. 4. d Department of Psychiatry , University of New Mexico , Albuquerque , NM , USA. 5. e School of Medicine , University of New Mexico , Albuquerque , NM , USA. 6. f Psychiatry , NYU School of Medicine , New York , NY , USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Attentional bias (i.e., differences in reaction time between drug and neutral cues) has been associated with a variety of drug-use behaviors (e.g., craving, abstinence). Reduction of bias may ultimately reduce use. OBJECTIVE: The current study examined whether attentional bias modification therapy (ABMT) reduced the frequency of drug use behaviors in individuals with cocaine use disorder (CUD). METHOD: Participants (n = 37) were randomly assigned to ABMT or control therapy, which systematically varied how frequently probes replaced neutral (ABMT = 100%; control therapy = 50%) relative to drug stimuli. Each intervention included 5 training sessions comprising a total of 2640 trials over 4 weeks. Clinical assessments occurred at baseline, post-intervention, 2 weeks and 3 months posttreatment. RESULTS: There were no baseline differences between groups on drug-use behaviors or other clinical measures. Contrary to predictions, both groups exhibited slower rather than faster reaction times for cocaine stimuli (p = 0.005) at baseline, with no relationship between bias and baseline measures of drug-use behavior. CONCLUSIONS:ABMT was not more effective than our control therapy at reducing attentional bias, reducing craving or changing other drug use behaviors. Current results suggest additional replication studies are needed to assess ABMT's efficacy in reducing drug-use behaviors in CUD.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Attentional bias (i.e., differences in reaction time between drug and neutral cues) has been associated with a variety of drug-use behaviors (e.g., craving, abstinence). Reduction of bias may ultimately reduce use. OBJECTIVE: The current study examined whether attentional bias modification therapy (ABMT) reduced the frequency of drug use behaviors in individuals with cocaine use disorder (CUD). METHOD:Participants (n = 37) were randomly assigned to ABMT or control therapy, which systematically varied how frequently probes replaced neutral (ABMT = 100%; control therapy = 50%) relative to drug stimuli. Each intervention included 5 training sessions comprising a total of 2640 trials over 4 weeks. Clinical assessments occurred at baseline, post-intervention, 2 weeks and 3 months posttreatment. RESULTS: There were no baseline differences between groups on drug-use behaviors or other clinical measures. Contrary to predictions, both groups exhibited slower rather than faster reaction times for cocaine stimuli (p = 0.005) at baseline, with no relationship between bias and baseline measures of drug-use behavior. CONCLUSIONS:ABMT was not more effective than our control therapy at reducing attentional bias, reducing craving or changing other drug use behaviors. Current results suggest additional replication studies are needed to assess ABMT's efficacy in reducing drug-use behaviors in CUD.
Authors: Ronald N Ehrman; Steven J Robbins; Melissa A Bromwell; Megan E Lankford; John R Monterosso; Charles P O'Brien Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2002-07-01 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Shijing Liu; Scott D Lane; Joy M Schmitz; Andrew J Waters; Kathryn A Cunningham; F Gerard Moeller Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Nehal P Vadhan; Kenneth M Carpenter; Marc L Copersino; Carl L Hart; Richard W Foltin; Edward V Nunes Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2007 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Reinout W Wiers; Katrijn Houben; Javad S Fadardi; Paul van Beek; Mijke Rhemtulla; W Miles Cox Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2014-08-30 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Andy C Dean; Erika L Nurmi; Scott J Moeller; Nader Amir; Michelle Rozenman; Dara G Ghahremani; Maritza Johnson; Robert Berberyan; Gerhard Hellemann; Ziwei Zhang; Edythe D London Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2018-11-10 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Janika Heitmann; Madelon E van Hemel-Ruiter; Karin M Vermeulen; Brian D Ostafin; Colin MacLeod; Reinout W Wiers; Laura DeFuentes-Merillas; Martine Fledderus; Wiebren Markus; Peter J de Jong Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2017-05-23 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Melvyn W B Zhang; Jiangbo Ying; Tracey Wing; Guo Song; Daniel S S Fung; Helen E Smith Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2018-08-15 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Melvyn Weibin Zhang; Jiang Bo Ying; Guo Song; Daniel S S Fung; Helen E Smith Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-04-04 Impact factor: 3.390