JEu me questionne : un programme désiré par les CSSS du Québec ?

Ladouceur, Robert; Fournier, Patricia-Maude; Lafond, Sophie; Goulet, Annie; Simoneau, Hélène; Sévigny, Serge; Giroux, Isabelle

doi:10.7202/1026880ar

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(Ferris & Wynne, 2001). The Inventaire de croyances liées au jeu (ICROLJ, Gambling-Related Beliefs Inventory, Ladouceur et al, 2004) measures people's beliefs about gambling. The ICROLJ has 29 items and uses a 4-point Likert-type (strongly disagree = 1, strongly agree = 4).…”

Section: Primary Outcomes: Gamblingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of a randomized controlled trial of integrative couple treatment for pathological gambling (ICT-PG): 10-month follow-up.

Tremblay¹,

Dufour²,

Bertrand³

et al. 2023

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Assess the efficacy of integrative couple treatment for pathological gambling (ICT-PG) in comparison to treatment provided in an individual approach. Method: Eighty couples were assigned randomly to ICT-PG (n = 44, Mage = 42.2, SD [13.4], n male gamblers = 29) or individual treatment (n = 36, Mage = 39.9 SD [13.0], n male gamblers = 31) with follow-ups at 4- and 10-months postadmission regarding the severity of gambling, the individual and couple’s well-being. Linear mixed and generalized estimating equation models for repeated measures were applied to take into account the dependency of observations. Protocol was preregistered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT02240485). Results: Participants in both treatments generally improved over time with reductions on gambling expanses from an initial $4,000–$600 in a 90-day period following treatment, without diﬀerence across treatment conditions in money spent on gambling or frequency of gambling. However, on different indices of gambling severity, the participants in ICT-PG showed more improvement at follow-ups, with better control capacity (OR = 2.57, p < .0129) and greater reduction in gambling craving (OR = 5.83, p < .0001) and erroneous cognitions (OR = 2.63, p < .0063). The couple treatment was associated with a better individual well-being (e.g., less depression for partners, OR = 5.53; p < .0351, and gamblers, OR = 2.37; p < .0334) and couple well-being (e.g., better dyadic satisfaction for partners, OR = 2.02; p < .0057, and gamblers, OR = 3.07; p < .0212). Conclusions: The results underline the necessity to provide a greater diversity of treatment for gamblers and their partner. Further research should focus on identifying active components of ICT-PG and widen its provision to gamblers with concurrent addiction disorders.

show abstract

Section: Primary Outcomes: Gamblingmentioning

confidence: 99%