Efficacy of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Integrative Couple Treatment for Pathological Gambling (ICT-PG): 10-Month Follow-Up

Objective: Assess the efficacy of integrative couple treatment for pathological gambling (ICT-PG) in comparison to treatment provided in an individual approach. Method: Eighty couples were assigned randomly to ICT-PG (n = 44, Mage = 42.2, SD [13.4], n male gamblers = 29) or individual treatment (n =...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of consulting and clinical psychology 2023-04, Vol.91 (4), p.221-233
Hauptverfasser: Tremblay, Joël, Dufour, Magali, Bertrand, Karine, Saint-Jacques, Marianne, Ferland, Francine, Blanchette-Martin, Nadine, Savard, Annie-Claude, Côté, Mélissa, Berbiche, Djamal, Beaulieu, Myriam
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective: Assess the efficacy of integrative couple treatment for pathological gambling (ICT-PG) in comparison to treatment provided in an individual approach. Method: Eighty couples were assigned randomly to ICT-PG (n = 44, Mage = 42.2, SD [13.4], n male gamblers = 29) or individual treatment (n = 36, Mage = 39.9 SD [13.0], n male gamblers = 31) with follow-ups at 4- and 10-months postadmission regarding the severity of gambling, the individual and couple's well-being. Linear mixed and generalized estimating equation models for repeated measures were applied to take into account the dependency of observations. Protocol was preregistered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT02240485). Results: Participants in both treatments generally improved over time with reductions on gambling expanses from an initial $4,000-$600 in a 90-day period following treatment, without difference across treatment conditions in money spent on gambling or frequency of gambling. However, on different indices of gambling severity, the participants in ICT-PG showed more improvement at follow-ups, with better control capacity (OR = 2.57, p < .0129) and greater reduction in gambling craving (OR = 5.83, p < .0001) and erroneous cognitions (OR = 2.63, p < .0063). The couple treatment was associated with a better individual well-being (e.g., less depression for partners, OR = 5.53; p < .0351, and gamblers, OR = 2.37; p < .0334) and couple well-being (e.g., better dyadic satisfaction for partners, OR = 2.02; p < .0057, and gamblers, OR = 3.07; p < .0212). Conclusions: The results underline the necessity to provide a greater diversity of treatment for gamblers and their partner. Further research should focus on identifying active components of ICT-PG and widen its provision to gamblers with concurrent addiction disorders. What is the public health significance of this article? This study highlights the importance of directly including the partner in the treatment when helping adults with a gambling disorder.
ISSN:0022-006X
1939-2117
DOI:10.1037/ccp0000765