Impact of a computerized intervention for high distress intolerance on cannabis use outcomes: A randomized controlled trial

Impact of a computerized distress intolerance intervention on electrocortical reactivity to cannabis and threat cues: A randomized controlled trial.

“…Significant subjective and physiological stress reactivity to the MMST has been observed in healthy and clinical samples (Cackowski et al, 2014; Reinhardt et al, 2012). In the present study sample, the MMST elicited significantly increased subjective stress at baseline and postintervention; further, subjective stress reactivity did not change from baseline to postintervention (Macatee, Albanese, et al, 2021).…”

“…Our previously published data (Macatee et al, 2019) was derived from a baseline assessment in the context of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating a brief DI-targeted intervention for cannabis users with high DI. Primary outcomes have been previously reported (Macatee, Albanese, et al, 2021), which revealed comparable reductions in DI and most cannabis use outcomes through follow-up in the experimental and control arms. In addition to the baseline assessment, acute stress modulation of the LPP to threat and cannabis cues was also assessed at postintervention as a secondary outcome.…”

“…This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. stress induction was administered at baseline and postintervention, which may have altered stress responding at Importantly, the stress induction significantly increased subjective stress at both lab visits and reactivity magnitude did not significantly change from baseline to postintervention (Macatee, Albanese, et al, 2021). However, it is possible that repeated administration of the same stress induction resulted in other, unmeasured changes in reactivity at postintervention, ultimately affecting the poststressor LPPs.…”

“…Sixty participants were recruited from a large southeastern university and the surrounding community as part of a RCT evaluating the efficacy of a computerized DI intervention for cannabis users with high DI. The sample size was determined based on a power analysis for detecting a medium effect size of group on the primary outcomes (i.e., DI, cannabis use behavior; Macatee, Albanese, et al, 2021). The RCT was advertised as evaluating the efficacy of a computerized stress management intervention for regular cannabis users who struggle with emotion regulation.…”

“…This design allows us to evaluate (a) the impact of a DI-targeted intervention on these secondary neurophysiological outcomes and (b) the LPPs predictive validity with respect to change in CUD severity over time, ultimately elucidating the possible mechanistic role of the LPP in CUD severity among distress intolerant cannabis users. Because our previously published baseline data (Macatee et al, 2019) and others work (Dunning et al, 2011;Parvaz et al, 2016) suggest that the LPP and subjective craving index largely distinct constructs, we present intervention outcome data on the LPP separately from the primary behavioral outcomes (e.g., craving, CUD severity; Macatee, Albanese, et al, 2021). Based on cognitive models of DI and previous findings, our registered hypotheses (www.ClinicalTrials .gov NCT04173078) were that, relative to the control group, the DI intervention group would show greater pre to postintervention reductions in the LPP to threat and cannabis cues during acute stress.…”