Piloting the addition of contingency management to best practice counselling as an adjunct treatment for rural and remote disordered gamblers: study protocol

Darren R Christensen, Chad S G Witcher, Trent Leighton, Rebecca Hudson-Breen, Samuel Ofori-Dei, Darren R Christensen, Chad S G Witcher, Trent Leighton, Rebecca Hudson-Breen, Samuel Ofori-Dei

Abstract

Introduction: Problematic gambling is a significant Canadian public health concern that causes harm to the gambler, their families, and society. However, a significant minority of gambling treatment seekers drop out prior to the issue being resolved; those with higher impulsivity scores have the highest drop-out rates. Consequently, retention is a major concern for treatment providers. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and internet-delivered CBT and contingency management (CM+) as treatments for gambling disorder in rural Albertan populations. Contingency management (CM) is a successful treatment approach for substance dependence that uses small incentives to reinforce abstinence. This approach may be suitable for the treatment of gambling disorder. Furthermore, internet-delivered CM may hold particular promise in rural contexts, as these communities typically struggle to access traditional clinic-based counselling opportunities.

Methods and analysis: 54 adults with gambling disorder will be randomised into one of two conditions: CM and CBT (CM+) or CBT alone (CBT). Gambling will be assessed at intake, every treatment session, post-treatment, and follow-up. The primary outcome measures are treatment attendance, gambling abstinence, gambling, gambling symptomatology, and gambling urge. In addition, qualitative interviews assessing study experiences will be conducted with the supervising counsellor, graduate student counsellors, study affiliates, and a subset of treatment seekers. This is the first study to use CM as a treatment for gambling disorder in rural and remote populations.

Ethics and dissemination: This study was approved by the University of Lethbridge's Human Subject Research Committee (#2016-080). The investigators plan to publish the results from this study in academic peer-reviewed journals. Summary information will be provided to the funder.

Trial registration number: NCT02953899; Pre-results.

Keywords: behavioural momentum; contingency management; gambling; on-line; protocol; treatment.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

References

    1. Huang JH, Boyer R. Epidemiology of youth gambling problems in Canada: a national prevalence study. Can J Psychiatry 2007;52:657–65. 10.1177/070674370705201006
    1. Williams R, Belanger Y, Arthur J. Gambling in Alberta: History, current status and socioeconomic impacts. 28: Alberta Gaming Research Institute, 2011:1–337.
    1. Problem Gambling Institute of Ontario. The effects of gambling on families the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. 2014. .
    1. Leblond J, Ladouceur R, Blaszczynski A. Which pathological gamblers will complete treatment? Br J Clin Psychol 2003;42:205–9. 10.1348/014466503321903607
    1. Petry NM. Contingency management treatments: controversies and challenges. Addiction 2010;105:1507–9. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02879.x
    1. Garcia-Rodriguez O, Secades-Villa R, Higgins ST, et al. . Effects of voucher-based intervention on abstinence and retention in an outpatient treatment for cocaine addiction: a randomized controlled trial. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2009;17:131–8. 10.1037/a0015963
    1. Peirce JM, Petry NM, Stitzer ML, et al. . Effects of Lower-Cost Incentives on Stimulant Abstinence in Methadone Maintenance Treatment. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2006;63:201–8. 10.1001/archpsyc.63.2.201
    1. Dutra L, Stathopoulou G, Basden SL, et al. . A meta-analytic review of psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders. Am J Psychiatry 2008;165:179–87. 10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.06111851
    1. Prendergast M, Podus D, Finney J, et al. . Contingency management for treatment of substance use disorders: a meta-analysis. Addiction 2006;101:1546–60. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01581.x
    1. Lott DC, Jencius S. Effectiveness of very low-cost contingency management in a community adolescent treatment program. Drug Alcohol Depend 2009;102:162–5. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.01.010
    1. Petry NM, Martin B. Low-cost contingency management for treating cocaine- and opioid-abusing methadone patients. J Consult Clin Psychol 2002;70:398–405. 10.1037/0022-006X.70.2.398
    1. West B. Strategic contingency management to enhance treatment outcomes for problem gamblers. Master’s Thesis, Lethbridge, Canada: University of Lethbridge, School of Health Sciences, 2008.
    1. Petry NM, Kolodner KB, Li R, et al. . Prize-based contingency management does not increase gambling. Drug Alcohol Depend 2006;83:269–73. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.11.023
    1. Christensen DR. Contingency management literature review: Application to problem gambling counselling. Journal of the National Association for Gambling Studies 2013;25:3–17.
    1. Blaszczynski A, Nower L. A pathways model of problem and pathological gambling. Addiction 2002;97:487–99. 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00015.x
    1. Christensen DR. Complimentary forces of change: Contingency management and behavioural momentum as treatments for problematic gambling. CJAM 2015;6:45–53.
    1. Zeiler M. Schedules of reinforcement: The controlling variables. Handbook of Operant Behavior 1977:201–32.
    1. Dallery J, Silverman K, Chutuape MA, et al. . Voucher-based reinforcement of opiate plus cocaine abstinence in treatment-resistant methadone patients: effects of reinforcer magnitude. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2001;9:317–25. 10.1037/1064-1297.9.3.317
    1. Petry NM, Alessi SM, Barry D, et al. . Standard magnitude prize reinforcers can be as efficacious as larger magnitude reinforcers in cocaine-dependent methadone patients. J Consult Clin Psychol 2015;83:464–72. 10.1037/a0037888
    1. Petry NM, Petrakis I, Trevisan L, et al. . Contingency management interventions: from research to practice. Am J Psychiatry 2001;158:694–702. 10.1176/appi.ajp.158.5.694
    1. Christensen DR, Landes RD, Jackson L, et al. . Adding an Internet-delivered treatment to an efficacious treatment package for opioid dependence. J Consult Clin Psychol 2014;82:964–72. 10.1037/a0037496
    1. Amass L, Kamien JB, Mikulich SK. Efficacy of daily and alternate-day dosing regimens with the combination buprenorphine-naloxone tablet. Drug Alcohol Depend 2000;58(1-2):143–52. 10.1016/S0376-8716(99)00074-5
    1. Nevin JA. Measuring behavioral momentum. Behav Processes 2002;57:187–98. 10.1016/S0376-6357(02)00013-X
    1. Nevin JA, Shahan TA. Behavioral momentum theory: equations and applications. J Appl Behav Anal 2011;44:877–95. 10.1901/jaba.2011.44-877
    1. Lorains FK, Cowlishaw S, Thomas SA. Prevalence of comorbid disorders in problem and pathological gambling: systematic review and meta-analysis of population surveys. Addiction 2011;106:490–8. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03300.x
    1. Wareham JD, Potenza MN. Pathological gambling and substance use disorders. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2010;36:242–7. 10.3109/00952991003721118
    1. Statistics Canada. Rural and Small Town Analysis Bulletin. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2001:3;21–6.
    1. Rural Health Services Review Committee. Rural health services review final report: Understanding the concerns and challenges of Albertans who live in rural and remote communities: Government of Alberta, 2015. .
    1. McClure M. Gambling revenues surge in Alberta, while province weighs online casino. Calgary Herald 2015. .
    1. Christensen DR, Jackson AC, Dowling NA, et al. . An Examination of a Proposed DSM-IV Pathological Gambling Hierarchy in a Treatment Seeking Population: Similarities with Substance Dependence and Evidence for Three Classification Systems. J Gambl Stud 2015;31:787–806. 10.1007/s10899-014-9449-2
    1. American Psychiatric Association. DSM-5. Author. Arlington: American Psychiatric, 2013.
    1. Problem Gambling Research and Treatment Centre. Screening, assessment and treatment guidelines in problem and pathological gambling. Melbourne, Victoria: Author. Monash University, 2011.
    1. Petry NM. Pathological gambling: Etiology, comorbidity, and treatment: American Psychological Association, 2005.
    1. Cormier S, Nurius P, Osborn C. Interviewing and change strategies for helpers: Nelson Education, 2016.
    1. Beck J. Cognitive behavior therapy: Basics and beyond: Guilford Press, 2011.
    1. Stinchfield R, McCready J, Turner NE, et al. . Reliability, Validity, and Classification Accuracy of the DSM-5 Diagnostic Criteria for Gambling Disorder and Comparison to DSM-IV. J Gambl Stud 2016;32:905–22. 10.1007/s10899-015-9573-7
    1. Patton JH, Stanford MS, Barratt ES. Factor structure of the Barratt impulsiveness scale. J Clin Psychol 1995;51:768–74. 10.1002/1097-4679(199511)51:6<768::AID-JCLP2270510607>;2-1
    1. Raylu N, Oei TP, Tps O. The gambling urge scale: development, confirmatory factor validation, and psychometric properties. Psychol Addict Behav 2004;18:100–5. 10.1037/0893-164X.18.2.100
    1. Bickel WK, Marsch LA. Toward a behavioral economic understanding of drug dependence: delay discounting processes. Addiction 2001;96:73–86. 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2001.961736.x
    1. Humeniuk R, Ali R, Babor TF, et al. . Validation of the Alcohol, Smoking And Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). Addiction 2008;103:1039–47. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02114.x
    1. Kim SW, Grant JE, Adson DE, et al. . Double-blind naltrexone and placebo comparison study in the treatment of pathological gambling. Biol Psychiatry 2001;49:914–21. 10.1016/S0006-3223(01)01079-4
    1. Gainsbury S, Hing N, Suhonen N. Professional help-seeking for gambling problems: awareness, barriers and motivators for treatment. J Gambl Stud 2014;30:503–19. 10.1007/s10899-013-9373-x
    1. Petry NM. Contingency management: what it is and why psychiatrists should want to use it. Psychiatrist 2011;35:161–3. 10.1192/pb.bp.110.031831
    1. Ventola CL. Mobile devices and apps for health care professionals: uses and benefits. P T 2014;39:356–64.
    1. Best DW, Lubman DI. The recovery paradigm - a model of hope and change for alcohol and drug addiction. Aust Fam Physician 2012;41:593–7.
    1. Nevin JA, Grace RC. Behavioral momentum and the law of effect. Behav Brain Sci 2000;23:73–90. 10.1017/S0140525X00002405
    1. Christensen DR. Gambling research-looking forward. Austin Journal of Drug Abuse and Addiction 2015;2:1–2.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj