Comparing the effectiveness of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) and cognitive behavioral therapy on craving, mood, and smoking addiction

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate professor, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Department of Educational Science, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran. Associate professor, Faculty of Educational Science and Psychology, Department of Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

2 M.Sc. in clinical psychology, Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction: Craving is a complex behavior and one of the important factors for the continuation of smoking. This research was conducted to compare the effectiveness of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) on craving, mood, and smoking addiction in smokers.
 
Materials and Methods: In this experimental study, 12 smokers who referred to medical centers in Mashhad- Iran, were selected by the convenient sampling method and assigned to TDCS (6 cases) and CBT (6 cases) groups randomly. They received the intervention during 8 sessions. They fulfilled the Questionnaire on Smoking Urges, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule and Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence, before and after the intervention. The data were analyzed using Wilcoxon test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
 
Results: The results showed that both TDCS and CBT treatments significantly reduce smoking craving (P< 0.05), but TDCS reduces craving greater than CBT (P< 0.01). Also, TDCS improves positive and negative affect significantly, while CBT only improves negative affect in smokers (P< 0.05). Besides, TDCS causes more improvement in negative affect (P< 0.01). TDCS reduces smoking addiction (P< 0.05), while CBT was not effective in this regard.
 
Conclusion: Compared to cognitive behavioral therapy, transcranial direct current stimulation has a greater effect on craving, mood, and smoking addiction.

Keywords


  1. Ruther T, Bobes J, De Hert M, Svensson TH, Mann K, Batra A, et al. EPA guidance a tobacco dependence for smoking cessation in people with mental illness. Eur Psychiatry 2011; 31: 65-82.
  2. Odermatt R, Stutzer A. Smoking bans, cigarette prices and life satisfaction. J Health Econ 2015; 44: 176-94.
  3. Ayo-Yusuf OA, Omole OB. Nicotine dependence, socioeconomic status, lifestyle behaviours and lifetime quit attempts among adult smokers in South Africa. S Afr Med J 2020; 110(8): 796-801.
  4. Schlam TR, Baker TB, Smith SS, Cook JW, Piper ME. Anxiety sensitivity and distress tolerance in smokers: relations with tobacco dependence, withdrawal, and quitting success. Nicotine Tob Res 2020; 22(1): 58-65.
  5. Veilleux JC, Skinner KD. Introspective responses to cues and motivation to reduce cigarette smoking influence state and behavioral responses to cue exposure. Addict Behav 2016; 60: 103-8.
  6. O'Connell NE, Marston L, Spencer S, DeSouza LH, Wand BM. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 4(4): CD008208.
  7. Laakso I, Mikkonen M, Koyama S, Hirata A, Tanaka S. Can electric fields explain inter-individual variability in transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex? Sci Rep 2019; 9(1): 626.
  8. Hartwigsen G. The neurophysiology of language: Insights from non-invasive brain stimulation in the healthy human brain. Brain Lang 2015; 148: 81-94.
  9. Meng Z, Li Q, Ma Y, Liu C. Transcranial direct current stimulation of the frontal-parietal-temporal brain areas reduces cigarette consumption in abstinent heroin users. J Psychiatr Res 2022; 152: 321-5.
  10. Jiansong Xu, Fergni F, Arthur L, Brody A, Ardeshir SR. Transcranial direct current stimulation reduces negative affect but not cigarette craving in overnight abstinent smokers. Front Psychiatry 2013; 2013: 00112.
  11. Blonigen DM, Finney JW, Wilbourne PL, Moos RH. Psychosocial treatments for substance use disorders. In: Nathan PE, Gorman JM. (editors). A guide to treatments that work. Oxford: Oxford University; 2015: 731-61.
  12. Morean ME, Kong G, Camenga DR, Cavallo DA, Carroll KM, Pittman B, et al. Contingency management improves smoking cessation treatment outcomes among highly impulsive adolescent smokers relative to cognitive behavioral therapy. Addict Behav 2015; 42: 86-90.
  13. Leventhal AM, Piper ME, Japuntich SJ, Baker TB, Cook JW. Anhedonia, depressed mood, and smoking cessation outcome. J Consult Clin Psychol 2014; 82(1): 122.
  14. Brunoni AR, Moffa AH, Fregni F, Palm U, Padberg F, Blumberger DM, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation for acute major depressive episodes: meta-analysis of individual patient data. Br J Psychiatry 2016; 208(6): 522-31.
  15. Sudak DM. Cognitive behavioral therapy for depression. Psychiatr Clin North Am 2012; 35(1): 99-110.
  16. Sharma MK, Suman LN, Srivastava K, Suma N, Vishwakarma A. Psychometric properties of Fagerstrom Test of Nicotine Dependence: A systematic review. Ind Psychiatry J 2021; 30(2): 207-16.
  17. Payne TJ, Smith PO, McCracken LM, McSherry WC, Antony MM. Assessing nicotine dependence: A comparison of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire (FTQ) with the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) in a clinical sample. Addict Behav 1994; 19(3): 307-17.
  18. Rozario HP. Nicotine dependence assessment using Fagerstrom test and Nicotine Replacement therapy (NRT) recommendation techniques for smoking cessation among Paniya tribes. Ann Oncol 2016; 27: ix187-8.
  19. Lee MJ, Lee KS. Maintenance of smoking cessation in Korean single mothers. BMC Women's Health 2021; 21(1): 292.
  20. Weber CF, Hatschbach P, Pithan SA, Dullius AI. [Measure nicotine dependence by the Fagerström test for nicotine dependence]. RGO 2017; 65: 208-15. (Portuguese)
  21. Azizi AR. [Reliability and validity of the Persian version of distress tolerance scale]. Journal of psychology 2010; 4: 154-8. (Persian)
  22. Merz EL, Malcarne VL, Roesch SC, Ko CM, Emerson M, Roma VG, et al. Psychometric properties of Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) original and short forms in an African American community sample. J Affect Disord 2013; 151(3): 942-9.
  23. Ositer GV, Smith MP, Smith D. Reliability of the positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) in medical rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil J 2005; 19: 767-9.
  24. Abolghasemi F. [Evaluation of reliability and validity of positive and negative affect scale and concurrent validity with mind healthy and vitality scale on students of Isfahan University]. MS. Dissertation. Isfahan: Isfahan University, 2004. (Persian)
  25. Ahmed S, Tazmeem F, Alam MM, Kibria MG, Ahmed BT, Das BB, et al. Psychometric properties of the Bengali Version Brief Questionnaire on Smoking Urges (QSU-Brief). Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2021; 22(12): 3857-63.
  26. Çelik ZH, Sevi OM. Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for smoking cessation: A systematic review. Current approaches in psychiatry 2020; 12(1): 54-71.
  27. Morean ME, Kong G, Camenga DR, Cavallo DA, Carroll KM, Pittman B, et al. Contingency management improves smoking cessation treatment outcomes among highly impulsive adolescent smokers relative to cognitive behavioral therapy. Addict Behav 2015; 42: 86-90.
  28. McClure JB, Bricker J, Mull K, Heffner JL. Comparative effectiveness of group-delivered acceptance and commitment therapy versus cognitive behavioral therapy for smoking cessation: A randomized controlled trial. Nicotine Tob Res 2020; 22(3): 354-62.
  29. Mollazadeh J, Ashouri A. [The effect of cognitive-behavioral group therapy in prevention of relapse and improvement of addicted person mental health]. Journal of Daneshvar 2010; 16: 1-11. (Persian)
  30. Narimani M. [Examining the effect of cognitive behavior therapy on addiction-treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts]. News in consulting researches 2004; 3: 42-59. (Persian)
  31. Meng Z, Liu C, Yu C, Ma Y. Transcranial direct current stimulation of the frontal-parietal-temporal area attenuates smoking behavior. J Psychiatr Res 2014; 54: 19-25.