Randomized-controlled trial of response inhibition training for individuals with PTSD and impaired response inhibition

Abstract Background Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and impulsive aggression are linked to transdiagnostic neurocognitive deficits. This includes impaired inhibitory control over inappropriate responses. Prior studies showed that inhibitory control can be improved by modulating the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in combination with inhibitory control training. However, its clinical potential remains unclear. We therefore aimed to replicate a tDCS-enhanced inhibitory control training in a clinical sample and test whether this reduces stress-related mental health symptoms. Methods In a preregistered double-blind randomized-controlled trial, 100 active-duty military personnel and post-active veterans with PTSD, anxiety, or impulsive aggression symptoms underwent a 5-session intervention where a stop-signal response inhibition training was combined with anodal tDCS over the right IFG for 20 min at 1.25 mA. Inhibitory control was evaluated with the emotional go/no-go task and implicit association test. Stress-related symptoms were assessed by self-report at baseline, post-intervention, and after 3-months and 1-year follow-ups. Results Active relative to sham tDCS neither influenced performance during inhibitory control training nor on assessment tasks, and did also not significantly influence self-reported symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, impulsive aggression, or depression at post-assessment or follow-up. Conclusions Our results do not support the idea that anodal tDCS over the right IFG at 1.25 mA enhances response inhibition training in a clinical sample, or that this tDCS-training combination can reduce stress-related symptoms. Applying different tDCS parameters or combining tDCS with more challenging tasks might provide better conditions to modulate cognitive functioning and stress-related symptoms.

Download Full-text

Cumulative mild partial sleep deprivation negatively impacts working memory capacity but not sustained attention, response inhibition, or decision making: a randomized controlled trial

Sleep Health ◽

10.1016/j.sleh.2018.09.007 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. 101-108 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Jose Arturo Santisteban ◽

Thomas G. Brown ◽

Marie Claude Ouimet ◽

Reut Gruber

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Working Memory ◽

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Sustained Attention ◽

Response Inhibition ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Working Memory Capacity ◽

Memory Capacity ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Partial Sleep Deprivation

Download Full-text

Learning to resist the urge: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial investigating alcohol-specific inhibition training in abstinent patients with alcohol use disorder

Trials ◽

10.1186/s13063-019-3505-2 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Raphaela M. Tschuemperlin ◽

Maria Stein ◽

Hallie M. Batschelet ◽

Franz Moggi ◽

Leila M. Soravia

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Alcohol Use ◽

Alcohol Use Disorder ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Specific Inhibition ◽

Double Blind ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Inhibition Training

Download Full-text

Response inhibition and emotional cognition improved by atomoxetine in children and adolescents with ADHD: The ACTION randomized controlled trial

Journal of Psychiatric Research ◽

10.1016/j.jpsychires.2018.03.009 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 102 ◽

pp. 57-64 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Kristi R. Griffiths ◽

John E. Leikauf ◽

Tracey W. Tsang ◽

Simon Clarke ◽

Daniel F. Hermens ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Children And Adolescents ◽

Response Inhibition ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Emotional Cognition

Download Full-text

Treatment Fidelity Procedures for an Aphasia Intervention Within a Randomized Controlled Trial: Design, Feasibility, and Results

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2019_ajslp-cac48-18-0227 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (1S) ◽

pp. 412-424

Author(s):

Elissa L. Conlon ◽

Emily J. Braun ◽

Edna M. Babbitt ◽

Leora R. Cherney

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Treatment Protocol ◽

Treatment Fidelity ◽

Protocol Adherence ◽

Study Condition ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Aphasia Therapy ◽

Percent Accuracy ◽

Over Time

Purpose This study reports on the treatment fidelity procedures implemented during a 5-year randomized controlled trial comparing intensive and distributed comprehensive aphasia therapy. Specifically, the results of 1 treatment, verb network strengthening treatment (VNeST), are examined. Method Eight participants were recruited for each of 7 consecutive cohorts for a total of 56 participants. Participants completed 60 hr of aphasia therapy, including 15 hr of VNeST. Two experienced speech-language pathologists delivered the treatment. To promote treatment fidelity, the study team developed a detailed manual of procedures and fidelity checklists, completed role plays to standardize treatment administration, and video-recorded all treatment sessions for review. To assess protocol adherence during treatment delivery, trained research assistants not involved in the treatment reviewed video recordings of a subset of randomly selected VNeST treatment sessions and completed the fidelity checklists. This process was completed for 32 participants representing 2 early cohorts and 2 later cohorts, which allowed for measurement of protocol adherence over time. Percent accuracy of protocol adherence was calculated across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition (intensive vs. distributed therapy). Results The fidelity procedures were sufficient to promote and verify a high level of adherence to the treatment protocol across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition. Conclusion Treatment fidelity strategies and monitoring are feasible when incorporated into the study design. Treatment fidelity monitoring should be completed at regular intervals during the course of a study to ensure that high levels of protocol adherence are maintained over time and across conditions.

Download Full-text

Phonomotor Versus Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Anomia in 58 Persons With Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research ◽

10.1044/2019_jslhr-l-18-0257 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 62 (12) ◽

pp. 4464-4482 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Diane L. Kendall ◽

Megan Oelke Moldestad ◽

Wesley Allen ◽

Janaki Torrence ◽

Stephen E. Nadeau

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Response Latency ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Semantic Knowledge ◽

Semantic Feature ◽

Feature Analysis ◽

Group Differences ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Confrontation Naming ◽

Semantic Feature Analysis

Purpose The ultimate goal of anomia treatment should be to achieve gains in exemplars trained in the therapy session, as well as generalization to untrained exemplars and contexts. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of phonomotor treatment, a treatment focusing on enhancement of phonological sequence knowledge, against semantic feature analysis (SFA), a lexical-semantic therapy that focuses on enhancement of semantic knowledge and is well known and commonly used to treat anomia in aphasia. Method In a between-groups randomized controlled trial, 58 persons with aphasia characterized by anomia and phonological dysfunction were randomized to receive 56–60 hr of intensively delivered treatment over 6 weeks with testing pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3 months posttreatment termination. Results There was no significant between-groups difference on the primary outcome measure (untrained nouns phonologically and semantically unrelated to each treatment) at 3 months posttreatment. Significant within-group immediately posttreatment acquisition effects for confrontation naming and response latency were observed for both groups. Treatment-specific generalization effects for confrontation naming were observed for both groups immediately and 3 months posttreatment; a significant decrease in response latency was observed at both time points for the SFA group only. Finally, significant within-group differences on the Comprehensive Aphasia Test–Disability Questionnaire ( Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2004 ) were observed both immediately and 3 months posttreatment for the SFA group, and significant within-group differences on the Functional Outcome Questionnaire ( Glueckauf et al., 2003 ) were found for both treatment groups 3 months posttreatment. Discussion Our results are consistent with those of prior studies that have shown that SFA treatment and phonomotor treatment generalize to untrained words that share features (semantic or phonological sequence, respectively) with the training set. However, they show that there is no significant generalization to untrained words that do not share semantic features or phonological sequence features.

Download Full-text