Examining differential responses to the Take Care of Me trial: A latent class and moderation analysis

Addictive Behaviors Reports

Corey S. Mackenzie¹  Karli K. Rapinda²  Heather D. Hadjistavropoulos³  David D. Ebert⁴  Matthijs Blankers⁵  Jona R. Frohlich⁵  Matthew T. Keough⁵  Michael P. Schaub⁵  Jeffrey D. Wardell⁶  Christian Baumgartner⁷  Edward A. Johnson⁷  Andreas Wenger⁷  Jason D. Edgerton⁸ 

[1] Academic Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands;Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, 190 Dysart Rd., Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2, Canada.;Trimbos Institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, Netherlands;Arkin Mental Health Care, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands;Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada;Department of eMental Health, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany;Swiss Research Institute for Public Health and Addiction, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland;University of Regina, Psychology, Regina, SK, Canada;

关键词: Alcohol use;    Emotional problems;    Latent class analysis;    Moderation;    Online treatment;   

DOI  :  

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Given prevalent alcohol misuse-emotional comorbidities among young adults, we developed an internet-based integrated treatment called Take Care of Me. Although the treatment had an impact on several secondary outcomes, effects were not observed for the primary outcome. Therefore, the goal of the current study was to examine heterogeneity in treatment responses. The initial RCT randomized participants to either a treatment or psychoeducational control condition. We conducted an exploratory latent class analysis to distinguish individuals based on pre-treatment risk and then used moderated regressions to examine differential treatment responses based on class membership. We found evidence for three distinct groups. Most participants fell in the “low severity” group (n = 123), followed by the “moderate severity” group (n = 57) who had a higher likelihood of endorsing a previous mental health diagnosis and treatment and higher symptom severity than the low group. The “high severity” group (n = 42) endorsed a family history of alcoholism, and the highest symptom severity and executive dysfunction. Moderated regressions revealed significant class differences in treatment responses. In the treatment condition, high severity (relative to low) participants reported higher alcohol consumption and hazardous drinking and lower quality of life at follow-up, whereas moderate severity (relative to low) individuals had lower alcohol consumption at follow-up, and lower hazardous drinking at end-of-treatment. No class differences were found for participants in the control group. Higher risk individuals in the treatment condition had poorer responses to the program. Tailoring interventions to severity may be important to examine in future research.

【 授权许可】

Unknown