Internet-delivered therapist-assisted cognitive behavioral therapy for gambling disorder: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is the most promising treatment for gambling disorder (GD) but only 21% of those with problematic gambling seek treatment. CBT over the Internet might be one way to reach a larger population. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of Internet-delivered CBT with therapist guidance compared to an active control treatment. Methods: Using a single-blinded design, 71 treatment-seeking gamblers (18-75 years) diagnosed with GD were randomized to 8 weeks of Internet-delivered CBT guided by telephone support, or 8 weeks of Internet-delivered motivational enhancement paired with motivational interviewing via telephone (IMI). The primary outcome was gambling symptoms measured at a first face-to-face assessment, baseline (treatment start), every 2 weeks, post-treatment, and 6-month follow-up. Gambling expenditures, time spent gambling, depression, anxiety, cognitive distortions, and quality of life were assessed as secondary outcomes. Analysis was performed on the full analysis sample (n = 60), with intention-to-treat sensitivity analyses (n = 69). Results: In the CBT group, 80% stayed in treatment until the final week, compared to 67% in IMI. Post-treatment and at 6-month follow-up, no differences were found between CBT and IMI for any outcome measure. An exploratory analysis of the total sample (n = 60) showed a significant effect of time during treatment on gambling symptoms (d, [95% CI] 0.52, [-1.15, 2.02]) and all secondary outcomes except the gambling diary (depression (0.89, [-1.07-2.65]); anxiety (0.69, [-1.20-2.38])); cognitive distortions (0.84, [-0.73-2.29]); quality of life (0.60, [-0.61-1.70])). Post-treatment, there were no clinical gambling symptoms in either group. Some deterioration was seen between post-treatment and 6-month follow-up on gambling symptoms (0.42, [-1.74-2.43]), depression (0.59, [-0.82-1.86]), and anxiety (0.30, [-0.99-1.48]). Additionally, it was observed that the largest reduction in gambling symptoms was between the first assessment and baseline. Conclusion: Both treatments offered in this study were effective at reducing gambling symptoms. It is also possible that the process of change started before treatment, which gives promise to low-intensity interventions for GD. Additional research is needed as this approach could be both cost-effective and has the potential to reach more patients in need of treatment than is currently possible. Clinical trial registration https//www.isrctn.com/, identifier ISRCTN38692394.