Piloting the addition of contingency management to best practice counselling as an adjunct treatment for rural and remote disordered gamblers: study protocol

Treatment of harmful gambling: a scoping review of United Kingdom-based intervention research

BACKGROUND

Understanding and treating the harm caused by gambling is a growing international psychiatric and public health challenge. Treatment of gambling harm may involve psychological and pharmacological intervention, in conjunction with peer support. This scoping review was conducted to identify, for the first time, the characteristics and extent of United Kingdom (UK) based gambling treatment research. We reviewed studies conducted among people seeking treatment for disordered or harmful gambling in the UK, the settings, research designs, and outcome measures used, and to identify any treatment research gaps.

METHODS

Systematic searches of PsycInfo, PsycArticles, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were carried out for gambling treatment research or evaluation studies conducted in the UK. Studies were included if they evaluated the effectiveness of an intervention or treatment designed to improve symptoms of harmful or problematic gambling, reported outcomes of interventions on treatment adherence, gambling symptoms, or behaviours using standardised measures, were conducted in the UK, and were published since 2000.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Four were retrospective chart reviews, two were single-participant case reports, one described a retrospective case series, and one employed a cross-sectional design. None used an experimental design.

CONCLUSION

The limited number of studies included in this review highlights a relative paucity of gambling treatment research conducted in UK settings. Further work should seek to identify potential barriers and obstacles to conducting gambling treatment research in the UK.

Voluntary Self-Exclusion and Contingency Management for the Treatment of Problematic and Harmful Gambling in the UK: An Exploratory Study

Research into self-directed methods for reducing problematic and harmful gambling is still in its infancy. One strategy that individuals use to prevent gambling involves voluntary self-exclusion (VSE) programs. For example, VSE programs can make it challenging to access betting sites or enable banks to block gambling-related transactions. Although individual VSEs can be helpful when used alone, it is unclear whether their efficacy is enhanced when combined. Furthermore, it is unknown how VSE compliance can be improved. We propose that contingency management (CM), an evidence-based strategy to incentivise abstinence, could encourage continued VSE use, promoting long-lasting recovery from problematic or harmful gambling. Here, we conducted exploratory analyses on VSE use and CM for gambling in two populations (members of the UK general population recruited and students). Participants responded favourably regarding combined VSE use. They felt that providing vouchers exchangeable for goods/services could incentivise gambling abstinence during VSE. However, some were concerned about people potentially "gaming" the system. Participants believed supplementing VSE and CM with social support could encourage abstinence. These attitudes, and recent research on treatment providers' opinions on CM for gambling, suggest that experimental evidence should be sought to determine the efficacy of combined VSE use and CM for gambling.

Client Views of Contingency Management in Gambling Treatment: A Thematic Analysis

Low levels of treatment access and poor retention among those with gambling problems suggests a need to improve treatment. Contingency management (CM) is a behavioural intervention involving the identification of target behaviours and the provision of incentives when targets are met. There exists a substantial evidence base for CM increasing abstinence and attendance in substance misuse treatment, but this has not been widely extended to gambling treatment setting. This study sought to explore the views of clients about CM for the treatment of problematic and disordered gambling. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 gambling treatment clients who were, or had previously been, engaged in treatment in Great Britain. Participants were provided with an explanation of CM, two hypothetical scenarios, and two structured questionnaires to facilitate discussion. Thematic analysis was used to interpret findings. Some participants felt that clients could manipulate CM while in treatment to obtain money to gamble, and that mechanisms of CM could trigger recovering clients into relapse. Participants also identified potential benefits of CM to achieve treatment goals, by enhancing motivation and engagement while in treatment, and helping bring people into treatment earlier. Gambling treatment clients broadly supported the use of incentives for treatment. CM is seen as a facilitator of extended engagement in treatment, and an encouragement for clients to make progress in the treatment process.

The modulation of acute stress on model-free and model-based reinforcement learning in gambling disorder

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Experiencing acute stress is common in behavioral addictions such as gambling disorder. Additionally, like most substance-induced addictions, aberrant decision-making wherein a reactive habit-induced response (conceptualized as a Model-free [MF] in reinforcement learning) suppresses a flexible goal-directed response (conceptualized as a Model-based [MB]) is also common in gambling disorder. In the current study we investigated the influence of acute stress on the balance between habitual response and the goal-directed system.

METHODS

A sample of N = 116 problem gamblers (PG) and healthy controls (HC) performed an acute stress task - the Socially Evaluated Cold pressure task (SECPT) - or a control task. Self-reported stress and salivary cortisol were collected as measures of acute stress. Following the SECPT, participants performed the Two-Step Markov Task to account for the relative contribution of MB and MF strategies. Additionally, verbal working memory and IQ measures were collected to account for their mediating effects on the orchestration between MB/MF and the impact of stress.

RESULTS

Both groups had comparable baseline and stress-induced cortisol response to the SECPT. Non-stressed PG displayed lower MB learning than HC. MANOVA and regression analyses showed a deleterious effect of stress-induced cortisol response on the orchestration between MB and MF learning in HC but not in PG. These effects remained when controlling for working memory and IQ.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We found an abnormal pattern of modulation of stress on the orchestration between MB and MF learning among PG. Several interpretations and future research directions are discussed.