TY - JOUR
T1 - Alcohol use in the year following approach bias modification during inpatient withdrawal
T2 - secondary outcomes from a double-blind, multi-site randomized controlled trial
AU - Manning, Victoria
AU - Garfield, Joshua B.B.
AU - Reynolds, John
AU - Staiger, Petra K.
AU - Piercy, Hugh
AU - Bonomo, Yvonne
AU - Lloyd-Jones, Martyn
AU - Jacka, David
AU - Wiers, Reinout W.
AU - Verdejo-Garcia, Antonio
AU - Lubman, Dan I.
N1 - Funding Information:
This project was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) project grant 1124604. We acknowledge Associate Professor Jarrad A. G. Lum’s contribution to programming the approach bias modification and sham control training tasks. We thank the directors and staff of the recruitment sites for facilitating our access to their clients, and would particularly like to acknowledge Angela Fazio, Jennifer Kelly, Oonagh McNamara, Molly O’Reilly, Michelle Cody, Kelvin Hicks, Alex Lebani, Trudy Trice and Bernadette De Boer for their role in this. We also acknowledge the role of Katherine Mroz, Samuel C. Campbell, Kristina Vujcic, Ingrid Zhang, Thomas Tolliday, Patrick Haylock, Alexandra Turnbull, Emily Darmanin and Nyssa Ferguson in recruiting participants, conducting training sessions and collecting, entering and cleaning data. We thank Danielle Whelan for her help preparing the figures in the paper. We also thank Dr Kate Hall for her role in assisting with the design of the study and obtaining funding. Open access publishing facilitated by Monash University, as part of the Wiley ‐ Monash University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Background and aims: Approach bias modification (ApBM) targeting alcohol approach bias has been previously shown to reduce likelihood of relapse during the first 2 weeks following inpatient withdrawal treatment (IWT). We tested whether ApBM’s effects endure for a longer period by analysing alcohol use outcomes 3, 6 and 12 months post-discharge. Design: A double-blind, sham-controlled randomized controlled trial. Setting: Four IWT units in Melbourne, Australia. Participants: Three hundred alcohol IWT patients (173 men, 126 women, 1 non-binary; mean age 43.5 years) were recruited between 4 June 2017 and 14 July 2019. Follow-up data collection was completed on 22 September 2020. Intervention and control training: Four ApBM sessions were delivered during IWT. ApBM trained participants (n = 147) to avoid alcohol and approach non-alcohol beverage cues. Controls (n = 153) responded to the same stimuli, but without approach/avoidance training. Measurements: Date of first lapse was recorded for non-abstinent participants to determine time to first lapse. Time-line follow-back interviews assessed past-month alcohol consumption at each follow-up, with participants reporting no alcohol consumption classified as abstinent. In analyses of past-month abstinence, non-abstinence was assumed in participants lost to follow-up. Number of past-month drinking days, standard drinks and heavy drinking days (five or more standard drinks for women or non-binary; six or more standard drinks for men) were calculated for non-abstinent participants at each follow-up. Findings: ApBM significantly delayed time to first lapse [ApBM median: 53 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 21–61; controls = 12 days, 95% CI = 9–21, P = 0.045]. Past-month abstinence rates at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups were 33/153 (21.6%), 30/153 (19.6%), and 24/153 (15.7%) in controls; and 51/147 (34.7%), 30/147 (20.4%) and 29/147 (19.7%) in the ApBM group, respectively. Past-month abstinence was significantly more likely in ApBM participants than controls at the 3-month follow-up [odds ratio (OR) = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.16–3.23, P = 0.012], but not at 6- or 12-month follow-ups (6-month OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.60–1.95, P = 0.862; 12-month OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.73–2.40, P = 0.360). No significant group differences were found for indices of alcohol consumption in non-abstinent participants. Conclusions: Approach bias modification for alcohol delivered during inpatient withdrawal treatment helps to prevent relapse, increasing rates of abstinence from alcohol for at least 3 months post-discharge.
AB - Background and aims: Approach bias modification (ApBM) targeting alcohol approach bias has been previously shown to reduce likelihood of relapse during the first 2 weeks following inpatient withdrawal treatment (IWT). We tested whether ApBM’s effects endure for a longer period by analysing alcohol use outcomes 3, 6 and 12 months post-discharge. Design: A double-blind, sham-controlled randomized controlled trial. Setting: Four IWT units in Melbourne, Australia. Participants: Three hundred alcohol IWT patients (173 men, 126 women, 1 non-binary; mean age 43.5 years) were recruited between 4 June 2017 and 14 July 2019. Follow-up data collection was completed on 22 September 2020. Intervention and control training: Four ApBM sessions were delivered during IWT. ApBM trained participants (n = 147) to avoid alcohol and approach non-alcohol beverage cues. Controls (n = 153) responded to the same stimuli, but without approach/avoidance training. Measurements: Date of first lapse was recorded for non-abstinent participants to determine time to first lapse. Time-line follow-back interviews assessed past-month alcohol consumption at each follow-up, with participants reporting no alcohol consumption classified as abstinent. In analyses of past-month abstinence, non-abstinence was assumed in participants lost to follow-up. Number of past-month drinking days, standard drinks and heavy drinking days (five or more standard drinks for women or non-binary; six or more standard drinks for men) were calculated for non-abstinent participants at each follow-up. Findings: ApBM significantly delayed time to first lapse [ApBM median: 53 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 21–61; controls = 12 days, 95% CI = 9–21, P = 0.045]. Past-month abstinence rates at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups were 33/153 (21.6%), 30/153 (19.6%), and 24/153 (15.7%) in controls; and 51/147 (34.7%), 30/147 (20.4%) and 29/147 (19.7%) in the ApBM group, respectively. Past-month abstinence was significantly more likely in ApBM participants than controls at the 3-month follow-up [odds ratio (OR) = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.16–3.23, P = 0.012], but not at 6- or 12-month follow-ups (6-month OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.60–1.95, P = 0.862; 12-month OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.73–2.40, P = 0.360). No significant group differences were found for indices of alcohol consumption in non-abstinent participants. Conclusions: Approach bias modification for alcohol delivered during inpatient withdrawal treatment helps to prevent relapse, increasing rates of abstinence from alcohol for at least 3 months post-discharge.
KW - Alcohol
KW - alcohol use disorder
KW - approach bias modification
KW - cognitive bias modification
KW - detoxification
KW - relapse
KW - withdrawal treatment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133956229&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/add.15989
DO - 10.1111/add.15989
M3 - Article
C2 - 35792053
AN - SCOPUS:85133956229
JO - Addiction
JF - Addiction
SN - 0965-2140
ER -