Computerized Intervention for Distress Intolerance
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Distress Intolerance Index score >= 20
- Average cannabis use frequency in the past year >= 2-3/week
Exclusion Criteria:
- Current suicidal ideation
- History of psychotic symptoms
- Bipolar-spectrum disorder without stabilization on medication for >= 3 months
- Change in psychotropic medication in the past month
- Current CBT for internalizing or substance use disorders
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Computerized Distress Intolerance Intervention
Two, 1-hour computerized sessions that include psychoeducation about emotional avoidance, idiographic emotional exposure, and construction of idiographic implementation intentions to practice distress tolerance skills outside of session.
|
|
|
Placebo Comparator: Computerized Healthy Behaviors Intervention
Two, 1-hour computerized sessions that focus on psychoeducation about the importance of a healthy lifestyle.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Distress Intolerance Index (DII) score from Baseline through 4-Month Follow-Up
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
Self-report measure of Distress Intolerance (Distress Intolerance Index [DII]; McHugh & Otto, 2012).
The DII is a self-report measure comprised of 10 items that are summed together to form a total score (minimum: 0; maximum: 40).
Higher scores indicate greater distress intolerance (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
|
Change in Mirror-Tracing Persistence Task (MTPT) quit latency from Baseline to Post-Treatment
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
Behavioral measure of Distress Intolerance (Mirror-Tracing Persistence Task [MTPT]; Macatee & Cougle, 2015).
The MTPT is a behavioral persistence measure that assesses behavioral distress intolerance via the latency to quit a distressing task.
Scores range from 0 seconds to a maximum persistence time of 7 minutes.
Lower scores indicate greater distress intolerance (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
|
Change in Marijuana Problems Scale (MPS) score from Baseline through 4-Month Follow-Up
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
Self-report measure of marijuana use-related problems (Marijuana Problems Scale [MPS]; Stephens et al., 2000).
The MPS is a self-report measure of marijuana use-related problem severity in the past month.
The measure is comprised of 19 items with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 38.
Higher scores indicate greater marijuana use-related problem severity in the past month (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
|
Change in Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD) diagnostic criteria from Baseline to 4-Month Follow-Up
Time Frame: Baseline, 4-month follow-up
|
Interviewer-assessed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-5 Cannabis Use Disorder diagnostic criteria.
DSM-5 Cannabis Use Disorder criteria were assessed via interview at baseline and again at the 4-month follow-up.
Total number of Cannabis Use Disorder criteria was used to assess Cannabis Use Disorder severity (minimum score: 0; maximum score: 11).
Higher scores indicate greater Cannabis Use Disorder severity (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, 4-month follow-up
|
|
Change in Timeline follow-back (TLFB) cannabis use frequency from Baseline through 4-Month Follow-Up
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
Percent cannabis use days in the past month (Timeline follow-back [TLFB]; Hjorthoj et al., 2012).
The Timeline follow-back (TLFB) is a self-report measure that assesses cannabis use over the past 4 weeks.
Percentage of days on which cannabis was used in the past four weeks was used to assess cannabis use frequency (minimum: 0%; maximum: 100%).
Higher scores indicate greater cannabis use frequency (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
|
Change in Marijuana Motives Measure (MMM) score from Baseline through 4-Month Follow-Up
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
Self-reported motives for cannabis use (Marijuana Motives Measure [MMM]; Zvolensky et al., 2007).
The Marijuana Motives Measure (MMM) is a self-report measure that assesses different motives for marijuana use.
The coping motives subscale was the subscale of interest in this project.
The Coping motives subscale is comprised of 4 items that are then averaged (minimum score: 1; maximum score: 5).
Greater scores indicate greater coping motives for marijuana use (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session), 1-month follow-up, 4-month follow-up
|
|
Change in Marijuana Craving Questionnaire (MCQ) score from Baseline to Post-Treatment
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
Self-reported state craving for marijuana (Marijuana Craving Questionnaire [MCQ]; Heishman et al., 2009).
The Marijuana Craving Questionnaire (MCQ) is a self-report measure of current craving for marijuana use.
The emotionality subscale was the subscale of interest in this project.
The Emotionality subscale is comprised of 5 items that are then averaged (minimum score: 1; maximum score: 7).
Greater scores indicate greater marijuana craving (i.e., worse outcome).
In this project, the outcome of interest is the extent to which a laboratory stress induction increases state marijuana craving.
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in electroencephalography (EEG) index of acute stress modulation of cannabis cue reactivity (assessed by the Late Positive Potential [LPP]) from Baseline to Post-Treatment
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
Acute Stress modulation of the Late Positive Potential (LPP) to Cannabis Cues.
The LPP to visual cannabis cues before and after a laboratory stress induction will be measured as a neurophysiological index of acute stress modulation of cannabis cue incentive salience.
Greater values indicate a larger neural response to cannabis cues during acute stress (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
|
Change in electroencephalography (EEG) index of acute stress modulation of threat reactivity (assessed by the Late Positive Potential [LPP]) from Baseline to Post-Treatment
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
Acute Stress modulation of the Late Positive Potential (LPP) to threat stimuli.
The LPP to visual threat stimuli before and after a laboratory stress induction will be measured as a neurophysiological index of acute stress modulation of threat reactivity.
Greater values indicate a larger neural response to threat during acute stress (i.e., worse outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
|
Change in electroencephalography (EEG) index of acute stress modulation of response inhibition (assessed by the N200 [N2]) from Baseline to Post-Treatment
Time Frame: Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
Acute stress modulation of the N2 to no-go stimuli.
The N2 to no-go vs. go stimuli on a go/no-go task before and after a laboratory stress induction will be measured as a neurophysiological index of the acute stress modulation of response inhibition.
More negative values indicate a larger neural response to stimuli requiring response inhibition during acute stress (i.e., better outcome).
|
Baseline, post-treatment (i.e., ~1 week following the last treatment session)
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Richard J Macatee, PhD, Auburn University
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Stephens RS, Roffman RA, Curtin L. Comparison of extended versus brief treatments for marijuana use. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000 Oct;68(5):898-908.
- McHugh RK, Otto MW. Refining the measurement of distress intolerance. Behav Ther. 2012 Sep;43(3):641-51. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2011.12.001. Epub 2011 Dec 20.
- Macatee RJ, Cougle JR. Development and evaluation of a computerized intervention for low distress tolerance and its effect on performance on a neutralization task. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2015 Sep;48:33-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2015.01.007. Epub 2015 Jan 26.
- Hjorthoj CR, Hjorthoj AR, Nordentoft M. Validity of Timeline Follow-Back for self-reported use of cannabis and other illicit substances--systematic review and meta-analysis. Addict Behav. 2012 Mar;37(3):225-33. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.11.025. Epub 2011 Nov 26.
- Zvolensky MJ, Vujanovic AA, Bernstein A, Bonn-Miller MO, Marshall EC, Leyro TM. Marijuana use motives: A confirmatory test and evaluation among young adult marijuana users. Addict Behav. 2007 Dec;32(12):3122-30. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2007.06.010. Epub 2007 Jun 9.
- Heishman SJ, Evans RJ, Singleton EG, Levin KH, Copersino ML, Gorelick DA. Reliability and validity of a short form of the Marijuana Craving Questionnaire. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2009 Jun 1;102(1-3):35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.12.010. Epub 2009 Feb 13.
- Macatee RJ, Preston TJ, Afshar K, Schmidt NB, Cougle JR. Impact of a computerized distress intolerance intervention on electrocortical reactivity to cannabis and threat cues: A randomized controlled trial. Psychol Addict Behav. 2022 Nov;36(7):920-929. doi: 10.1037/adb0000815. Epub 2022 Feb 7.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 201720828
- F31DA039644-01A1 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.