Introduction
In the evolving landscape of digital health, internet-based interventions have emerged as a promising avenue for addressing various health concerns, including alcohol use disorders (AUDs). A recent study titled "High versus low-intensity internet interventions for alcohol use disorders: results of a three-armed randomized controlled superiority trial" provides valuable insights into the efficacy of different intensities of online interventions for AUDs. This blog aims to elucidate the findings of this study and explore their implications for practitioners, particularly those involved in online therapy services such as TinyEYE.
Study Overview
The study conducted by Sundström et al. (2020) involved a three-group randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of a therapist-guided high-intensity internet intervention with an unguided low-intensity intervention among individuals with AUDs. The participants were 166 online self-referred adults from Sweden, who were assessed based on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and their weekly alcohol consumption.
Key Findings
The primary outcome measured was self-reported alcohol consumption, specifically the number of standard drinks and heavy drinking days at the 6-month follow-up. The study found no significant differences in alcohol consumption reduction between the high-intensity and low-intensity interventions. This suggests that both intervention types can be equally effective, offering flexibility in treatment approaches.
- Attrition rates were relatively low, with 13% at post-treatment and 22% at the 6-month follow-up.
- Negative effects and deterioration were minimal across both intervention groups.
Implications for Practitioners
For practitioners, these findings underscore the potential of internet-based interventions as viable options for treating AUDs. Here are some considerations for implementation:
- Flexibility in Treatment: Given the comparable efficacy of high and low-intensity interventions, practitioners can tailor the intensity based on individual client needs and preferences.
- Cost-Effectiveness: Low-intensity interventions, being unguided, may reduce costs and resource allocation, making treatment more accessible.
- Client Engagement: Despite the lack of significant differences in outcomes, the choice of intervention intensity might influence client engagement and satisfaction, warranting further exploration.
Encouraging Further Research
While the study provides a robust comparison of intervention intensities, it also opens avenues for further research. Practitioners are encouraged to explore:
- The long-term efficacy of internet-based interventions beyond the 6-month follow-up.
- Factors influencing client engagement and retention in online therapy.
- The role of personalization in enhancing the effectiveness of internet-based interventions.
To read the original research paper, please follow this link: High versus low-intensity internet interventions for alcohol use disorders: results of a three-armed randomized controlled superiority trial.
