Dataset Information

An efficacy trial of adaptive interventions for alcohol use disorder.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Adaptive interventions, sometimes referred to as "stepped care", are those interventions in which the type or dosage of treatment offered to patients is tailored to baseline clinical presentation and then adjusted over time in response to patient progress or lack thereof. Currently, no adaptive brief interventions exist specifically for alcohol use disorder (AUD).

Method

This study used a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial design with 160 individuals with AUD recruited both locally and nationally who had a goal to reduce or abstain from drinking. Participants received brief advice (BA) and then the study reassessed them three weeks later; the study randomized those who did not respond to BA, defined as reducing their drinking to low-risk guidelines, to two session of motivational interviewing (MI) or more BA. The study then reassessed participants at week 8. The study re-randomized nonresponders to receive either MI alone or MI plus behavioral self-control therapy (BSCT), also referred to as coping skills therapy, and evaluated participants at week 13.

Results

Overall, participants receiving any BSCT made the greatest reductions in drinking. Participants who received MI at week 4 and BSCT at week 8 outperformed all other groups.

Conclusion

Findings reveal that prolonged treatment, more sessions, and/or a specific combination of MI and BSCT provided optimal outcomes. Future research should determine whether such an algorithm holds across heterogenous groups of individuals with AUD.

SUBMITTER: Morgenstern J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7900613 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An efficacy trial of adaptive interventions for alcohol use disorder.

Morgenstern Jon J Kuerbis Alexis A Shao Sijing S Padovano Hayley Treloar HT Levak Svetlana S Vadhan Nehal P NP Lynch Kevin G KG

Journal of substance abuse treatment 20201226

<h4>Background</h4>Adaptive interventions, sometimes referred to as "stepped care", are those interventions in which the type or dosage of treatment offered to patients is tailored to baseline clinical presentation and then adjusted over time in response to patient progress or lack thereof. Currently, no adaptive brief interventions exist specifically for alcohol use disorder (AUD).<h4>Method</h4>This study used a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial design with 160 individuals with A ...[more]

PMID: 33612197

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimsManagement of alcohol use disorder (AUD) could be enhanced by effective remote treatments. This study tested whether supplementing intensive outpatient programs (IOPs) with continuing care delivered via (1) telephone, (2) smartphone or (3) their combination improves outcomes relative to (4) IOP only. Continuing care conditions were also compared.DesignRandomized controlled trial of four groups with 3-, 6-, 9-, 12- and 18-month follow-ups.SettingUniversity research center in Philadelphia, PA, USA.ParticipantsParticipants (n = 262) met DSM-V criteria for AUD, were largely male (71%) and African American (82%).Interventions and comparatorTelephone monitoring and counseling (TMC; n = 59), addiction comprehensive health enhancement support system (ACHESS; n = 68) and TMC + ACHESS (n = 70) provided for 12 months. The control condition received IOP only (TAU; n = 65).MeasurementThe primary outcome was percentage of days heavy drinking (PDHD) in months 1-12. Secondary outcomes were any drinking, any drug use, drinking consequences and quality of life.FindingsMean PDHD in months 1-12 was 10.29 in TAU, 5.41 in TMC, 6.80 in ACHESS and 5.99 in TMC + ACHESS. PDHD was lower in TMC [Cohen's d = 0.35, P = 0.018, 95% confidence interval (CI) = (-1.42, -0.20)], ACHESS [d = 0.31, P = 0.031, 95% CI = (-1.27, -0.06)] and TMC + ACHESS [d = 0.36, P = 0.009, 95% CI = (-1.40, -0.20)] than in TAU. Differences between TMC + ACHESS, TMC and ACHESS were small (d ≤ 0.06) and non-significant. Findings were inconclusive as to whether or not the treatment conditions differed on PDHD at 18 months. A significant effect was obtained on any drinking, which was higher in months 1-12 in TAU than in TMC [odds ratio (OR) = 3.02, standard error (SE) = 0.43, 95% CI = (1.30, 6.99), P = 0.01] and TMC + ACHESS [OR = 2.43, SE = 0.39, 95% CI = (1.12, 5.27), P = 0.025). No other significant effects were obtained on other secondary outcomes during or after treatment.ConclusionsA telephone-delivered intervention and a smartphone-delivered intervention, alone and in combination, provided effective remote continuing care for alcohol use disorder. The combination of both interventions was not superior to either alone and effects did not persist post-treatment.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough an estimated 30 million people meet criteria for alcohol use disorder (AUD), few receive appropriate pharmacotherapy. A more personalized, symptom-specific, approach might improve efficacy and acceptance.ObjectiveTo examine whether gabapentin would be useful in the treatment of AUD, especially in those with the most alcohol withdrawal symptoms.Design, setting, and participantsThis double-blind randomized clinical trial conducted between November 2014 and June 2018 evaluated gabapentin vs placebo in community-recruited participants screened and treated in an academic outpatient setting over a 16-week treatment period. A total of 145 treatment-seeking individuals who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) criteria for AUD and were not receiving other AUD intervention were screened, and 96 who also met recent alcohol withdrawal criteria were randomized to treatment after 3 abstinent days. Daily drinking was recorded, and percentage of disialo carbohydrate-deficient transferrin in the blood, a heavy drinking marker, was collected at baseline and monthly during treatment.InterventionsGabapentin up to 1200 mg/d, orally, vs placebo along with 9 medical management visits (20 minutes each).Main outcomes and measuresThe percentage of individuals with no heavy drinking days and those with total abstinence were compared between treatment groups and further evaluated based on prestudy alcohol withdrawal symptoms.ResultsOf 96 randomized individuals, 90 were evaluable (44 in the gabapentin arm and 46 in the placebo arm), with a mean (SD) age of 49.6 (10.1) years; 69 were men (77%) and 85 were white (94%). The evaluable participants had 83% baseline heavy drinking days (4 or more drinks/day for women, 5 or more for men) and met 4.5 alcohol withdrawal criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition). More gabapentin-treated individuals had no heavy drinking days (12 of 44 participants [27%]) compared with placebo (4 of 46 participants [9%]), a difference of 18.6% (95% CI, 3.1-34.1; P = .02; number needed to treat [NNT], 5.4), and more total abstinence (8 of 44 [18%]) compared with placebo (2 of 46 [4%]), a difference of 13.8% (95% CI, 1.0-26.7; P = .04; NNT, 6.2). The prestudy high-alcohol withdrawal group had positive gabapentin effects on no heavy drinking days (P < .02; NNT, 3.1) and total abstinence (P = .003; NNT, 2.7) compared with placebo, while within the low-alcohol withdrawal group, there were no significant differences. These findings were similar for other drinking variables, where gabapentin was more efficacious than placebo in the high-alcohol withdrawal group only. Gabapentin caused more dizziness, but this did not affect efficacy.Conclusions and relevanceThese data, combined with others, suggest gabapentin might be most efficacious in people with AUD and a history of alcohol withdrawal symptoms. Future studies should evaluate sleep changes and mood during early recovery as mediators of gabapentin efficacy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02349477.

Dataset Information

An efficacy trial of adaptive interventions for alcohol use disorder.

Background

Method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

An efficacy trial of adaptive interventions for alcohol use disorder.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets