TY - JOUR
T1 - A guided digital intervention to reduce cannabis use
T2 - The ICan randomized controlled trial
AU - Olthof, Marleen I. A.
AU - Goudriaan, Anna E.
AU - van Laar, Margriet W.
AU - Blankers, Matthijs
N1 - Funding Information: The ICan study is funded by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. The funder had no role in the design, data collection, analysis and writing of this manuscript. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.
PY - 2023/9
Y1 - 2023/9
N2 - Aims: To test the effectiveness of a digital intervention to reduce cannabis use (ICan) with adherence-focused guidance compared with educational cannabis information. Design: This was a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Follow-up clinical outcome measurements took place 3 and 6 months after randomization. Setting: The trial was conducted in the Netherlands. The intervention and guidance took place on-line, with recruitment via Facebook/Instagram advertisement campaigns. Participants: Inclusion criteria were ≥ 18 years, cannabis use on ≥ 3 days/week, the desire to reduce/quit cannabis and using a smartphone. Participants were allocated to either ICan (n = 188) or control (n = 190) (69% male, mean age = 27.5 years). Intervention and comparator: ICan is a mobile (web-)application based on motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy and includes three main components: screening, brief intervention (six modules) and referral to treatment. The control condition consisted of non-interactive educational cannabis information. Measurements: Primary outcome was the number of cannabis use days in the 7 days prior to the 6-month follow-up measurement. Secondary outcome measures at 3- and 6-month follow-up were the number of grams of cannabis used and attitudes towards seeking professional help for cannabis use related problems. Findings: Intention-to-treat analysis showed that 6 months after randomization the mean number of cannabis use days in the past 7 days was reduced in both conditions (time P < 0.001), with no significant group × time interaction effect [ICan = 4.17 days, control = 4.31 days, Cohen's dbetween = 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.15, 0.26, P = 0.93]. Three months after randomization the mean number of grams used in the past 7 days was reduced in both conditions, with a significantly larger reduction in the ICan condition (P = 0.009, Cohen's dbetween = 0.15). At 6-month follow-up the significant group × time interaction effect was no longer present (P = 0.30). In both conditions, attitudes towards seeking professional help remained virtually unchanged over time. Conclusions: A digital intervention to reduce cannabis use (ICan) was more effective than non-interactive educational cannabis information in reducing grams of cannabis used over 3 months, but not more effective at reducing cannabis use days at 6-month follow-up. Cannabis use reductions were maintained in both conditions between 3 and 6 months’ follow-up.
AB - Aims: To test the effectiveness of a digital intervention to reduce cannabis use (ICan) with adherence-focused guidance compared with educational cannabis information. Design: This was a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Follow-up clinical outcome measurements took place 3 and 6 months after randomization. Setting: The trial was conducted in the Netherlands. The intervention and guidance took place on-line, with recruitment via Facebook/Instagram advertisement campaigns. Participants: Inclusion criteria were ≥ 18 years, cannabis use on ≥ 3 days/week, the desire to reduce/quit cannabis and using a smartphone. Participants were allocated to either ICan (n = 188) or control (n = 190) (69% male, mean age = 27.5 years). Intervention and comparator: ICan is a mobile (web-)application based on motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy and includes three main components: screening, brief intervention (six modules) and referral to treatment. The control condition consisted of non-interactive educational cannabis information. Measurements: Primary outcome was the number of cannabis use days in the 7 days prior to the 6-month follow-up measurement. Secondary outcome measures at 3- and 6-month follow-up were the number of grams of cannabis used and attitudes towards seeking professional help for cannabis use related problems. Findings: Intention-to-treat analysis showed that 6 months after randomization the mean number of cannabis use days in the past 7 days was reduced in both conditions (time P < 0.001), with no significant group × time interaction effect [ICan = 4.17 days, control = 4.31 days, Cohen's dbetween = 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.15, 0.26, P = 0.93]. Three months after randomization the mean number of grams used in the past 7 days was reduced in both conditions, with a significantly larger reduction in the ICan condition (P = 0.009, Cohen's dbetween = 0.15). At 6-month follow-up the significant group × time interaction effect was no longer present (P = 0.30). In both conditions, attitudes towards seeking professional help remained virtually unchanged over time. Conclusions: A digital intervention to reduce cannabis use (ICan) was more effective than non-interactive educational cannabis information in reducing grams of cannabis used over 3 months, but not more effective at reducing cannabis use days at 6-month follow-up. Cannabis use reductions were maintained in both conditions between 3 and 6 months’ follow-up.
KW - Cannabis use
KW - SBIRT
KW - cannabis use disorder
KW - digital intervention
KW - eHealth
KW - randomized controlled trial
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85161124090&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1111/add.16217
DO - https://doi.org/10.1111/add.16217
M3 - Article
C2 - 37128762
SN - 0965-2140
VL - 118
SP - 1775
EP - 1786
JO - Addiction
JF - Addiction
IS - 9
ER -