Efficacy and working mechanisms of a Go/No-Go task-based inhibition training in smoking: A randomized-controlled trial.

IF 4.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Behaviour Research and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-12-15 DOI:10.1016/j.brat.2024.104672
Franziska Motka, Charlotte E Wittekind, Leonie Ascone, Simone Kühn
{"title":"Efficacy and working mechanisms of a Go/No-Go task-based inhibition training in smoking: A randomized-controlled trial.","authors":"Franziska Motka, Charlotte E Wittekind, Leonie Ascone, Simone Kühn","doi":"10.1016/j.brat.2024.104672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Deficits in inhibitory control contribute to smoking behavior. Inhibitory control training (ICT), which involves repeatedly inhibiting responses to general or substance-related stimuli, shows promise in reducing problematic substance use. This preregistered randomized-controlled trial is the first to investigate the efficacy of general and smoking-specific Go/No-Go task-based ICT on smoking behavior compared to control groups receiving no ICT. Three potential working mechanisms were examined: inhibitory enhancement, automatic stimulus-stop associations, and stimulus devaluation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Individuals who smoke (N = 122) were randomly assigned to complete 28 sessions of smoking-specific Go/No-Go, general Go/No-Go, Sham training, or to a Waitlist control condition. Clinical outcomes included daily cigarettes (primary outcome), carbon monoxide levels, tobacco dependence severity, and craving, assessed at post-intervention and 3-month follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Go/No-Go training resulted in a significantly greater reduction in tobacco dependence (β = -0.88, p = .004) and craving (β = -4.31, p = .012) post-intervention compared to both control groups. The greater reduction in craving remained significant when compared to the Sham training group only (β = -4.64, p = .026). No significant effects of group were observed on daily cigarette consumption (β = -1.97, p = .093) or carbon monoxide levels (β = 2.16, p = .818) post-intervention. At the 3-month follow-up, no significant effects of group emerged (all ps > .794). Smoking-specific Go/No-Go training did not outperform general Go/No-Go training (all ps > .075). No working mechanism for clinical outcome improvements was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preliminary evidence suggests that (smoking-specific) GNG training reduces tobacco dependence severity and craving post-intervention in individuals who smoke compared to non-ICT-based control conditions. Its efficacy as an add-on in smoking cessation needs to be investigated.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration number: </strong>DRKS00014652.</p>","PeriodicalId":48457,"journal":{"name":"Behaviour Research and Therapy","volume":"185 ","pages":"104672"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behaviour Research and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2024.104672","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Deficits in inhibitory control contribute to smoking behavior. Inhibitory control training (ICT), which involves repeatedly inhibiting responses to general or substance-related stimuli, shows promise in reducing problematic substance use. This preregistered randomized-controlled trial is the first to investigate the efficacy of general and smoking-specific Go/No-Go task-based ICT on smoking behavior compared to control groups receiving no ICT. Three potential working mechanisms were examined: inhibitory enhancement, automatic stimulus-stop associations, and stimulus devaluation.

Method: Individuals who smoke (N = 122) were randomly assigned to complete 28 sessions of smoking-specific Go/No-Go, general Go/No-Go, Sham training, or to a Waitlist control condition. Clinical outcomes included daily cigarettes (primary outcome), carbon monoxide levels, tobacco dependence severity, and craving, assessed at post-intervention and 3-month follow-up.

Results: Go/No-Go training resulted in a significantly greater reduction in tobacco dependence (β = -0.88, p = .004) and craving (β = -4.31, p = .012) post-intervention compared to both control groups. The greater reduction in craving remained significant when compared to the Sham training group only (β = -4.64, p = .026). No significant effects of group were observed on daily cigarette consumption (β = -1.97, p = .093) or carbon monoxide levels (β = 2.16, p = .818) post-intervention. At the 3-month follow-up, no significant effects of group emerged (all ps > .794). Smoking-specific Go/No-Go training did not outperform general Go/No-Go training (all ps > .075). No working mechanism for clinical outcome improvements was identified.

Conclusions: Preliminary evidence suggests that (smoking-specific) GNG training reduces tobacco dependence severity and craving post-intervention in individuals who smoke compared to non-ICT-based control conditions. Its efficacy as an add-on in smoking cessation needs to be investigated.

Clinical trial registration number: DRKS00014652.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于 "去/不去 "任务的吸烟抑制训练的效果和工作机制:随机对照试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Behaviour Research and Therapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.30%
发文量
148
期刊介绍: The major focus of Behaviour Research and Therapy is an experimental psychopathology approach to understanding emotional and behavioral disorders and their prevention and treatment, using cognitive, behavioral, and psychophysiological (including neural) methods and models. This includes laboratory-based experimental studies with healthy, at risk and subclinical individuals that inform clinical application as well as studies with clinically severe samples. The following types of submissions are encouraged: theoretical reviews of mechanisms that contribute to psychopathology and that offer new treatment targets; tests of novel, mechanistically focused psychological interventions, especially ones that include theory-driven or experimentally-derived predictors, moderators and mediators; and innovations in dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices into clinical practice in psychology and associated fields, especially those that target underlying mechanisms or focus on novel approaches to treatment delivery. In addition to traditional psychological disorders, the scope of the journal includes behavioural medicine (e.g., chronic pain). The journal will not consider manuscripts dealing primarily with measurement, psychometric analyses, and personality assessment.
期刊最新文献
Broadening the conceptualization of panic disorder to include the fear presentation of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder: The legacy of panic control therapy. Mediators and Moderators of two online interventions for managing pain, fear of progression and functional ability in rheumatoid arthritis. The renewal reducing effect of unpaired unconditional stimuli presented during extinction is not specific to the unconditional stimulus used during acquisition. Accelerometer-based sedentary time and physical activity with incident and progressive tobacco smoking in 2503 children: A 13-year mediation and temporal longitudinal study. Diverging paths: Modeling the relation between adverse effects, attitudes, perceived adherence, and treatment effect in an internet-based cognitive-behavioral intervention for obsessive-compulsive disorder.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1