Skip to main content

Volume 36 Issue 1

Computerized Cognitive–Behavioral Therapy

Kathleen M. Carroll, Ph.D.

Kathleen M. Carroll, Ph.D., is the Albert E. Kent Professor of Psychiatry in the Department of Psychiatry at Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.

    With an estimated 90 percent or more of alcohol use disorders going untreated (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 2012), the search for interventions that easily, effectively, and economically reach more people has become a priority. The landmark 1990 report, Broadening the Base of Treatment for Alcohol Problems (Institute of Medicine 1990), refocused alcohol treatment research toward an emphasis on developing, standardizing, and disseminating new behavioral therapies to expand the reach of alcohol treatment. A particularly exciting development on this front has been the creation of computerized versions of interventions shown to be effective in clinical settings.

    Computerized treatments have multiple potential advantages for expanding the base of treatment for alcohol use disorders, including broad availability 24 hours a day, lower cost, standardization, greater ability to reach rural and underserved populations, and greater confidentiality, leading to fewer concerns about stigma (Carroll and Rounsaville 2010; Cunningham and Van Mierlo 2009). In effect, computer-based interventions can serve as “clinician extenders,” offering a means of delivering high-quality, standardized versions of screening, evaluation, and brief treatments, at relatively low cost. That said, these interventions are relatively new, and, therefore, both their quality and the level of rigor of the studies supporting them varies widely (Carey et al. 2009; Kiluk et al. 2011; Rooke et al. 2010). Here, we will highlight only approaches with at least preliminary validation in clinical trials.

    Electronic Screenings and Brief Interventions (eSBIs)

    Many Web sites exist that allow people to assess their alcohol use from their personal computers or other devices using Web-based versions of more traditional, clinician-delivered SBIs (Babor et al. 2007). These sites connect people with SBI services immediately, when their motivation may be highest, rather than asking them to wait several days or weeks for an appointment with a clinician. Called electronic SBI (eSBI), these sites typically are based on principles of clinician-delivered SBIs, using a validated instrument such as the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) to assess alcohol use and risk (Allen et al. 1997; Bohn et al. 1995), provide feedback about the user’s level of risk, and offer some suggestions or additional resources for reducing drinking.

    Many eSBIs exist; however, only a few have been evaluated in randomized clinical trials, and the majority of those studies have been conducted on college populations and may not generalize to broader society (Bewick et al. 2008; Rooke et al. 2010; White et al. 2010). In fact, one recent meta-analysis found only 17 randomized controlled trials of eSBIs that provided enough data for comparison, and 13 of those studied student populations (Donoghue et al. 2014). Despite this limitation, Donoghue and colleagues reported that the eSBIs studied had a significant effect on participants’ drinking behavior for up to 12 months postintervention. Overall, studies of eSBIs find a small but significant effect size for eSBIs and conclude that some users can benefit from these computer-based interventions, particularly people unlikely to seek out more traditional services (Bewick et al. 2008; Donoghue et al. 2014; Rooke et al. 2010; White et al. 2010).

    To date, the English-language eSBIs designed for the general public that have the strongest evidence supporting their efficacy based on randomized controlled trials are The Drinker’s Checkup (www.drinkerscheckup.com) (Hester et al. 2005) and Check Your Drinking (www.checkyourdrinking.net) (Cunningham et al. 2009).

    Web-Based Multisession Interventions

    Compared with eSBIs, fewer computer- based intensive, multiple-session interventions for alcohol use disorders exist, and even fewer have been tested with randomized controlled clinical trials. Those have shown some promise.

    One study, for example, examined whether study participants who utilized the Check Your Drinking SBI would get an added benefit if also offered an extended Internet intervention called the Alcohol Help Center (AHC). AHC provides cognitive–behavioral, motivational, and relapse prevention components that previous research has shown helps problem drinkers (Cunningham 2012). People using the AHC can complete whichever exercises they choose in whatever order they like over an unspecified, extended period of time. The study recruited 170 problem drinkers from the general population and randomly assigned them access to Check Your Drinking alone or Check Your Drinking along with AHC. Ninety percent of participants returned a 6-month follow-up questionnaire that assessed their drinking behavior. Both groups significantly reduced their drinking, but participants who accessed AHC showed an added benefit of the extended intervention. The study did not assess how often study participants engaged with AHC.

    Another study of nondependent problem drinkers showed that online training in moderation management using the “Moderate Drinking” application (www.moderatedrinking.com) combined with online moderation management through the Moderation Management Web site (www.moderation.org) is effective in reducing drinking days (Hester et al. 2011). The study randomly assigned 78 participants to either use the two interventions in tandem or to just use Moderation Management. Although both groups significantly decreased the amount they drank, even after a full year, participants that used both Web sites had a higher percentage of days abstinent and fewer alcohol-related problems than the group utilizing Moderation Management only. This study did not report participants’ level of engagement with the interventions.

    A more structured, 6-week online cognitive–behavioral self-help intervention for adult problem drinkers also showed promise in a randomized controlled trial conducted in the Netherlands (Riper et al. 2008). Participants who utilized the interactive self-help intervention reduced their drinking significantly more than participants who received an online psychoeducational brochure about alcohol use. Specifically, 17 percent of those receiving the intervention reduced their drinking to levels considered low risk in the Netherlands (no more than two units or 20 g of alcohol per day) compared with 5.4 percent of those receiving the brochure. Overall, the intervention group decreased their weekly alcohol consumption significantly more than the control group.

    Although those findings are promising, another study of adult problem drinkers in the Netherlands suggests that it might be more effective to combine online self-help interventions with Internet-based one-on-one therapy (Blankers and Koeter 2011). The randomized controlled trial assigned 205 problem drinkers to one of three interventions:

    • A waitlist for treatment (the no treatment control);
    • Self-Help Alcohol Online (SAO), a fully automated, Internet based, self-guided treatment program based on a cognitive–behavioral treatment (CBT)/motivational interviewing (MI) treatment protocol; or
    • Therapy Alcohol Online (TAO), which provides the same CBT/MI treatment protocol as SAO but also includes up to seven synchronous text-based chat-therapy sessions with a trained therapist.

    Three months after starting the program, study participants in both treatment groups had reduced their alcohol consumption and their level of alcohol-related problems significantly more than those on the waitlist, but there was no significant difference between the treatment groups. That changed after 6 months when participants receiving TAO showed larger reductions in alcohol consumption than those receiving SAO. The researchers concluded that both TAO and SAO effectively reduced drinking and drinking-related problems but that TAO seemed to lead to better results after 6 months.

    A recent meta-analysis comparing nine randomized controlled clinical trials of guided and unguided low- intensity Internet interventions for adults (the authors excluded studies of college students) found that Internet interventions had a small but significant effect on drinking behavior (Riper et al. 2014). Participants in the Internet interventions drank an average of 22 grams per week less than participants in control groups and were more likely to adhere to low-risk drinking guidelines postintervention. Riper and colleagues note that, although the effect sizes of these interventions are small (g = 0.20), because they have the potential to reach so many people, they could have a large influence on public health.

    A higher-intensity computer-based intervention that shows promise is computer-based training for CBT (CBT4CBT). This eight-session computer-based version of CBT focuses on teaching basic coping skills, presenting video examples of effective coping skills used in a number of realistic situations and providing opportunities for patients to practice and review new skills. Two completed trials indicate that CBT4CBT improves outcomes over standard treatment alone. One study (Carroll 2008) tested CBT4CBT in an outpatient setting with a mixed group of 77 substance users, including a large number of alcohol-dependent individuals. The other study tested the intervention among 101 cocaine-dependent methadone-maintained patients (Carroll et al. 2014). Both studies found CBT4CBT had a durable effect on substance use, with improvement in substance use increasing over time, suggesting that CBT’s “sleeper effect” is retained in its Web-based version (Carroll et al. 2009). These studies also found that CBT4CBT effectively taught the targeted skills and that skill acquisition in turn mediated the effects on substance use (Kiluk et al. 2010). Researchers recently have developed a version of CBT4CBT specifically for individuals with alcohol use disorders and have begun randomized clinical trials evaluating its efficacy, including one evaluating CBT4CBT as a standalone intervention. More information can be found at the Web site: www.cbt4cbt.com.

    Conclusion

    Computer and Web-based interventions hold great promise for reaching the large number of individuals who may benefit from alcohol treatment but do not access it. Thus far, the meta-analytic work in this area points to a modest but significant effect of these interventions and hence their potential to improve public health by extending the reach of interventions beyond the clinic.

    At the same time, enthusiasm regarding the potential of these interventions should be tempered with some caution. It is critical to carefully evaluate these interventions before they are broadly disseminated. Relatively few of the many available Web-based interventions have been carefully evaluated in well-controlled clinical trials (Kiluk et al. 2011), and the conclusions that can be drawn from many studies are constrained by high levels of dropout, high attrition, and weak control conditions (e.g., waitlists). Indeed, recent meta-analyses have included only one-tenth of available published reports (Riper et al. 2014) because of methodological limitations. The field, while not still in its infancy, remains young, and basic questions regarding which individuals are best served by and most responsive to online versus face-to-face interventions have not been addressed (Carey et al. 2012). That said, if research demonstrates computer- based interventions to be safe and even moderately effective, they may have tremendous impact for individuals with alcohol use disorders and their families, potentially reaching people who would not access more traditional treatment options.

    From the Publisher

    Acknowledgments

    Source material for this review originally appeared in the article “The Brave New World of Behavioral Therapies for Alcohol Use Disorders,” by Kathleen M. Carroll in Psychiatric Times 31(6):1–3, 2014.

    The author thanks Beth Azar, M.A., science editor for Alcohol Research: Current Reviews, for her help in the preparation of this article.

    Financial disclosure

    Dr. Carroll is a member of CBT4CBT, LLC, which distributes CBT4CBT to appropriate clinical entities.

    References

    Allen, J.P.; Litten, R.Z.; Fertig, J.B.; and Babor, T.F. A review of research on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research 21:613–619, 1997. PMID: 9194913

    Babor, T.F.; McRee, B.G.; Kassebaum, P.A.; et al. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT): Toward a public health approach to the management of substance abuse. Substance Abuse 28(3):7–30, 2007. PMID: 18077300

    Bewick, B.M.; Trussler, K.; Barkham, M.; et al. The effectiveness of web-based interventions designed to decrease alcohol consumption: A systematic review. Preventive Medicine 47:17–26, 2008. PMID: 18302970

    Blankers, M.; Koeter, M.W.; and Schippers, G.M. Internet therapy versus internet self-help versus no treatment for problematic alcohol use: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 79(3):330–341, 2011. PMID: 21534652

    Bohn, M.J.; Babor, T.F.; and Kranzler, H.R. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): Validation of a screening instrument for use in medical settings. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 56:423–432, 1995. PMID: 7674678

    Carey, K.B.; Scott-Sheldon, L.A.; Elliott, J.C.; et al. Computer-delivered interventions to reduce college student drinking: A meta-analysis. Addiction 104(11):1807–1819, 2009. PMID: 19744139

    Carey, K.B.; Scott-Sheldon, L.A.; Elliott, J.C.; et al. Face-to-face versus computer-delivered alcohol interventions for college drinkers: A meta-analytic review, 1998 to 2010. Clinical Psychology Review 32(8): 690–703, 2012. PMID: 23022767

    Carroll, K.M.; Ball, S.A.; Martino, S.; et al. Computer-assisted delivery of cognitive-behavioral therapy for addiction: a randomized trial of CBT4CBT. American Journal of Psychiatry 165(7):881–888, 2008. PMID: 18450927

    Carroll, K.M.; Ball, S.A.; Martino, S.; et al. Enduring effects of a computer-assisted training program for cognitive-behavioral therapy: A six-month follow-up of CBT4CBT. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 100:178–181, 2009. PMID: 19041197

    Carroll, K.M.; Kiluk, B.D.; Nich, C.; et al. Computer-assisted delivery of cognitive-behavioral therapy: Efficacy and durability of CBT4CBT among cocaine- dependent individuals maintained on methadone. American Journal of Psychiatry 171(4):436–44, 2014. PMID: 24577287

    Carroll, K.M., and Rounsaville, B.J. Computer-assisted therapy in psychiatry: Be brave—it’s a new world. Current Psychiatry Reports 12(5):426–432, 2010. PMID: 20683681

    Cohen, E.; Feinn, R.; Arias, A.; and Kranzler, H.R. Alcohol treatment utilization: Findings from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 86(2–3):214–221, 2007. PMID: 16919401

    Cunningham, J.A. Comparison of two internet-based interventions for problem drinkers: Randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research 14(4):e107, 2012.PMID: 22954459

    Cunningham, J.A., and Van Mierlo, T. Methodological issues in the evaluation of Internet-based interventions for problem drinking. Drug and Alcohol Review 28(1):12–17, 2009. PMID: 19320670

    Cunningham, J.A.; Wild, T.C.; Cordingley, J.; et al. A randomized controlled trial of an internet-based intervention for alcohol abusers. Addiction 104(12):2023–2032, 2009. PMID: 19922569

    Donoghue, K.; Patton, R.; Phillips, T.; et al. The effectiveness of electronic screening and brief intervention for reducing levels of alcohol consumption: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research 16(6):e142, 2014. PMID: 24892426

    Hester, R.K.; Delaney, H.D.; and Campbell, W. ModerateDrinking.Com and moderation management: Outcomes of a randomized clinical trial with non-dependent problem drinkers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 79(2):215–224, 2011. PMID: 21319896

    Hester, R.K.; Squires, D.D.; and Delaney, H.D. The Drinker’s Check-up: 12-month outcomes of a controlled clinical trial of a stand-alone software program for problem drinkers. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28:159–169, 2005. PMID: 15780546

    Institute of Medicine. Broadening the Base of Treatment for Alcohol Problems. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 1990.

    Kiluk, B.D.; Nich, C.; Babuscio, T.A.; and Carroll, K.M. Quality versus quantity: Acquisition of coping skills following computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for substance use disorders. Addiction 105:2120–2127, 2010. PMID: 20854334

    Kiluk, B.D.; Sugarman, D.E.; Nich, C.; et al. A methodological analysis of randomized clinical trials of computer-assisted therapies for psychiatric disorders: Toward improved standards for an emerging field. American Journal of Psychiatry 168(8):790–799, 2011. PMID: 21536689

    Riper, H.; Kramer, J.; and Smit, F.; et al. Web-based self-help for problem drinkers: A pragmatic randomized trial. Addiction 103(2):218–227, 2008. PMID: 18199300

    Riper, H.; Blankers, M.; Hadiwijaya, H.; et al. Effectiveness of guided and unguided low-intensity internet interventions for adult alcohol misuse: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 9(6):e99912, 2014. PMID: 24937483

    Rooke, S.; Thorsteinsson, E.; Karpin, A.; et al. Computer-delivered interventions for alcohol and tobacco use: A meta-analysis. Addiction 105(8):1381–1390, 2010. PMID: 20528806

    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Available at: http://www.samhsa.gov/data/NSDUH/2012SummNatFindDetTables/
    DetTabs/NSDUH-DetTabsSect5peTabs1to56-2012.htm#Tab5.32A
    .

    White, A., Kavanagh, D.; Stallman, H.; et al. Online alcohol interventions: A systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 12(5):e62, 2010. PMID: 21169175