4.6 Article

Computer-assisted delivery of cognitive-behavioral therapy for addiction: A randomized trial of CBT4CBT

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
卷 165, 期 7, 页码 881-888

出版社

AMER PSYCHIATRIC PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07111835

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [K05 DA000457, P50 DA009241-140014, R01 DA015969-01, K05 DA000457-08, P50 DA009241-130014, K05 DA000089, R37 DA015969, R37 DA015969-06, R37 DA015969-03, R01 DA015969, K05-DA00457, P50 DA009241, R37 DA015969-02, K05 DA000457-07, R37 DA015969-04, P50-DA09241, K05-DA00089, R37-DA 015969, R37 DA015969-03S1, K05 DA000457-06, R37 DA015969-05, P50 DA009241-120014] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: This study evaluated the efficacy of a computer-based version of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for substance dependence. Method: This was a randomized clinical trial in which 77 individuals seeking treatment for substance dependence at an outpatient community setting were randomly assigned to standard treatment or standard treatment with biweekly access to computer-based training in CBT (CBT4CBT) skills. Results: Treatment retention and data availability were comparable across the treatment conditions. Participants assigned to the CBT4CBT condition submitted significantly more urine specimens that were negative for any type of drugs and tended to have longer continuous periods of abstinence during treatment. The CBT4CBT program was positively evaluated by participants. In the CBT4CBT condition, outcome was more strongly associated with treatment engagement than in treatment as usual; furthermore, completion of homework assignments in CBT4CBT was significantly correlated with outcome and a significant predictor of treatment involvement. Conclusions: These data suggest that CBT4CBT is an effective adjunct to standard outpatient treatment for substance dependence and may provide an important means of making CBT, an empirically validated treatment, more broadly available.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据