Personalized attention control therapy for PTSD: effectiveness and moderators of outcome in a randomized controlled trial

Attentional bias modification and attention control training in PTSD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Cognitive models of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) highlighted the effect of maladaptive cognitive processing in the development and maintenance of PTSD. PTSD is related to attentional bias (AB) toward threatening stimuli and greater attentional bias variability (ABV). Attentional bias modification (ABM) and attention control training (ACT) have demonstrated the effect of improving PTSD, but the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are controversial.

Objectives

The current study aimed to evaluate the extent of evidence supporting the efficacy of ABM in the treatment of PTSD.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

We searched PUBMED, PsycINFO, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for articles published between 1980 and 2022. RCTs of ABM for adult participants with PTSD symptoms were identified. The primary outcome was changes in PTSD severity, and the second outcome was changes in AB and ABV. Trial quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Publication bias was assessed using the Doi plot and Luis Furuya-Kanamori (LFK) index.

Results

Eight RCTs comparing the effect of ABM to ACT were included in the review, and six studies were meta-analyzed. Meta-analysis favored ACT in improving PTSD symptoms and ABV, and the effect size was large. ABM and ACT demonstrated similar effects in improving AB.

Conclusion

ACT should not only be seen as a control training condition but also has therapeutic values. However, since the current meta-analysis only included a limited number of studies, further research was still needed to examine the clinical value of ACT in PTSD treatment.

Attention allocation to negatively-valenced stimuli in PTSD is associated with reward-related neural pathways

BACKGROUND

In a recent eye-tracking study we found a differential dwell time pattern for negatively-valenced and neutral faces among patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), trauma-exposed healthy control (TEHCs), and healthy control (HC) participants. Here, we explored whether these group differences relate to resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) patterns of brain areas previously linked to both attention processes and PTSD. These encompass the amygdala, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (vlPFC), and nucleus accumbens (NAcc).

METHODS

Ten minutes magnetic resonance imaging rsFC scans were recorded in 17 PTSD patients, 21 TEHCs, and 16 HCs. Participants then completed a free-viewing eye-tracking task assessing attention allocation outside the scanner. Dwell time on negatively-valenced stimuli (DT%) were assessed relative to functional connectivity in the aforementioned seed regions of interest (amygdala, dACC, dlPFC, vlPFC, and NAcc) to whole-brain voxel-wise rsFC.

RESULTS

As previously reported, group differences occurred in attention allocation to negative-valence stimuli, with longer dwell time on negatively valence stimuli in the PTSD and TEHC groups than the HC group. Higher DT% correlated with weaker NAcc-orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) connectivity in patients with PTSD. Conversely, a positive association emerged in the HC group between DT% and NAcc-OFC connectivity.

CONCLUSIONS

While exploratory in nature, present findings may suggest that reward-related brain areas are involved in disengaging attention from negative-valenced stimuli, and possibly in regulating ensuing negative emotions.

A randomized controlled trial of supervised remotely-delivered attention bias modification for posttraumatic stress disorder

BACKGROUND

Many individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have limited access to first-line treatments, warranting the development of remotely-delivered treatments. Attention bias modification (ABM), targeting perturbed threat-related attentional patterns, shows promise when delivered in-person. However, previous studies found ABM to be ineffective when delivered remotely. Randomized clinical trials usually applied two variations of ABM: ABM away from threat or attention control training (ACT) balancing attention between threat-related and neutral stimuli. We tested remotely-delivered ACT/ABM with tighter supervision and video-based interactions that resemble in-clinic protocols. We expected to replicate the results of in-clinic trials, in which ACT outperformed ABM for PTSD.

METHODS

In this double-blinded, parallel-group randomized controlled trial, 60 patients diagnosed with PTSD were randomized (ABM n = 30; ACT n = 30). Patients performed eight bi-weekly remotely-delivered supervised ABM/ACT sessions. Symptoms were assessed pre- and post-treatment with Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale 5 (CAPS-5) severity score and PTSD diagnosis as the primary outcomes. Current depressive episode, current anxiety-related comorbidity, and time elapsed since the trauma were examined as potential moderators of treatment outcome.

RESULTS

Significant decrease in CAPS-5 severity scores and PTSD diagnosis was observed following both ACT and ABM with no between-group difference. Patients without depression or whose trauma occurred more recently had greater symptom reduction in the ACT than the ABM group.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to our expectation, symptoms decreased similarly following ACT and ABM. Moderator analyses suggest advantage for ACT in non-depressed patients and patients whose trauma occurred more recently. Further refinements in remotely-delivered ABM/ACT may be needed.

Is attentional bias variability causally implicated in emotional vulnerability? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present review was to determine whether attentional bias variability (ABV) is causally implicated in emotional vulnerability. We consider evidence examining whether ABV precedes and predicts later psychopathology, and whether modifying ABV leads to changes in psychological symptoms following an intervention.

METHODS

A systematic literature search located 15 studies that met the inclusion criteria (3 longitudinal, 12 intervention). Eligible intervention studies were also meta-analysed.

RESULTS

Preliminary evidence suggests that ABV predicts later post-traumatic stress symptomatology in interaction with number of traumatic events. The few interventions designed to reduce ABV suggest promise for improving PTSD symptoms. However, these interventions did not consistently change ABV, and where it was tested, change in ABV did not correspond to change in symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

There is emerging evidence that ABV could represent a vulnerability factor for psychological symptoms, particularly for those exposed to trauma. This may indicate attentional control difficulties, although this remains to be tested. Conclusions regarding the causal status of ABV will depend on future high-quality randomised controlled trials.