Volume 26, Issue 7 (10-2019)                   RJMS 2019, 26(7): 99-112 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Alizadehgoradel J, Imani S, Nejati V, Fathabsdi J. Comparison of the effectiveness of mindfulness-based substance abuse treatment (MBSAT) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) improve executive functions in adolescents with substance use disorders. RJMS 2019; 26 (7) :99-112
URL: http://rjms.iums.ac.ir/article-1-5646-en.html
Assistant Professor of Clinical Psychology, Department Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Education & Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran , s_imani@sbu.ac.ir
Abstract:   (3556 Views)
Background: Substance abuse is one of the most widespread and costly health problems in modern societies. Customary medical treatments are often ineffective and relapse is prevalent. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and mindfulness-based substance abuse treatment (MBSAT) to improve executive functions in adolescents with substance abuse.
Methods: The research design was experimental with pretest-posttest and control group. Sixty adolescents (aged 18-21) with substance abuse disorders were selected according to including and excluding criteria and randomly assigned into the tDCS group (n=20), MBSAT group (n=20) and control group (n=20). To collect data, we used of the neurosciences tasks including N-Back Test, Wisconsin card sorting test, Go/ No Go Task and Balloon Analogue Risk Taking Task (BART). Data analysis was performed using mixed analysis of variance with repeated measures in SPSS 22.
Results: The results showed that both transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and mindfulness-based substance abuse treatment (MBSAT) therapy improved the executive functions of adolescents with substance abuse disorder. Analysis showed no significant difference between two treatments.
Conclusion: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and Mindfulness-Based Substance Abuse Treatment can be used as an effective intervention to improve executive functions in adolescents in adolescents with SUD.

Full-Text [PDF 804 kb]   (1563 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Clinical Psychiatry

2. 1. Bari A, DiCesare J, Babayan, D, Runcie M, Sparks H, Wilson B. Neuromodulation for substance addiction in human subjects: A review.
3. Neurosci Biobehav Rev; 2018. 95:33-43.
4. 2. Ghavidel N, Samadi M, Kharmanbiz A, Asadi A, Feyzi A, Ahmadi R, et al . Investigation of substance use prevalence and the interrelated factors involved through third-year high school students in Nazarabad city from January 2008 to June 2008. Razi J Med Sci; 2012. 19(97):29-37. (Persian)
5. 3. Faraghaty M, Sohrabi F, Borjali A, Farokhi N, Skandary H. The role of personality, spiritual, emotional and relational variables for addiction treatment among addicts. Razi Med Sci; 2017. 24 (8) :39-50. (Persian)
6. 4. Garland EL, Boettiger CA, Gaylord SA, WestChannonV, Howard MO. Mind- fullness is inversely associated with alcohol attentional bias among recovering alcohol dependent adults. Cognit Ther Res; 2012. 36:442–50.
7. 5. Whitesell M, Bachand A, Peel J, Brown M., social, and individual factors contributing to risk for adolescent substance use. J Addict; 2013. 579310.
8. 6. Moss HB, Chen CM, Yi HY. Early adolescent patterns of alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana polysubstance use and young adult substance use outcomes in a nationally representative sample. J Alcohol Drug Depend; 2014. 136:51–62.
9. 7. Reyna VF, Farley F. Risk and rationality in adolescent decision making: Implications for theory, practice, and public policy. Psychol Sci Public Interest; 2006. 7(1): 1–44.
10. 8. Pentz MA, Riggs NR. Longitudinal relationships of executive cognitive function and parent influence to child substance use and physical activity. Prev Sci; 2013. 14(3): 229–237.
11. 9. Amini F, Alizadeh H, Rezaee O. The Comparison of the Executive-Neurological Functions of the Narcotic Addicted and Normal Adults. Journal of research on addiction; 2010. 4 (13): 25 38.(Persian).
12. 10. Sofuoglu M, DeVito EE, Waters AJ, Carroll KM. Cognitive enhancement as a treatment for drug addictions. Neuropharmacology; 2013. 64:452-63
13. 11. MeilW, LaPorte D, Stewart P. Substance dependence as a neurological disorder. In K. Chen (Ed.), Advanced Topics in Neurological Disorders 2012. (pp. 217–242). InTech Publishing.
14. 12. Fuster JM.The prefrontal cortex (4th ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2011.
15. 13. Riggs NR, Spruijt-Metz D, Chou CP, Pentz MA. Relationships between executive cognitive function and lifetime substance use and obesity-related behaviors in fourth grade youth. Child Neuropsychol; 2012. 18(1): 1–11
16. 14. Kandel ER, Kandel DB. A molecular hypothesis for nicotine as a gateway drug. New Engl J Med; 2014. 371: 932–943
17. 15. Contia CL, Moscona JA, Miyuki E, Palaciosa N. Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex Activity and Neuromodulation in Crack-Cocaine Dependents during Early Abstinence. J Neurol Neurophysiol; 2016. 7:374.
18. 16. McBride D, Barrett SP, Kelly JT, Aw A, Dagher A. Effects of expectancy and abstinence on the neural response to smoking cues in cigarette smokers: an fMRI study. Neuropsychopharmacology; 2006. 31: 2728-2738.
19. 17. Tapert SF, Cheung EH, Brown GG, Frank LR, Paulus M.P. Neural response to alcohol stimuli in adolescents with alcohol use disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatr; 2003. 60: 727-735.
20. 18. Rosen LG, Sun N, Rushlow W, Laviolette SR. Molecular and neuronal plasticity mechanisms in the amygdala-prefrontal cortical circuit: implications for opiate addiction memory formation. Front Neurosci; 2015. 9: 399.
21. 19. Chen BT, Yau HJ, Hatch C, Kusumoto-Yoshida I, Cho SL, Hopf FW, Bonci A. Rescuing cocaine-induced prefrontal cortex hypoactivity prevents compulsive cocaine seeking. Nature; 2013. 496(7445):359-62.
22. 20. Hyman SE, Malenka RC, Nestler EJ. Neural mechanisms of addiction: the role of reward-related learning and memory. Annu Rev Neurosci; 2006. 29:565-98.
23. 21. McClernon FJ, Addicott MA, Sweitzer MM, (2015). Smoking abstinence and neurocognition: implications for cessation and relapse. CurrTopBehav Neurosci; 2015. 23: 193–227.
24. 22. Coles AS, Kozak K, George TP. A review of brain stimulation methods to treat substance use disorders. Am J Addict; 2018. 27: 71–91.
25. 23. Yang LZ, Shi B, Li H, Zhang W, Liu Y, Wang H, et al. Electrical stimulation reduces smokers' craving by modulating the coupling between dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex and parahippocampal gyrus. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci; 2017. 12(8):1296-1302.
26. 24. Lima Conti C, Nakamura-Palacios EM. Bilateral Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex Changes the Drug-cued Reactivity in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex of Crack-cocaine Addicts. Brain Stimul; 2014. 7 :130-132
27. 25. Goldstein RZ, Volkow ND. Dysfunction of the prefrontal cortex in addiction: neuroimaging findings and clinical implications. Nat Rev Neurosci; 2011.12(11):652-69.
28. 26. de Souza Brangioni V, Maria C, Pereira DA, Thibaut A, Fregni F, Brasil-Neto JP, Boechat-Barros R. Effects of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation and motivation to quit in tobacco smokers: a randomized, sham controlled, double-blind trial. Frontiers in pharmacology; 2018. 26;9:14.
29. 27. Walsh JJ, Balint MG, Smolira DR, Fredericksen LK, Madsen S. Predicting individual differences in mindfulness: The role of trait anxiety, attachment anxiety and attentional control. Pers Individ Dif; 2009. 46: 94-99
30. 28. Eric LG, Brett F, Matthew O.H. Mindfulness training targets neurocognitive mechanisms of addiction at the attention-appraisal-emotion interface. Front Psychiatry; 2014. 4: 1-16
31. 29. Li W, Howard MO, Garland EL, McGovern P, Lazar M. Mindfulness treatment for substance misuse: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Subst Abuse Treat; 2017. 75:62-96.
32. 30. Garland E L, Roberts-Lewis A, Tronnier CD, Graves R, Kelley K. Mindfulness- oriented recovery enhancement versus CBT for co-occurring substance dependence, traumatic stress, and psychiatric disorders: Proximal outcomes from a pragmatic randomized trial. Behav Res Ther; 2016. 77: 7–16.
33. 31. Quach D, Jastrowski Mano KE, Alexander K. A Randomized Controlled Trial Examining the Effect of Mindfulness Meditation on Working Memory Capacity in Adolescents. J Adolesc Health; 2016. 58(5):489-96.
34. 32. Oberle E, Schonert-Reichl KA, Lawlor MS, Thomson KC. Mindfulness and inhibitory control in early adolescence. J Early Adolesc. 2012; 32(4):565-88.
35. 33. Andreu CI, Cosmelli D, Slagter HA, Franken I. Effects of a brief mindfulness-meditation intervention on neural measures of response inhibition in cigarette smokers. PloS one; 2018. 13(1): e0191661.
36. 34. Chiesa A, Serretti A. (2014). Are mindfulness-based interventions effective for substance use disorders? A systematic review of the evidence. Subst Use Misuse; 2014. 49(5): 492–512.
37. 35. Lejuez CW, Akline WM, Michael J, Zvolensky MJ. Evaluation of balloon analogue risk task (BARAT) as a predictor of adolescent real world risk taking behaviors. J Adolesc; 2003. 26(4): 475-9.
38. 36. Spreen O, Strauss E. A compendium of neuropsychological tests: Administration, norms and commentary (2nd ed.), New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.
39. 37. Ghadiri F, Jazayeri A, Ashaeri H, Ghazi Tabatabaei M. Deficit in Executive Functioning in Patients With Schizo-Obsessive Disorder. Adv Cogn Psychol; 2006.8 (3):11-24.(Persian)
40. 38. Matthies S, Philipsen A, Svaldi J. Risky decision making in adults with ADHD. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry; 2012. 43(3): 938-46
41. 39. Kane MJ, Conway ARA, Miura TK, Colflesh GJH. Working memory, attention control, and the N-back task: a question of construct validity". J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007. (33): 615–622
42. 40. Nyhus E, Barcelà F. The Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and the cognitive assessment of prefrontal executive functions. A critical update Original Research. Brain Cogn; 2009.71(3): 437-51
43. 41. Ekhtiari H, Behzadi A.Which one has negative effect on us? Investigating the risky decision making strategies by AIWA gambling test. J Cogn Sci; 2007.6 (3-4): 17-25
44. 42. Miyake A, Friedman NP, Emerson M, Witzki AH, Howerter A, Wager TD. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex ‘‘frontal lobe’’ tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cogn Psychol; 2000. 41(1): 49–100
45. 43. Hopko DR, Lejuez CW, Daughters SB, Aklin WM, Osborne A, Simmons BL, Strong D R. Construct validity of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART): Relationship with MDMA use by innercity drug users in residential treatment. J Psychopathol Behav; 2006. 28 (2): 95-101.
46. 44. Himelstein S, Saul S. Mindfulness-Based Substance Abuse Treatment for Adolescents. First published by Routledge; 2016.
47. 45. Mancuso LE, Ilieva IP, Hamilton RH, Farah Mj. A Meta-analytic Review, J. Does Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improve Healthy Working Memory?: A Meta-analytic Review. J Cogn Neurosci; 2016.28: 1063–89.
48. 46. Fregni F, Boggio PS, Nitsche M, Bermpohl F, Antal A, Feredoes E, etal. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex enhances working memory. Exp Brain Res; 2005. 166(1):23-30.
49. 47. Nejati V, Salehinejad MA, Nitsche MA, Najian A, Javadi AH. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improves Executive Dysfunctions in ADHD: Implications for Inhibitory Control, Interference Control, Working Memory, and Cognitive Flexibility. J Atten Disord; 207. 1: 108705471773061.
50. 48. Soyata, A. Z., Aksu, S., Woods, A. J., İşçen, P., Saçar, K. T., & Karamürsel, S. (2018). Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on decision making and cognitive flexibility in gambling disorder. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci; 2018. : 1-10
51. 49. Mansouri FA, Fehring DJ, Feizpour A, Gaillard A, Rosa MG, Rajan R, Jaberzadeh S. Direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex modulates error-induced behavioral adjustments. Eur J Neurosci; 2015. 44(2):1856-69.
52. 50. Ouellet J, McGirr A, Van den Eynde F, Jollant F, Lepage M, Berlim MT. Enhancing decision-making and cognitive impulse control with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied over the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC): A randomized and sham-controlled exploratory study. J Psychiatr Res; 2015. 69:27-34.
53. 51. Loftus AM, Yalcin O, Baughman FD, Vanman EJ, Hagger MS. Theimpact of transcranial direct current stimulation on inhibitory control in young adults. Brain Behav; 2015. 5(5) :e00332.
54. 52. Kuhn J, Möller M, Lenartz D, Christian PB, Veerle VV. Neuromodulation for Addiction, in: Knotkova, H., Rasche, D. (Eds.), Textbook of Neuromodulation. Springer; 2015. pp. 247–255.
55. 53. Domínguez-Salas S, Díaz-Batanero C, Lozano-Rojas OM, Verdejo-García A. Impact of general cognition and executive function deficits on addiction treatment outcomes: Systematic review and discussion of neurocognitive pathways. Neurosci Biobehav Rev; 2016. 71:772-801.
56. 54. Robinson CD, Waters AJ, Kang N, Sofuoglu M. Neurocognitive function as a treatment target for tobacco use disorder. Curr. Behav. Neurosci; 2017. 4: 10–20.
57. 55. Lovstad M. Executive sunctions after focal lesions to the lateral, orbital and medial subdivisions of the prefrontal cortex. Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital Department of Research; 2012. 311-359.
58. 56. Durazzo TC, Meyerhoff DJ, Nixon SJ. Chronic cigarette smoking: Implications for neuro-cognition and brain neurobiology. Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2012. 7(37): 12-37
59. 57. Fecteau S, Agosta S, Hone- Blanchet A, Fregni F, Boggio P, Ciraulo D, Pascual-Leone A. Modulation of smoking and decisionmaking behaviors with transcranial direct current stimulation in tobacco smokers: A preliminary study. Drug Alcohol Depend; 2014. 12(142): 78-84.
60. 58. Garland E, Gaylord S, Park J. The role of mindfulness in positive reappraisal. Explore; 2009. 5(1): 37–44.
61. 59. Kabat-Zinn J. Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clin Psychol; 2003. 10(2): 144–156.
62. 60. Mullur LM, khodnapur JP, Bagali sh C, Aithala M. influence of yogo pracyice on anxiety level of apparently healthy female subjects of bijapur (karnataka). Int J of Biomed & Adv Res; 2012. 3(8): 618-820.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Razi Journal of Medical Sciences

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb