Inhibition moderates the effect of attentional bias modification for reducing residual depressive symptoms: A randomized sham-controlled clinical trial

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Ragnhild Bø , Brage Kraft , August Skilbrei , Rune Jonassen , Catherine J. Harmer , Nils Inge Landrø
{"title":"Inhibition moderates the effect of attentional bias modification for reducing residual depressive symptoms: A randomized sham-controlled clinical trial","authors":"Ragnhild Bø ,&nbsp;Brage Kraft ,&nbsp;August Skilbrei ,&nbsp;Rune Jonassen ,&nbsp;Catherine J. Harmer ,&nbsp;Nils Inge Landrø","doi":"10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.101982","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Residual symptoms represent risk factor for relapse. Attention bias modification (ABM) may reduce clinical and sub-clinical depressive symptoms, indicating that is may be of relevance when preventing relapse. Current evidence suggests that executive functions may moderate the outcome of interventions targeting depressive symptoms.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We assessed inhibition and shifting as indicators of executive functioning by means of the Color-Word Interference Test (i.e., “Stroop task”). These baseline characteristics were investigated as moderator of the effect of ABM on depression symptoms in a double-blinded randomized sham-controlled trial of ABM including patients with a history of recurrent depression (N = 301). Inclusion and follow-ups took place from January 2015 to October 2016. The trial was retrospectively registered #NCT02658682 January 2016.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The moderation analysis was based on the interaction term ABM x Stroop. Scaled inhibition scores ≤10.8, but not shifting ability, moderated the effect of ABM compared to sham on clinician-rated depression (HDRS). The difference from the 15th to the 85th percentile of the inhibition score was about 1 HDRS-point, indicating a small effect size. No moderation was found when self-reported depression and AB were the outcome. Post-hoc power calculation indicates risk of Type-II error.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>When targeting depressive symptoms, ABM seems to be somewhat more effective in patients with weak inhibitory control. This suggests that evaluating the level of inhibition in individual patients could provide some information when making decisions about prescribing ABM to reduce residual symptoms, but the clinical implications of this is uncertain due to an overall small effect size attributable to ABM. Future studies should examine whether inhibitory control still is a relevant moderator when comparing ABM to treatment options other than the sham control condition.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48198,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101982"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791624000417/pdfft?md5=d65099e411ae309f51459c5eff6cf890&pid=1-s2.0-S0005791624000417-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791624000417","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Residual symptoms represent risk factor for relapse. Attention bias modification (ABM) may reduce clinical and sub-clinical depressive symptoms, indicating that is may be of relevance when preventing relapse. Current evidence suggests that executive functions may moderate the outcome of interventions targeting depressive symptoms.

Methods

We assessed inhibition and shifting as indicators of executive functioning by means of the Color-Word Interference Test (i.e., “Stroop task”). These baseline characteristics were investigated as moderator of the effect of ABM on depression symptoms in a double-blinded randomized sham-controlled trial of ABM including patients with a history of recurrent depression (N = 301). Inclusion and follow-ups took place from January 2015 to October 2016. The trial was retrospectively registered #NCT02658682 January 2016.

Results

The moderation analysis was based on the interaction term ABM x Stroop. Scaled inhibition scores ≤10.8, but not shifting ability, moderated the effect of ABM compared to sham on clinician-rated depression (HDRS). The difference from the 15th to the 85th percentile of the inhibition score was about 1 HDRS-point, indicating a small effect size. No moderation was found when self-reported depression and AB were the outcome. Post-hoc power calculation indicates risk of Type-II error.

Conclusion

When targeting depressive symptoms, ABM seems to be somewhat more effective in patients with weak inhibitory control. This suggests that evaluating the level of inhibition in individual patients could provide some information when making decisions about prescribing ABM to reduce residual symptoms, but the clinical implications of this is uncertain due to an overall small effect size attributable to ABM. Future studies should examine whether inhibitory control still is a relevant moderator when comparing ABM to treatment options other than the sham control condition.

抑制调节了注意偏差修正对减轻残余抑郁症状的效果:随机假对照临床试验
目标:残留症状是导致复发的风险因素。注意力偏差修正(ABM)可减轻临床和亚临床抑郁症状,这表明它可能与预防复发有关。目前的证据表明,执行功能可能会影响针对抑郁症状的干预结果:方法:我们通过颜色-词语干扰测验(即 "Stroop任务")评估了作为执行功能指标的抑制和转移。在一项ABM双盲随机假对照试验中,我们将这些基线特征作为ABM对抑郁症状影响的调节因素进行了调查,试验对象包括有复发性抑郁症病史的患者(N = 301)。纳入和随访时间为2015年1月至2016年10月。该试验于2016年1月进行了回顾性注册#NCT02658682:调节分析基于交互项ABM x Stroop。抑制评分≤10.8分(而非移位能力)调节了ABM与假药相比对临床医师评分抑郁(HDRS)的影响。从抑制得分的第 15 百分位数到第 85 百分位数之间的差异约为 1 HDRS 分,显示出较小的效应规模。以自我报告的抑郁和 AB 为结果时,未发现调节作用。事后功率计算显示存在II型错误的风险:结论:针对抑郁症状,ABM 似乎对抑制控制能力较弱的患者更有效。这表明,评估个体患者的抑制水平可以为决定是否使用ABM来减轻残余症状提供一些信息,但由于ABM的总体效应大小较小,因此其临床意义尚不确定。未来的研究应该探讨在将 ABM 与假对照条件以外的治疗方案进行比较时,抑制控制是否仍然是一个相关的调节因素。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: The publication of the book Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition (1958) by the co-founding editor of this Journal, Joseph Wolpe, marked a major change in the understanding and treatment of mental disorders. The book used principles from empirical behavioral science to explain psychopathological phenomena and the resulting explanations were critically tested and used to derive effective treatments. The second half of the 20th century saw this rigorous scientific approach come to fruition. Experimental approaches to psychopathology, in particular those used to test conditioning theories and cognitive theories, have steadily expanded, and experimental analysis of processes characterising and maintaining mental disorders have become an established research area.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信