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":"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.","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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

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.