Effectiveness of two psychological intervention techniques for de-addiction among patients with addiction to tobacco and alcohol - A double-blind randomized control trial

• Published in: Indian journal of cancer 2018-10, Vol.55 (4), p.382-389
• Main Authors: Ganavadiya, Rahul, Shekar, B, Suma, S, Singh, Pallavi, Gupta, Ruchika, Rana, Poonam, Jain, Shubham
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Addiction; Addictions; Alcohol; Analysis; Clinical trials; Consumption; Counseling; Double-blind studies; Drug abuse; Intervention; Interviews; Methods; Nervous system agents; Nicotine; Personal health; Psychological aspects; Public health; Questionnaires; Smoking; Substance abuse treatment; Tobacco; Writing therapy
• ISSN: 0019-509X; 1998-4774
• DOI: 10.4103/ijc.IJC_650_17

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate effectiveness of two psychological intervention techniques (reading - writing therapy vs. games - narrative therapy) using motivational intervention alone as a control among tobacco addicts. Materials and Method: This randomized control trial was conducted over a period of 6 months from April to September 2013 at a de-addiction center in Madhya Pradesh, India. Patients with moderate-to-high levels of dependence as determined by Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) admitted for treatment in a de-addiction center were recruited. A cluster randomization technique was used for allocation of participants to three different groups. Group allocation was concealed from investigator and done by coordinator. Three interventions were group A - motivational intervention alone, group B - games and story therapy along with motivational intervention, and group C - reading and writing therapy along with motivational intervention. Interventions were applied for 1 month. Two postintervention follow-ups (one at the time of discharge and one after 1 month following discharge) were done to assess level of dependence using FTND besides undertaking urine cotinine analysis among three randomly selected participants in each group. Results: A total of 82 participants (28 in group A, 27 each in groups B and C) completed the study. Eighty-one (98.8%) participants had complete abstinence at the end of 1 month with no significant difference in the success rate between different categories (P = 0.357). At the end of 1 month following discharge from center, only 7 participants (8.5%) had complete abstinence and 51 participants (62.2%) had partial reduction and remaining 24 participants (29.3%) were considered failures with no difference between three groups (P = 0.768). Conclusion: Although overall abstinence was low (8.5%), all intervention techniques were equally effective in at least reducing level of dependence with no significant difference in their efficacy.