Mullen Jillian, Mathias Charles W, Karns Tara E, Liang Yuanyuan, Hill-Kapturczak Nathalie, Roache John D, Lamb Richard J, Dougherty Donald M
Department of Psychiatry, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.
Addict Disord Their Treat. 2016 Sep;15(3):120-128. doi: 10.1097/ADT.0000000000000085.
The purpose of this study was to determine if behavioral impulsivity under multiple conditions (baseline, after alcohol consumption or after serotonin depletion) predicted naturalistic alcohol use or treatment outcomes from a moderation-based contingency management intervention.
The current data analysis pulls information from three phases of a large study: 1) Phase 1 examined baseline and the effects of alcohol use and serotonin depletion on three types of behavioral impulsivity: response initiation (IMT task), response inhibition (GoStop task), and delay discounting (SKIP task); 2) Phase 2 involved 28 days of naturalistic drinking; and 3) Phase 3 involved 3 months of contingency management. During phases 2 and 3 alcohol use was measured objectively using transdermal alcohol monitors. The results of each individual phase has been previously published showing that at a group level the effects of alcohol consumption on impulsivity were dependent on the component of impulsivity being measured and the dose of alcohol consumed but serotonin depletion had no effect on impulsivity, and that a moderation-based contingency management intervention reduced heavy drinking.
The current analysis combining data from those who completed all three phases ( = 67) showed that impulsivity measured at baseline, after alcohol consumption, or after serotonin depletion did not predict naturalistic drinking or treatment outcomes from a moderation-based CM treatment.
Contingency management interventions may prove to be an effective intervention for impulsive individuals, however, normal variations in measured impulsivity do not seem to relate to normal variations in drinking pattern or response to moderation-based contingency management.
本研究旨在确定在多种条件下（基线、饮酒后或血清素耗竭后）的行为冲动性是否能预测自然状态下的酒精使用情况或基于适度的应急管理干预的治疗效果。
当前的数据分析提取了一项大型研究三个阶段的信息：1）第一阶段考察了基线以及饮酒和血清素耗竭对三种行为冲动性的影响：反应发起（IMT任务）、反应抑制（GoStop任务）和延迟折扣（SKIP任务）；2）第二阶段涉及28天的自然饮酒；3）第三阶段涉及3个月的应急管理。在第二和第三阶段，使用经皮酒精监测仪客观测量酒精使用情况。每个单独阶段的结果此前已发表，表明在群体水平上，饮酒对冲动性的影响取决于所测量的冲动性成分和饮酒剂量，但血清素耗竭对冲动性没有影响，且基于适度的应急管理干预减少了重度饮酒。
当前对完成所有三个阶段的参与者（n = 67）的数据进行的综合分析表明，在基线、饮酒后或血清素耗竭后测量的冲动性并不能预测基于适度的CM治疗的自然饮酒情况或治疗效果。
应急管理干预可能被证明是对冲动个体有效的干预措施，然而，测量的冲动性的正常变化似乎与饮酒模式的正常变化或对基于适度的应急管理的反应无关。
