Motivational interviewing versus cognitive behavioral group therapy in the treatment of problem and pathological gambling: a randomized controlled trial. Effectiveness of group and individual formats of a combined motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioral treatment program for problem gambling: a randomized controlled trial. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for pathological gamblers. Brief motivational interventions for college student problem gamblers. Twelve-step facilitated versus mapping-enhanced cognitive-behavioral therapy for pathological gambling: a controlled study. A randomized trial of brief interventions for problem and pathological gamblers. Cognitive and behavioral treatment of pathological gambling: a controlled study. Cognitive treatment of pathological gambling. Group therapy for pathological gamblers: a cognitive approach.
Pathological gambling is a widespread problem with major implications for society and the individual. There are effective treatments, but little is known about the relative effectiveness of different treatments. The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral group therapy, and a no-treatment control (wait-list) in the treatment of pathological gambling. This was done in a randomized controlled trial at an outpatient dependency clinic at Karolinska Institute (Stockholm, Sweden). A total of 150 primarily self-recruited patients with current gambling problems or pathological gambling according to an NORC DSM-IV screen for gambling problems were randomized to four individual sessions of motivational interviewing (MI), eight sessions of cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT), or a no-treatment wait-list control. Gambling-related measures derived from timeline follow-back as well as general levels of anxiety and depression were administered at baseline, termination, and 6 and 12 months posttermination. Treatment showed superiority in some areas over the no-treatment control in the short term, including the primary outcome measure. No differences were found between MI and CBGT at any point in time. Instead, both MI and CBGT produced significant within-group decreases on most outcome measures up to the 12-month follow-up. Both forms of intervention are promising treatments, but there is room for improvement in terms of both outcome and compliance. The study aimed to assess the effectiveness of group and individual formats of a combined motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) program for problem gamblers (PGs) using a randomized controlled design.
                One hundred and two PGs were randomly assigned to individual or group CBT conditions. Twenty-eight of these participants were randomly allocated to a 6-week waitlist control condition prior to receiving the designated treatment.
                At post-treatment, there were significant improvements in all dependent variables (frequency and amount gambled, gambling urges, gambling cognitions, negative psychological states, and life satisfaction) for both the treatment conditions but not for the waitlist condition. Individuals that completed the individual (compared to group) treatment condition generally had higher effect sizes for gambling correlates. Therapeutic gains for gambling correlates were generally maintained at 6-month follow-up.
                A combined motivational interviewing and CBT program applied in group or individual format can improve PG behaviors, as well as gambling correlates. Few studies have evaluated efficacy of psychotherapies for pathological gambling. Pathological gamblers (N = 231) were randomly assigned to (a) referral to Gamblers Anonymous (GA), (b) GA referral plus a cognitive- behavioral (CB) workbook, or (c) GA referral plus 8 sessions of individual CB therapy. Gambling and related problems were assessed at baseline, 1 month later, posttreatment, and at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. CB treatment reduced gambling relative to GA referral alone during the treatment period and resulted in clinically significant improvements, with some effects maintained throughout follow-up ( ps = .05). Individual CB therapy improved some outcomes compared with the CB workbook. Attendance at GA and number of CB therapy sessions or workbook exercises completed were associated with gambling abstinence. These data suggest the efficacy of this CB therapy approach.
                Copyright 2006 APA, all rights reserved. College students experience high rates of problem and pathological gambling, yet little research has investigated methods for reducing gambling in this population. This study sought to examine the efficacy of brief intervention strategies.
                Randomized trial.
                College campuses.
                A total of 117 college student problem and pathological gamblers.
                Students were assigned randomly to: an assessment-only control, 10 minutes of brief advice, one session of motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or one session of MET, plus three sessions of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). The three interventions were designed to reduce gambling.
                Gambling was assessed at baseline, week 6 and month 9 using the Addiction Severity Index-gambling (ASI-G) module, which also assesses days and dollars wagered.
                Compared to the assessment-only condition, those receiving any intervention had significant decreases in ASI-G scores and days and dollars wagered over time. The MET condition decreased significantly ASI-G scores and dollars wagered over time, and increased the odds of a clinically significant reduction in gambling at the 9-month follow-up relative to the assessment-only condition, even after controlling for baseline indices that could impact outcomes. The Brief Advice and MET+CBT conditions had benefits on some, but not all, indices of gambling. None of the interventions differed significantly from one another. Conclusions These results suggest the efficacy of brief interventions for reducing gambling problems in college students. This study examined the efficacy of two group treatments for pathological gambling, a node-link mapping-enhanced cognitive-behavioral group therapy (CBGT-mapping) and twelve-step facilitated (TSF) group treatment. Forty-nine participants meeting criteria for pathological gambling were recruited from local newspaper advertisements. These participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: TSF (n = 11), CBGT-mapping (n = 18), and Wait-List control (n = 9); 11 refused treatment prior to randomization. Outcome measures included number of DSM-IV criteria met, perception of control/self-efficacy, desire to gamble, and frequency of gambling episodes. Analyses revealed a significant treatment group x time interaction (η²(partial) = .39). Specifically, the group treatments resulted in significant improvements in the dependent measures, while the Wait-List group remained relatively stable. Overall, CBGT-mapping and TSF had no significant differences on any outcome measure at follow-up assessments. Analysis of post-treatment and 6-month follow-up reveal a significant improvement in gambling outcomes (i.e., fewer DSM-IV criteria met, greater self-efficacy, and fewer gambling episodes (η²(partial) = .35), with treatment gains maintained at 6 months. These results are consistent with previous research for group treatment for pathological gambling and provide support for the utility of TSF and a mapping-based CBT therapy as viable intervention for pathological gambling. Limited research exists regarding methods for reducing problem gambling. Problem gamblers (N = 180) were randomly assigned to assessment only control, 10 min of brief advice, 1 session of motivational enhancement therapy (MET), or 1 session of MET plus 3 sessions of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Gambling was assessed at baseline, at 6 weeks, and at a 9-month follow-up. Relative to assessment only, brief advice was the only condition that significantly decreased gambling between baseline and Week 6, and it was associated with clinically significant reductions in gambling at Month 9. Between Week 6 and Month 9, MET plus cognitive-behavioral therapy evidenced significantly reduced gambling on 1 index compared with the control condition. These results suggest the efficacy of a very brief intervention for reduction of gambling among problem and pathological gamblers who are not actively seeking gambling treatment.
                PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved. This study evaluated the efficacy of a cognitive-behavioral treatment package for pathological gambling. Twenty-nine men who met criteria for pathological gambling in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd ed., revised; DSM-III-R; American Psychiatric Association, 1987) were randomly assigned to treatment or wait-list control. The treatment included 4 components: (a) cognitive correction of erroneous perceptions about gambling, (b) problem-solving training, (c) social skills training, and (d) relapse prevention. The dependent variables were the South Oaks Gambling Screen, perception of control, frequency of gambling, perceived self-efficacy, desire to gamble, and number of DSM-III-R criteria met by participants. Posttest results indicated highly significant changes in the treatment group on all outcome measures, and analysis of data from 6- and 12-month follow-ups revealed maintenance of therapeutic gains. Recommendations for clinical interventions are discussed and focus on the cognitive correction of erroneous perceptions of gambling. This study evaluated the efficacy of a cognitive treatment package for pathological gambling. Sixty-six gamblers, meeting DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling, were randomly assigned to treatment or wait-list control conditions. Cognitive correction techniques were used first to target gamblers' erroneous perceptions about randomness and then to address issues of relapse prevention. The dependent measures used were the South Oaks Gambling Screen, the number of DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling met by participants, as well as gamblers' perception of control, frequency of gambling, perceived self-efficacy, and desire to gamble. Posttest results indicated highly significant changes in the treatment group on all outcome measures, and analysis of data from 6- and 12-month follow-ups revealed maintenance of therapeutic gains. Recommendations for clinical interventions are discussed, focusing on the cognitive correction of erroneous perceptions toward the notion of randomness. This study evaluated the efficacy of a group cognitive treatment for pathological gambling. Gamblers, meeting DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling, were randomly assigned to treatment (N=34) or wait-list control (N=24) conditions. Cognitive correction techniques were used first to target gamblers' erroneous perceptions about randomness, and then to address issues of relapse prevention. The dependent measures used were the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling, perceived self-efficacy, gamblers' perception of control, desire to gamble, and frequency of gambling. Post-treatment results indicated that 88% of the treated gamblers no longer met the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling compared to only 20% in the control group. Similar changes were observed on all outcome measures. Analysis of data from 6-, 12- and 24-month follow-ups revealed maintenance of therapeutic gains. Recommendations for group interventions are discussed, focusing on the cognitive correction of erroneous perceptions toward the notion of randomness.
This review supports the efficacy of CBT in reducing gambling behaviour and other symptoms of pathological and problem gambling immediately following therapy. However, the durability of therapeutic gain is unknown. There is preliminary evidence for some benefits from motivational interviewing therapy in terms of reduced gambling behaviour, although not necessarily other symptoms of pathological and problem gambling. However, the findings are based on few studies and additional research is needed to inform conclusions. There is also evidence suggestive of some possible benefit from integrative therapies, and other psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling. However, there are too few studies and evidence is insufficient to evaluate these therapies. The majority of studies in this review varied in risk of bias, and much of the evidence comes from studies with multiple limitations. The current data may thus reflect overestimates of treatment efficacy.