AzTrials
AzTrials

Gambling, PathologicalNCT02613754

Adding Contingency Management to Treatment as Usual for Disordered Gambling.

A study testing Contingency Management and Treatment as Usual in people with Gambling, Pathological, run by University of Lethbridge at 1 site in Canada.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The aim of this study is to conduct a trial to investigate the efficacy of adding Contingency Management (CM) to Treatment as Usual (TAU) for the treatment of Disordered Gambling. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Gambling, Pathological
What is being tested?
Contingency Management and Treatment as Usual
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
45 participants
Where
1 siteCanada
Study dates
Mar 2015to 2 Aug 2023
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 75 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • 18-75 years of age, provide written consent, receive a diagnosis of disordered gambling, are primarily seeking treatment for disordered gambling, and speak English

Who cannot join

  • Pharmacologically unmanaged psychiatric disorder that would impede counselling (e.g., psychosis), reports of neurological disorder(s), or injury resulting in a loss of consciousness greater than 10 minutes. Treatment as Usual participants will need to match CM+ participants on key measures (e.g., age, gender, education, gambling severity, substance use, psychiatric issues, comorbidities, treatment experience, ethnicity, and socio-economic status)

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Canada1 site
  • University of Lethbridge

    Lethbridge, Alberta, T1K3M4

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Official title: The Impact of Adding Contingency Management to Treatment as Usual for Disordered Gambling

The aim of this study is to conduct a trial to investigate the efficacy of adding Contingency Management (CM) to Treatment as Usual (TAU) for the treatment of Disordered Gambling. Results from this experiment will provide the first evidence of the additional efficacy of best-practice CM and whether it can be easily integrated into a clinical environment. Additionally, this study will correlate clinical outcomes with psychological measures and participant responses to develop new predictive treatment outcome measures.

Read the detailed description

Hypothesis Behavioural approaches are direct and powerful ways of modifying problematic behaviours. The prediction is that adding best-practice CM treatments to TAU will reduce gambling behaviour and gambling urges to a greater degree than standard counselling practices.

Background Problematic gambling is a significant Canadian public health concern that causes harm to the gambler, their families, and society at large (Huang \& Boyer, 2007). Approximately 4% of Albertans gamble in problematic ways resulting in significant financial losses, personal distress, relationship break-downs, and in some cases suicide (Williams et al., 2011; Problem Gambling Institute of Ontario, 2014). However, recent trends appear to show a decline in those seeking treatment despite the relatively consistent problem/disordered gambling prevalence rates (Williams et al., 2011). Further, 33% - 50% of treatment seekers drop out prior to the issue resolving (Leblonde et al., 2003), where those with the most severe gambling problems have the highest drop-out rates (ibid). One possible reason for these issues is the lack of immediate benefits clients gain from treatment attendance.

One treatment approach that provides immediate benefit for treatment attendance and superior treatment efficacy for substance and alcohol dependence is contingency management (Petry, 2010). Contingency management uses motivational incentives, typically vouchers that are exchangeable for retail goods and services, as rewards that participants receive for providing evidence of the target behavior and withholding them when the participant fails to perform the behaviour. This treatment has been used successfully in several countries in the treatment of various addictive substances (Garcia-Rodriguez et al., 2009; Peirce et al., 2006), and to promote healthy behaviours (Petry et al., 2011). Meta-analyses have consistently found contingency management to report improved clinical outcomes and the highest of treatment effect sizes (Dutra et al., 2010; Prendergast et al., 2006). Further, contingency management programs typically report a greater likelihood of program completion than standard care (Lott \& Jencius, 2009), where the positive effects of the treatment persist many months after treatment completion (Petry \& Martin, 2002).

Researchers are now suggesting that contingencies can be important mechanism in the treatment of gambling (Petry et al., 2006; Christensen, 2013), as the variable but regular nature of the receipt of gambling wins have been associated with the development of problematic gambling (Blaszczynski \& Nower, 2002), where contingency management uses the same approach to reverse these associations. Moreover, recent research suggests that the development of non-gambling reinforcement can successfully compete with the gambling experience resulting in reductions in gambling behaviour and increases in alternative, and pro-social, behaviours (Jackson et al., 2013).

Although CM appears very successful, it has only been previously applied once to problematic gambling (West, 2008). However, there were issues with the pilot procedure (Christensen, 2013), as the program implemented was non-standard, notably the reinforcers were delayed, infrequent, of a low level, resulting in modest CM treatment outcomes (Petry, 2010). This proposal will use techniques that have been shown to improve the efficacy of a CM program. These are; 1) increasing the rate of incentives for sustained performance of the target behaviour and resetting following a lapse (Petry et al., 2006), 2) providing incentives at regular intervals (Christensen, 2013), 3) providing incentives as soon as practicable after evidence of the target behaviour is provided (Zeiler, 1977; Griffith et al., 2000), and 4) providing sufficiently meaningful incentives (Dallery et al., 2001). These additions to the standard CM procedure, which are typically used in successful treatments for substance dependence (Chopra et al., 2011), will hopefully improve the treatment efficacy of CM for disordered gamblers.

Being tested
Contingency Management, Treatment as Usual
Medical subject headings
Gambling

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Contingency ManagementBehavioural

    See arm description.

  • Treatment as UsualBehavioural

    See arm description

Study groups in NCT02613754
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Contingency ManagementExperimentalContingency Management (CM+): This procedure is designed to reinforce treatment attendance, non-gambling behaviour, and study completion. Participants will earn points that will be recorded on vouchers that could be subsequently redeemed for gift cards at a variety of local businesses. Submission of evidence of gambling behaviour or non-attendance re-sets the point value for future vouchers to the starting level. This intervention is in addition to Treatment as Usual.
Receives: Behavioral: Contingency Management; Behavioral: Treatment as Usual
Treatment as UsualActive comparatorTreatment as Usual (TAU): This is typically a semi-structured approach for delivering cognitive behavioural therapy addressing the participant's experiences, thoughts, and emotions relating to their gambling.
Receives: Behavioral: Treatment as Usual

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. The total number of sessions that a participant provided evidence of gambling abstinence in the study.

    Gambling Abstinence

    Measured: up to 12-weeks

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. The total number of sessions that a participant attended the study

    Session Attendance

    Measured: up to 12-weeks

  2. The total number of weeks that a participant attended the study.

    Study Retention

    Measured: up to 12-weeks

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted24 Nov 2015 (estimated)
  2. Study startMar 2015
  3. Primary completion2 Aug 2023
  4. Study completion2 Aug 2023

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
45 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02613754
Sponsor's protocol ID
HSRC 2015-020
Status last verified
Aug 2023
First submitted
19 Nov 2015
Last updated
7 Aug 2023
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Contingency Management and Treatment as Usual in people with Gambling, Pathological, run by University of Lethbridge at 1 site in Canada.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Aug 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

The total number of sessions that a participant provided evidence of gambling abstinence in the study. (time frame: up to 12-weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 Aug 2023.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in