Search

Background and aims: Controlled drinking (CD) is an attractive treatment goal for a large proportion of individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD), but the availability of treatment methods supporting a goal of CD is scarce. We tested if behavioural self‐control training (BSCT) was superior to motivational enhancement therapy (MET) for individuals with AUD with a treatment goal of CD. Design: Randomized controlled two‐group trial. Follow‐ups were conducted at 12 and 26 weeks (primary end‐point) after inclusion. Setting: Three specialized dependency care clinics in Stockholm, Sweden. Participants: Two hundred and fifty self‐referred adults (52% men) fulfilling criteria of AUD (DSM‐5) and a stated treatment goal of CD. Intervention and comparator: BSCT (n = 125), a five‐session treatment based on cognitive behavioural therapy versus the active comparator, MET (n = 125), containing four sessions based on Motivational Interviewing. Measurements Primary outcome measure was mean weekly alcohol consumption at the 26‐week follow‐up, adjusted for baseline consumption. Conclusions: A randomized controlled trial found no evidence of a difference between behavioural self‐control training and motivational enhancement therapy in reducing weekly alcohol consumption. Both groups substantially reduced consumption and behavioural self‐control training was superior in reducing hazardous drinking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A substantial proportion of patients receiving cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) do not achieve remission, and drop-out is considerable. Motivational interviewing (MI) may influence non-response and drop-out. Previous research shows that MI as a pre-treatment to CBT produces moderate effects compared with CBT alone. Studies integrating MI with CBT (MI-CBT) are scarce. Aims: To test the feasibility of MI-CBT in terms of therapist competence in MI and various participant measures, including recruitment and retention. In addition, separate preliminary evaluations were conducted, exploring the effects of CBT alone for anxiety disorders and depression, and of MI-CBT for anxiety disorders, depression and unhealthy lifestyle behaviours. Method: Using a randomised controlled parallel trial design, participants were recruited in routine psychiatric care and allocated to CBT alone or MI-CBT. Means in feasibility measures and within-condition Hedges' g effect sizes in treatment outcome measures were calculated. Authors were not blind to treatment allocation, while independent raters were blind. Results: Seventy-three patients were assessed for eligibility, and 49 were included. Participant perceptions of treatment credibility, expectancy for improvement, and working alliance were similar for both conditions. Overall, effect sizes were large across outcome measures for both conditions, including anxiety and depressive symptoms and functional impairment. However, therapists did not acquire sufficient competence in MI and the drop-out rate was high. Conclusions: MI-CBT proved feasible in some respects, but the present study did not support the progression to a randomised controlled trial designed to assess the effectiveness of MI-CBT. Additional pilot studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: University students in a study on estimated blood alcohol concentration (eBAC) feedback apps were offered participation in a second study, if reporting continued excessive consumption at 6-week follow-up. This study evaluated the effects on excessive alcohol consumption of offering access to an additional skills training app. Method: A total of 186 students with excessive alcohol consumption were randomized to an intervention group or a wait list group. Both groups completed online follow-ups regarding alcohol consumption after 6 and 12 weeks. Wait list participants were given access to the intervention at 6-week follow-up. Assessment-only controls ( n = 144) with excessive alcohol consumption from the ongoing study were used for comparison. Results: The proportion of participants with excessive alcohol consumption declined in both intervention and wait list groups compared to controls at first ( p < 0.001) and second follow-ups ( p = 0.054). Secondary analyses showed reductions for the intervention group in quantity of drinking at first follow-up (−4.76, 95% CI [−6.67, −2.85], Z = −2.09, p = 0.037) and in frequency of drinking at both follow-ups (−0.83, 95% CI [−1.14, −0.52], Z = −2.04, p = 0.041; −0.89, 95% CI [−1.16, −0.62], Z = −2.12, p = 0.034). The odds ratio for not having excessive alcohol consumption among men in the intervention group compared to male controls was 2.68, 95% CI [1.37, 5.25] ( Z = 2.88, p = 0.004); the figure for women was 1.71, 95% CI [1.11, 2.64] ( Z = 2.41, p = 0.016). Conclusion: Skills training apps have potential for reducing excessive alcohol use among university students. Future research is still needed to disentangle effects of app use from emailed feedback on excessive alcohol consumption and study participation. Trial Registration: NCT02064998 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Brief interventions via the internet have been shown to reduce university students' alcohol intake. This study tested two smartphone applications (apps) targeting drinking choices on party occasions, with the goal of reducing problematic alcohol intake among Swedish university students. Methods Students were recruited via e-mails sent to student union members at two universities. Those who gave informed consent, had a smartphone, and showed risky alcohol consumption according to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) were randomized into three groups. Group 1 had access to the Swedish government alcohol monopoly's app, Promillekoll, offering real-time estimated blood alcohol concentration (eBAC) calculation; Group 2 had access to a web-based app, PartyPlanner, developed by the research group, offering real-time eBAC calculation with planning and follow-up functions; and Group 3 participants were controls. Follow-up was conducted at 7 weeks. Results Among 28574 students offered participation, 4823 agreed to join; 415 were excluded due to incomplete data, and 1932 fulfilled eligibility criteria for randomization. Attrition was 22.7-39.3 percent, higher among heavier drinkers and highest in Group 2. Self-reported app use was higher in Group 1 (74%) compared to Group 2 (41%). Per-protocol analyses revealed only one significant time-by-group interaction, where Group 1 participants increased the frequency of their drinking occasions compared to controls (p = 0.001). Secondary analyses by gender showed a significant difference among men in Group 1 for frequency of drinking occasions per week (p = 0.001), but not among women. Among all participants, 29 percent showed high-risk drinking, over the recommended weekly drinking levels of 9 (women) and 14 (men) standard glasses. Conclusions Smartphone apps can make brief interventions available to large numbers of university students. The apps studied using eBAC calculation did not, however, seem to affect alcohol consumption among university students and one app may have led to a negative effect among men. Future research should: 1) explore ways to increase user retention, 2) include apps facilitating technical manipulation for evaluation of added components, 3) explore the effects of adapting app content to possible gender differences, and 4) offer additional interventions to high-risk users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]