An Examination of Motivation to Change and Neural Alcohol Cue Reactivity Following a Brief Intervention.
ABSTRACT: Background: Brief interventions represent a promising psychological intervention targeting individuals with heavy alcohol use. Motivation to change represents an individual's openness to engage in a behavior change strategy and is thought to be a crucial component of brief interventions. Neuroimaging techniques provide a translational tool to investigate the neurobiological mechanisms underlying potential mediators of treatment response, including motivation to change. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the effect of a brief intervention on motivation to change drinking behavior and neural alcohol taste cue reactivity. Methods: Non-treatment-seeking heavy drinkers were randomized to receive a brief drinking intervention (n = 22) or an attention-matched control (n = 24). Three indices of motivation to change were assessed at baseline and after the intervention or control session: importance, confidence, and readiness. Immediately following the intervention or control session, participants also underwent an functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during which they completed an alcohol taste cues paradigm. Results: There was a significant effect of the brief intervention on increasing ratings of importance of changing drinking behavior, but not on ratings of confidence or readiness to change. Ratings of importance after the intervention or control session were associated with neural alcohol taste cue reactivity, but notably, this effect was only significant for participants who received the intervention. Individuals in the intervention condition showed a positive association between ratings of importance and activation in the precuneus, posterior cingulate, and insula. Conclusions: The brief drinking intervention was successful at improving one dimension of motivation to change among non-treatment-seeking heavy drinkers. The brief intervention moderated the relationship between ratings of importance and brain activation in circuitry associated with interoceptive awareness and self-reflection. Together, findings represent an initial step toward understanding the neurobiological mechanisms through which a brief intervention may improve motivation to change.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Brief interventions have empirical support for acutely reducing alcohol use among non-treatment-seeking heavy drinkers. Neuroimaging techniques allow for the examination of the neurobiological effect of behavioral interventions, probing brain systems putatively involved in clinical response to treatment. Few studies have prospectively evaluated whether psychosocial interventions attenuate neural cue reactivity that in turn reduces drinking in the same population. This study aimed to examine the effect of a brief intervention on drinking outcomes, neural alcohol cue reactivity, and the ability of neural alcohol cue reactivity to prospectively predict drinking outcomes. METHODS:Non-treatment-seeking heavy drinking participants were randomized to receive a brief interview intervention (n = 22) or an attention-matched control (n = 24). Immediately following the intervention or control, participants underwent a functional magnetic resonance imaging scan comprised of the alcohol taste cues paradigm. Four weeks after the intervention (or control), participants completed a follow-up visit to report on their past-month drinking. Baseline and follow-up percent heavy drinking days (PHDD) were calculated for each participant. RESULTS:There was no significant effect of the brief intervention on PHDD at follow-up or on modulating neural activation to alcohol relative to water taste cues. There was a significant association between neural response to alcohol taste cues and PHDD across groups (Z > 2.3, p < 0.05), such that individuals who had greater neural reactivity to alcohol taste cues in the precuneus and prefrontal cortex (PFC) had fewer PHDD at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:This study did not find an effect of the brief intervention on alcohol use in this sample, and the intervention was not associated with differential neural alcohol cue reactivity. Nevertheless, greater activation of the precuneus and PFC during alcohol cue exposure predicted less alcohol use prospectively suggesting that these neural substrates subserve the effects of alcohol cues on drinking behavior.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Alcohol brief interventions (BIs) for youth are efficacious, but effect sizes found have been modest. This article presents secondary data analyses from a randomized controlled trial of motivational interviewing-based (MI) alcohol BIs among youth in an emergency department, examining within-session predictors of alcohol outcomes at 3 months among those receiving BIs. METHOD:Risky drinkers (ages 14-20) received either a computer BI (n = 277) or therapist BI (n = 278). Within-session measures were obtained via computer metrics (therapist and computer BIs) and coding of audiotapes (therapist BI only). Parallel structural equation models examined direct and indirect effects of BI components on 3-month alcohol consumption and consequences, with posttest precursors of behavior change (e.g., importance, readiness, and intentions) as potential mediators. Components examined included reasons to avoid or reduce drinking, strengths, strategies for change, benefits of change, and leisure activities (computer BI only), and MI global ratings and MI-adherent behaviors (therapist BI only). RESULTS:For both BIs, greater number of strategies directly predicted greater posttest scores, with posttest scores mediating the relationship between strategies and alcohol consumption at 3 months. Greater number of strengths directly predicted fewer alcohol-related consequences at 3 months for both BIs; however, strengths also indirectly predicted greater consumption, mediated by posttest scores. Greater number of reasons to avoid or reduce drinking directly predicted greater alcohol consumption for the therapist BI only. CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest ways to optimize the content and efficacy of alcohol BIs. Reviews of strategies such as refusal skills, protective behavioral strategies, and coping with negative affect may be particularly salient for reducing alcohol misuse.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:With the growing recognition that, for some, significant changes in drinking occur before the first treatment session (i.e., pretreatment change), researchers have called for the careful assessment of when change occurs and its potential impact on mechanism of behavior change (MOBC) research. Using a commonly hypothesized MOBC variable, alcohol abstinence self-efficacy, the primary aim of this study was to examine the effect of pretreatment change on the study of MOBCs. METHOD:Sixty-three individuals diagnosed with alcohol dependence were recruited to participate in a 12-week cognitive-behavioral treatment. Participants completed weekly assessments of self-efficacy and drinking behaviors. RESULTS:Multilevel time-lagged regression models indicated that pretreatment change significantly moderated the effect of self-efficacy on the number of drinking days, such that among those higher on pretreatment change, higher self-efficacy ratings predicted lower rates of drinking days in the week until the next treatment session. In contrast, pretreatment change did not moderate the effect of self-efficacy on the rate of heavy drinking days. CONCLUSIONS:Results from the current study add to a small but growing body of research highlighting the importance of pretreatment change when studying MOBCs. Further, these results provide important insights into the conditions in which self-efficacy may play an important role in treatment outcomes.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Mandated college students (those in violation of a campus alcohol policy) are heterogenous with respect to alcohol consumption. Thus, when universities consider required treatment for mandated students, one promising option is to match treatment intensity according to level of alcohol involvement. The present study evaluates such an approach with minimal resources. METHODS:Mandated students (N = 285) were required to complete a baseline assessment. Participants identified as high-risk (5+ past month alcohol problems AND 2+ past month heavy drinking episodes) received a one session individual Brief Motivational Intervention (I-BMI) whereas those identified as low-risk (all others) received a one session group Brief Motivational Intervention (G-BMI). I-BMI and G-BMI sessions were delivered by doctoral students in Clinical Psychology. Follow-up assessments were collected 1 month post-intervention (response rate = 73%). RESULTS:The vast majority of students complied with their requirement. Participants assigned to I-BMI reported an 82% reduction in drinks per week, a 58% reduction in heavy episodic drinking, and a 74% reduction in alcohol-related problems at a 1 month follow-up. Participants assigned to G-BMI reported a 61% reduction in drinks per week and a 42% reduction in alcohol-related problems at follow-up relative to baseline. Conclusion/Importance: We demonstrate that matching intervention intensity on baseline alcohol involvement with mandated students is feasible and associated with short-term reductions in alcohol use and consequences. Universities may wish to consider the procedure outlined here as a way of allocating more resources to those who drink at problematic levels.
Project description:To evaluate the effectiveness of different brief intervention strategies at reducing hazardous or harmful drinking in primary care. The hypothesis was that more intensive intervention would result in a greater reduction in hazardous or harmful drinking.Pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.Primary care practices in the north east and south east of England and in London.3562 patients aged 18 or more routinely presenting in primary care, of whom 2991 (84.0%) were eligible to enter the trial: 900 (30.1%) screened positive for hazardous or harmful drinking and 756 (84.0%) received a brief intervention. The sample was predominantly male (62%) and white (92%), and 34% were current smokers.Practices were randomised to three interventions, each of which built on the previous one: a patient information leaflet control group, five minutes of structured brief advice, and 20 minutes of brief lifestyle counselling. Delivery of the patient leaflet and brief advice occurred directly after screening and brief lifestyle counselling in a subsequent consultation.The primary outcome was patients' self reported hazardous or harmful drinking status as measured by the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) at six months. A negative AUDIT result (score <8) indicated non-hazardous or non-harmful drinking. Secondary outcomes were a negative AUDIT result at 12 months, experience of alcohol related problems (alcohol problems questionnaire), health utility (EQ-5D), service utilisation, and patients' motivation to change drinking behaviour (readiness to change) as measured by a modified readiness ruler.Patient follow-up rates were 83% at six months (n=644) and 79% at 12 months (n=617). At both time points an intention to treat analysis found no significant differences in AUDIT negative status between the three interventions. Compared with the patient information leaflet group, the odds ratio of having a negative AUDIT result for brief advice was 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.39) and for brief lifestyle counselling was 0.78 (0.48 to 1.25). A per protocol analysis confirmed these findings.All patients received simple feedback on their screening outcome. Beyond this input, however, evidence that brief advice or brief lifestyle counselling provided important additional benefit in reducing hazardous or harmful drinking compared with the patient information leaflet was lacking.Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06145674.
Project description:Addiction is mediated in large part by pathological motivation for rewarding, addictive substances, and alcohol-use disorders (AUDs) continue to extract a very high physical and economic toll on society. Compulsive alcohol drinking, where intake continues despite negative consequences, is considered a particular obstacle during treatment of AUDs. Aversion-resistant drives for alcohol have been modeled in rodents, where animals continue to consume even when alcohol is adulterated with the bitter tastant quinine, or is paired with another aversive consequence. Here, we describe a two-bottle choice paradigm where C57BL/6 mice first had 24-h access to 15% alcohol or water. Afterward, they drank quinine-free alcohol (alcohol-only) or alcohol with quinine (100 ?M), in a limited daily access (LDA) two-bottle-choice paradigm (2 h/day, 5 days/week, starting 3 h into the dark cycle), and achieved nearly binge-level blood alcohol concentrations. Interestingly, a single, initial 24-h experience with alcohol-only enhanced subsequent quinine-resistant drinking. In contrast, mice that drank alcohol-quinine in the 24-h session showed significantly reduced alcohol-quinine intake and preference during the subsequent LDA sessions, relative to mice that drank alcohol-only in the initial 24-h session and alcohol-quinine in LDA sessions. Thus, mice could find the concentration of quinine we used aversive, but were able to disregard the quinine after a single alcohol-only drinking session. Finally, mice had low intake and preference for quinine in water, both before and after weeks of alcohol-drinking sessions, suggesting that quinine resistance was not a consequence of increased quinine preference after weeks of drinking of alcohol-quinine. Together, we demonstrate that a single alcohol-only session was sufficient to enable subsequent aversion-resistant consumption in C57BL/6 mice, which did not reflect changes in quinine taste palatability. Given the rapid development of quinine-resistant alcohol drinking patterns, this model provides a simple, quick, and robust method for uncovering the mechanisms that promote aversion-resistant consumption.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Emergency department (ED) patients have high rates of risky alcohol use, and an ED visit offers an opportunity to intervene. ED-based screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) reduces alcohol use and health care costs. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions may expand the impact of SBIRTs but are understudied in low-resource ED populations. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of and patient satisfaction with a text-based mHealth extension of an ED screening program to reduce risky alcohol use in low-income, urban patients. METHODS:Research assistants screened a convenience sample of ED patients in person for risky alcohol use via the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Patients who reported AUDIT scores ?8 and <20 were informed of their AUDIT score and risk. RAs invited patients with SMS text message-capable phones to receive mROAD (mobilizing to Reduce Overuse of Alcohol in the ED), an SMS text message-based extension of the ED screening program. mROAD is a 7-day program of twice-daily SMS text messages based on the National Institutes of Health's Rethinking Drinking campaign. Participants were allocated to a control group (daily sham text messages without specific guidance on behaviors, such as "Thanks for taking part!") or to the mROAD intervention group. Patients were interviewed at 30 days to assess acceptability, satisfaction, and changes in drinking behavior. Satisfaction was examined descriptively. Pre and post measurements of drinking behaviors and motivation were compared, as were differences in change scores between the intervention arms. RESULTS:Of 1028 patients screened, 95 (9.2%) exhibited risky alcohol use based on AUDIT, and 23/95 (24%) of those patients did not own an SMS text messaging-capable phone; this left 72/95 (76%) eligible patients. Among eligible participants, 48/72 (67%) agreed to enroll; 31/48 (65%) achieved follow-up (18/24 (75%) in the intervention group and 13/24 (55%) in the control group). Participants who completed follow-up reported high satisfaction. Changes in behavior were similar between the arms. Overall, the number of drinking days reported in the prior 30 days decreased by 5.0 (95% CI 1.7-8.3; P=.004), and the number of heavy drinking days decreased by 4.1 (95% CI 1.0 to 7.15, P=.01). Patients reported an 11-point increase (95% CI 2.6-20, P=.01, 10% overall increase) in motivation to change alcohol use via the Change Questionnaire. The were no statistical differences in drinking days, heavy drinking days, or motivation to change between the arms. CONCLUSIONS:The mROAD trial was feasible. Over three-quarters of ED patients with risky alcohol use owned a text message-capable phone, and two-thirds of these patients were willing to participate; only 1 patient opted out of the intervention. Although 35% of patients were lost to follow-up at 30 days, those patients who did follow up had favorable impressions of the program; more than 90% reported that SMS text messages were a "good way to teach," and 89% of intervention arm participants enjoyed the program and found that the messages were motivating. Both the mROAD and sham message groups showed promising changes in alcohol use and motivation to change. mROAD is a feasible intervention that may reduce rates of risky alcohol use in ED patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02158949; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02158949.
Project description:Motivational models of alcohol use suggest that individual differences in sensitivity to the acute subjective effects of alcohol play an important role in motivational pathways to alcohol use. However, few studies have examined the link between drinking motives and subjective responses to alcohol. This study investigated the associations of coping and enhancement drinking motives with subjective stimulant and sedative effects during a laboratory alcohol administration session. We also examined whether stimulation and sedation following alcohol administration mediated the relationships between drinking motives and postalcohol ratings of alcohol wanting and liking.Heavy episodic drinkers (n = 147, ages 19 to 25) at 2 sites participated in an intravenous alcohol administration session in which blood alcohol concentration was raised to a target of 80 mg% over 20 minutes. Participants completed measures of stimulation and sedation at baseline and 20 minutes and also rated alcohol liking and wanting at 20 minutes. Drinking motives and alcohol use were assessed during a previous laboratory visit.A path analysis controlling for baseline stimulation and sedation showed that enhancement motives were positively associated with postalcohol stimulation and negatively associated with postalcohol sedation. In contrast, coping motives were positively associated with postalcohol sedation. In turn, postalcohol stimulation, but not sedation, was associated with alcohol wanting and liking. Further, indirect pathways from enhancement motives to postalcohol wanting and liking mediated through postalcohol stimulation were statistically significant. Coping motives, on the other hand, were directly associated with increased postalcohol wanting and liking.The results demonstrate that drinking motives are linked with individual differences in sensitivity to the effects of alcohol, which may serve as a mechanism underlying alcohol reinforcement and the motivation to consume more alcohol during a drinking episode.
Project description:Background: This study sought to inform research with noncollege-attending emerging adults, an at-risk, and understudied population, by identifying patterns of response following a brief alcohol intervention. This study was a reanalysis of data from a randomized controlled intervention trial testing a brief, personalized feedback alcohol intervention targeting nonstudent emerging adult drinkers. Objectives: The study aims were to (1) model intervention response by identifying subgroups characterized by changes in heavy drinking (i.e. peak use, number of binges during a typical week, proportion of binge days, peak estimated blood alcohol concentration [eBAC]) following the alcohol intervention, and (2) distinguish subgroups on factors related to intervention response (i.e. perceived norms regarding how much peers drink, alcohol use severity, mental health symptoms, and readiness to change). Methods: Participants were 81 (64.2% men) nonstudent heavy drinkers between ages 18-25?years (average age = 22.04) recruited from the community. Results: Findings revealed two latent subgroups that exhibited differential response to the intervention (i.e. intervention "responders" and "nonresponders"). Further, responders reported higher pre-intervention descriptive normative perceptions and alcohol use severity. Conclusions/Importance: The current investigation contributed to knowledge regarding for whom brief alcohol interventions work in the short term within nonstudent emerging adults and could inform future research to facilitate behavior change in those unresponsive to intervention efforts.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To test the hypothesis that among hazardously drinking incarcerated women who are returning to the community, a brief alcohol intervention will result in less alcohol use at follow-up relative to standard of care. METHODS:Eligible participants endorsed hazardous alcohol consumption-four or more drinks at a time on at least 3 separate days in the previous 3 months or a score of 8 or above on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Participants were randomized to either an assessment-only condition or to two brief motivationally focused sessions, the first delivered during incarceration, the second 1 month later after community re-entry. Participants recalled drinking behaviors at 3 and 6 months after the baseline interview using a 90-day time-line follow-back method. RESULTS:The 245 female participants averaged 34 years of age, and were 71% Caucasian. The mean percentage of alcohol use days in the 3 months prior to incarceration was 51.7% and heavy alcohol use days was 43.9%. Intervention effects on abstinent days were statistically significant at 3 months (odds ratio = 1.96, 95% confidence interval 1.17, 3.30); the percentage of days abstinent was 68% for those randomized to intervention and 57% for controls. At 6 months the effect of the intervention was attenuated and no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS:Among incarcerated women who reported hazardous drinking, a two-session brief alcohol intervention increased abstinent days at 3 months, but this effect decayed by 6 months. Study participants continued to drink heavily after return to the community. More intensive intervention pre-release and after re-entry may benefit hazardously drinking incarcerated women.