title: Implementation of approach bias re-training in alcoholism-how many sessions are needed?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Computerized cognitive bias modification (CBM) programs have generated promising results regarding the treatment of alcohol dependence and anxiety disorders. However, there is hardly any research yet on the implementation of alcohol-CBM into clinical practice. This article addresses the question of the optimal number of training sessions for a specific form of CBM: approach bias re-training in alcohol-dependent patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  Participants were 111 alcohol-dependent patients of an inpatient rehabilitation clinic. In addition to treatment as usual, they took part in a 12-session CBM protocol, aimed at re-training alcohol approach tendencies, with an adapted Alcohol Approach-Avoidance Task. Learning curves and 2-level fitted mean trends were analyzed. Furthermore, parameters of the fitted mean trend and information on the most effective number of training sessions were used to predict 1-year follow-up data.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Two-level analyses revealed 6 training sessions to be the mean optimum, yet many patients improve further after that. Prediction of the individual optimum (speed of response) and parameters of the fitted mean trends failed. The linear term of the graph describing the mean trend of training effects, but not the speed of response, predicted 1-year follow-up data.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Suggestions for practical implementations of CBM are discussed.
authors.affiliation: Salus Clinic, Lindow, Germany; Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
authors.forename: Carolin
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Eberl
authors.forename: Reinout W
authors.initials: RW
authors.lastname: Wiers
authors.forename: Steffen
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Pawelczack
authors.forename: Mike
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Rinck
authors.forename: Eni S
authors.initials: ES
authors.lastname: Becker
authors.forename: Johannes
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Lindenmeyer
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000437:Alcoholism / Q000523:psychology / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D003071:Cognition / Q000502:physiology; D015928:Cognitive Behavioral Therapy / Q000379:methods*; D003863:Depression / Q000523:psychology; D039721:Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007206:Individuality; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011569:Psychiatric Status Rating Scales; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D020377:Self Efficacy; D057190:Stroop Test; D013813:Therapy, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: Alcohol Dependence; Approach Bias; Approach-Avoidance Task; Cognitive Bias Modification; Implicit Cognitions