虚拟现实提示暴露作为戒烟团体治疗的附加内容:一项随机对照试验。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
A M Kroczek, B Schröder, D Rosenbaum, A Mühleck, J Diemer, A Mühlberger, A C Ehlis, A Batra
{"title":"虚拟现实提示暴露作为戒烟团体治疗的附加内容:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"A M Kroczek, B Schröder, D Rosenbaum, A Mühleck, J Diemer, A Mühlberger, A C Ehlis, A Batra","doi":"10.1186/s13722-025-00561-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cue exposure (CE) is used for relapse prevention as part of smoking cessation therapy to reduce the automatized response to smoking-related cues. Using CET in virtual reality (VR) is an approach to increase its efficacy by creating cost-efficient high-risk situations. The efficacy of VR-based CETs was compared to that of an unspecific relaxation intervention as an add-on to an established cognitive-behaviorally oriented smoking cessation group therapy (G-CBT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>N = 246 abstinence-motivated smokers were included in a two-armed randomized controlled trial (G-CBT with VR-CET vs. G-CBT with progressive muscle relaxation/PMR) with 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups (measurements in 2018-2020). All smokers joined a well-established G-CBT smoking cessation program with six sessions with four additional sessions of either VR-based smoking cue exposure therapy (VR-CET) or four sessions of group-based PMR. The primary outcome was abstinence after 6 months according to the Russell Standard; secondary outcomes included changes in the number of smoked cigarettes, craving (assessed by the Questionnaire of Smoking Urges/QSU), and self-efficacy (assessed by the Smoking Abstinence Self-Efficacy Scale/SES) over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primary outcome: Six months after G-CBT, 24% of the participants were abstinent, and there was no significant difference between the PMR (n = 34/124) and VR-CET (n = 24/122) groups (odds ratio PMR/VR = 0.64). Secondary measures: SES increased, and QSU and the number of smoked cigarettes decreased over time. Baseline craving ratings predicted abstinence only in the VR-CET group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This randomized controlled trial did not show increased abstinence rates related to smoking cue exposure in virtual reality. Secondary measures demonstrated significant reductions in craving and cigarette consumption as well as increases in self-efficacy over time, regardless of the intervention. However, high baseline craving was negatively related to abstinence in the VR-CET group, suggesting that intense craving was insufficiently addressed. This may indicate that the amount of training was insufficient and should be intensified. Individualization, e.g., adaptive, individualized approaches, is required to improve the effects of the VR-CET on smoking cessation in future studies.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03707106.</p>","PeriodicalId":54223,"journal":{"name":"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice","volume":"20 1","pages":"34"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11987342/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Virtual reality cue exposure as an add-on to smoking cessation group therapy: a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"A M Kroczek, B Schröder, D Rosenbaum, A Mühleck, J Diemer, A Mühlberger, A C Ehlis, A Batra\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13722-025-00561-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cue exposure (CE) is used for relapse prevention as part of smoking cessation therapy to reduce the automatized response to smoking-related cues. Using CET in virtual reality (VR) is an approach to increase its efficacy by creating cost-efficient high-risk situations. The efficacy of VR-based CETs was compared to that of an unspecific relaxation intervention as an add-on to an established cognitive-behaviorally oriented smoking cessation group therapy (G-CBT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>N = 246 abstinence-motivated smokers were included in a two-armed randomized controlled trial (G-CBT with VR-CET vs. G-CBT with progressive muscle relaxation/PMR) with 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups (measurements in 2018-2020). All smokers joined a well-established G-CBT smoking cessation program with six sessions with four additional sessions of either VR-based smoking cue exposure therapy (VR-CET) or four sessions of group-based PMR. The primary outcome was abstinence after 6 months according to the Russell Standard; secondary outcomes included changes in the number of smoked cigarettes, craving (assessed by the Questionnaire of Smoking Urges/QSU), and self-efficacy (assessed by the Smoking Abstinence Self-Efficacy Scale/SES) over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primary outcome: Six months after G-CBT, 24% of the participants were abstinent, and there was no significant difference between the PMR (n = 34/124) and VR-CET (n = 24/122) groups (odds ratio PMR/VR = 0.64). Secondary measures: SES increased, and QSU and the number of smoked cigarettes decreased over time. Baseline craving ratings predicted abstinence only in the VR-CET group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This randomized controlled trial did not show increased abstinence rates related to smoking cue exposure in virtual reality. Secondary measures demonstrated significant reductions in craving and cigarette consumption as well as increases in self-efficacy over time, regardless of the intervention. However, high baseline craving was negatively related to abstinence in the VR-CET group, suggesting that intense craving was insufficiently addressed. This may indicate that the amount of training was insufficient and should be intensified. Individualization, e.g., adaptive, individualized approaches, is required to improve the effects of the VR-CET on smoking cessation in future studies.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03707106.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"34\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11987342/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-025-00561-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-025-00561-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:提示暴露(CE)作为戒烟治疗的一部分用于预防复发,以减少对吸烟相关提示的自动反应。在虚拟现实(VR)中使用CET是一种通过创造具有成本效益的高风险情境来提高其有效性的方法。将基于vr的CETs与非特异性放松干预作为已建立的以认知行为为导向的戒烟团体治疗(G-CBT)的附加疗法的效果进行了比较。方法:在一项双臂随机对照试验(G-CBT + VR-CET vs G-CBT +渐进式肌肉放松/PMR)中纳入N = 246名戒烟动机吸烟者,随访1个月、3个月和6个月(2018-2020年测量)。所有吸烟者都参加了一个完善的G-CBT戒烟计划,其中6个疗程,另外4个疗程是基于vr的吸烟提示暴露疗法(VR-CET)或4个疗程的基于小组的PMR。根据罗素标准,主要结局是6个月后禁欲;次要结果包括吸烟数量、渴望(通过吸烟冲动问卷/QSU评估)和自我效能(通过戒烟自我效能量表/SES评估)随时间的变化。结果:主要结局:G-CBT 6个月后,24%的参与者戒断,PMR组(n = 34/124)和VR- cet组(n = 24/122)之间无显著差异(比值比PMR/VR = 0.64)。次要测量:随着时间的推移,SES增加,QSU和吸烟数量减少。基线渴望评分仅在VR-CET组中预测禁欲。结论:这项随机对照试验并未显示虚拟现实中吸烟提示暴露增加了戒烟率。二次测量显示,无论干预与否,随着时间的推移,渴望和香烟消费的显著减少以及自我效能的增加。然而,在VR-CET组中,高基线渴望与戒断呈负相关,这表明强烈的渴望没有得到充分解决。这可能表明培训的数量不够,应该加强。在未来的研究中,需要个性化,例如适应性、个性化的方法来改善VR-CET对戒烟的影响。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符NCT03707106。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Virtual reality cue exposure as an add-on to smoking cessation group therapy: a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Cue exposure (CE) is used for relapse prevention as part of smoking cessation therapy to reduce the automatized response to smoking-related cues. Using CET in virtual reality (VR) is an approach to increase its efficacy by creating cost-efficient high-risk situations. The efficacy of VR-based CETs was compared to that of an unspecific relaxation intervention as an add-on to an established cognitive-behaviorally oriented smoking cessation group therapy (G-CBT).

Methods: N = 246 abstinence-motivated smokers were included in a two-armed randomized controlled trial (G-CBT with VR-CET vs. G-CBT with progressive muscle relaxation/PMR) with 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups (measurements in 2018-2020). All smokers joined a well-established G-CBT smoking cessation program with six sessions with four additional sessions of either VR-based smoking cue exposure therapy (VR-CET) or four sessions of group-based PMR. The primary outcome was abstinence after 6 months according to the Russell Standard; secondary outcomes included changes in the number of smoked cigarettes, craving (assessed by the Questionnaire of Smoking Urges/QSU), and self-efficacy (assessed by the Smoking Abstinence Self-Efficacy Scale/SES) over time.

Results: Primary outcome: Six months after G-CBT, 24% of the participants were abstinent, and there was no significant difference between the PMR (n = 34/124) and VR-CET (n = 24/122) groups (odds ratio PMR/VR = 0.64). Secondary measures: SES increased, and QSU and the number of smoked cigarettes decreased over time. Baseline craving ratings predicted abstinence only in the VR-CET group.

Conclusion: This randomized controlled trial did not show increased abstinence rates related to smoking cue exposure in virtual reality. Secondary measures demonstrated significant reductions in craving and cigarette consumption as well as increases in self-efficacy over time, regardless of the intervention. However, high baseline craving was negatively related to abstinence in the VR-CET group, suggesting that intense craving was insufficiently addressed. This may indicate that the amount of training was insufficient and should be intensified. Individualization, e.g., adaptive, individualized approaches, is required to improve the effects of the VR-CET on smoking cessation in future studies.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03707106.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
10.80%
发文量
64
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice provides a forum for clinically relevant research and perspectives that contribute to improving the quality of care for people with unhealthy alcohol, tobacco, or other drug use and addictive behaviours across a spectrum of clinical settings. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice accepts articles of clinical relevance related to the prevention and treatment of unhealthy alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use across the spectrum of clinical settings. Topics of interest address issues related to the following: the spectrum of unhealthy use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs among the range of affected persons (e.g., not limited by age, race/ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation); the array of clinical prevention and treatment practices (from health messages, to identification and early intervention, to more extensive interventions including counseling and pharmacotherapy and other management strategies); and identification and management of medical, psychiatric, social, and other health consequences of substance use. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice is particularly interested in articles that address how to improve the quality of care for people with unhealthy substance use and related conditions as described in the (US) Institute of Medicine report, Improving the Quality of Healthcare for Mental Health and Substance Use Conditions (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006). Such articles address the quality of care and of health services. Although the journal also welcomes submissions that address these conditions in addiction speciality-treatment settings, the journal is particularly interested in including articles that address unhealthy use outside these settings, including experience with novel models of care and outcomes, and outcomes of research-practice collaborations. Although Addiction Science & Clinical Practice is generally not an outlet for basic science research, we will accept basic science research manuscripts that have clearly described potential clinical relevance and are accessible to audiences outside a narrow laboratory research field.
×
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