Efficacy of attention bias modification training for depressed adults: a randomized clinical trial.
Efficacy of attention bias modification training for depressed adults: a randomized clinical trial.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1017/s0033291721000702
复制
发表时间：
2021-03-26
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
Beevers CG
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hsu KJ;Shumake J;Caffey K;Risom S;Labrada J;Smits JAJ;Schnyer DM;Beevers CG
本研究考察了注意偏倚矫正训练（ABMT）治疗抑郁症的效果。在这项随机临床试验中，145名至少有中度抑郁严重程度（即自我报告的抑郁症状快速量表(qds - sr)≥13）和负注意偏倚的成年人（77%女性，62%白人）被随机分为主动ABMT、假ABMT或仅评估。训练包括每周两次门诊和三次（简短）在家的ABMT课程，为期四周（总共2224次训练试验）。预登记的主要结局是QIDS-SR的变化。次要结果为17项汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表（HRSD）和心境与焦虑症状问卷（MASQ）中的快感缺乏性抑郁和焦虑唤醒。主要和次要结果在基线和ABMT期间每周评估4次。意向治疗分析表明，相对于仅进行评估，活性ABMT显著降低QIDS-SR和HRSD评分，每周分别降低0.62±0.23分（p = 0.008, d = - 0.57）和0.74±0.31分（p = 0.021, d = - 0.49）。活动ABMT与假ABMT的结果相似：每周症状减轻0.44±0.24 QIDS-SR （p = 0.067, d = - 0.41）和0.69±0.32 HRSD （p = 0.033, d = - 0.42）点。假性ABMT与单纯评估组无显著差异。在MASQ量表上没有观察到显著差异。至少有适度负性注意偏倚的抑郁个体从主动ABMT中获益。ClinicialTrials.gov识别码：NCT02880215
This study examined the efficacy Attention Bias Modification Training (ABMT) for the treatment of depression. In this randomized clinical trial, 145 adults (77% female, 62% white) with at least moderate depression severity (i.e., self-reported Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR) ≥ 13) and a negative attention bias were randomized to active ABMT, sham ABMT, or assessments only. Training consisted of two in-clinic and three (brief) at-home ABMT sessions per week for four weeks (2,224 training trials total). The pre-registered primary outcome was change in QIDS-SR. Secondary outcomes were the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD) and anhedonic depression and anxious arousal from the Mood and Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire (MASQ). Primary and secondary outcomes were administered at baseline and four weekly assessments during ABMT. Intent-to-treat analyses indicated that, relative to assessment only, active ABMT significantly reduced QIDS-SR and HRSD scores by an additional 0.62 ± 0.23 (p = .008, d = −0.57) and 0.74 ± 0.31 (p = .021, d = −0.49) points per week. Similar results were observed for active vs sham ABMT: a greater symptom reduction of 0.44 ± 0.24 QIDS-SR (p = .067, d = −0.41) and 0.69 ± 0.32 HRSD (p = .033, d = −0.42) points per week. Sham ABMT did not significantly differ from the assessment-only condition. No significant differences were observed for the MASQ scales. Depressed individuals with at least modest negative attentional bias benefitted from active ABMT. ClinicialTrials.gov identifier: NCT02880215