1
|
Coughlin LN, Bonar EE, Wieringa J, Zhang L, Rostker MJ, Augustiniak AN, Goodman GJ, Lin LA. Pilot trial of a telehealth-delivered behavioral economic intervention promoting cannabis-free activities among adults with cannabis use disorder. J Psychiatr Res 2023; 163:202-210. [PMID: 37224772 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2023.05.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2023] [Revised: 04/11/2023] [Accepted: 05/01/2023] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cannabis is increasingly consumed and increasingly perceived as harmless. Among those whose use develops into a cannabis use disorder (CUD), <5% initiate and engage in treatment. Thus, novel options for low-barrier, appealing treatments are needed to foster engagement in care. METHODS We conducted an open trial of a telehealth-delivered multicomponent behavioral economic intervention for non-treatment-engaged adults with CUD. Participants with CUD were recruited from a health system and screened for eligibility. Participants completed behavioral economic indices (cannabis demand, proportionate cannabis-free reinforcement), measures of cannabis use and mental health symptoms, and provided open-ended feedback on the intervention experience. RESULTS Of the 20 participants who enrolled and engaged in the initial intervention session, 70% (14 out of 20) completed all intervention components. All participants were satisfied/very satisfied with the intervention and 85.7% reported the telehealth delivery made it at least slightly easier/more likely for them to receive substance use care. Baseline to immediate post-treatment, behavioral economic cannabis demand decreased (intensity: Hedges' g = 0.14, maximum total expenditure: Hedges' g = 0.53, maximum expenditure for a single hit: Hedges' g = 0.10) and proportionate cannabis-free reinforcement (Hedges' g = 0.12) increased. Past-month total cannabis use decreased by 8.9% from baseline to post-treatment (Hedges' g = 0.39), along with decreases in recent depression (Hedges' g = 0.50) and anxiety symptoms (Hedges' g = 0.29). DISCUSSION These preliminary findings suggest that this behavioral economic intervention was highly acceptable and feasible for adults with untreated CUD. Changes in potential mechanisms of behavior change (cannabis demand, proportionate cannabis-free reinforcement) were consistent with reduced frequency of cannabis use and improved mental health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lara N Coughlin
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Injury Prevention Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
| | - Erin E Bonar
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Injury Prevention Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Joshua Wieringa
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; VA Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Lan Zhang
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; VA Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Matthew J Rostker
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; VA Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Alyssa N Augustiniak
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; VA Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Grant J Goodman
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; VA Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Lewei Allison Lin
- Addiction Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Injury Prevention Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA; VA Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lebeaut A, Pedersen ER, Francis DJ, Zvolensky MJ, Vujanovic AA. Evaluation of an integrated personalized feedback intervention for hazardous drinkers with elevated anxiety sensitivity and PTSD symptoms: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials Commun 2023; 32:101088. [PMID: 36824449 PMCID: PMC9941063 DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2023.101088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2022] [Revised: 02/02/2023] [Accepted: 02/03/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Hazardous drinking and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are commonly co-occurring conditions among adults. Motivational enhancement interventions, such as personalized feedback interventions (PFI), have demonstrated efficacy for reducing hazardous drinking. Emerging though scant literature has evaluated PFI for co-occurring PTSD and hazardous alcohol use. A transdiagnostic risk factor that may underlie this co-occurrence and inform novel PFI development is anxiety sensitivity (AS). Objective To use a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a novel, computer-based PFI for hazardous drinkers with at least subclinical PTSD and elevated AS (AP-PFI), against a time-matched comparison condition (C-PFI). Methods Participants (N = 100) will be recruited and enrolled from the Houston, TX community. The study includes: an in-person visit (baseline diagnostic assessment, a brief intervention, and a post-intervention assessment) and two follow-up assessments (1-week and 1-month). Participants who meet study inclusion criteria will be randomized to one of two conditions at baseline: AP-PFI or C-PFI. AP-PFI will consist of a brief, single-session, computer-delivered, PFI-based intervention that provides integrative and normative feedback about alcohol use, AS, and PTSD symptoms. C-PFI will be time-matched but will only include alcohol-related feedback. Conclusions AP-PFI is designed to provide feedback about alcohol use, PTSD symptoms, and AS and their interplay and deliver psychoeducation on harm-reduction techniques, interoceptive exposure exercises, and stress management strategies. The intervention may address extant gaps in treatment for these co-occurring conditions by providing a brief, evidence-based, motivational enhancement intervention that is cost-effective with potential to be disseminated across a variety of healthcare settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antoine Lebeaut
- Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA,Corresponding authors.
| | - Eric R. Pedersen
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - David J. Francis
- Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Anka A. Vujanovic
- Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA,Corresponding authors.
| |
Collapse
|