Journal of addictive behaviors, therapy & rehabilitation最新文献

Background: Escalation of voluntary alcohol drinking is characteristic of alcohol addiction and can be induced in rodents using intermittent access to alcohol. This model has been used to evaluate candidate therapeutics, but key systems involved in the transition into alcohol addiction, such as CRF, differ in their organization between rodents and primates. We examined the ability of an intermittent access schedule to induce escalation of voluntary alcohol drinking in non-human primates and used this model to assess the role of corticotropin releasing hormone (CRF) signaling in this process.

Methods: Four young adult male rhesus macaques were given access to an 8.4% alcohol solution every other weekday (EOD; M, W, F), while four other young adult males were given the same solution every weekday (ED; M-F). Subjects were then administered a CRF1 antagonist, antalarmin.

Results: EOD increased alcohol intake by up to 50% over baseline, with a more pronounced increase immediately following reintroduction of alcohol. For the morning/daytime sessions, EOD subjects increased their consumption by 83% over baseline. Differences between ED and EOD schedules emerged quickly, and EOD-induced escalation resulted in pharmacologically active BAC's. EOD-induced alcohol consumption was insensitive to CRFR1 blockade by antalarmin, but subjects with high CSF levels of CRF were more responsive.

Conclusions: Similar to what has been observed in rodents, intermittent access results in an escalation of voluntary alcohol drinking in non-human primates. In contrast to findings in rats, recruitment of the CRF system does not seem to be involved in the escalated alcohol drinking observed under these conditions, though individual differences in CRF system activity may play a role.

Background: Prior medication studies involving individuals with major depression in combination with an alcohol use disorder (MDD/AUD) have mainly focused on SSRI and tricyclic antidepressants, with generally ineffective results. Consequently, effective treatments for that common comorbid condition remain elusive. Mirtazapine is an antidepressant medicine with a unique pharmacological profile, whose effectiveness for treating non-comorbid depression reportedly may exceed that of SSRIs.

Objective/methods: We now review the published literature regarding the tolerability and efficacy of mirtazapine for the treatment of the depression and the pathological alcohol ingestion of individuals with co-occurring MDD/AUD, including a review of four of our own small studies and two studies conducted outside the United States.

Results/conclusions: The findings of these studies suggest that mirtazapine is well tolerated among persons with comorbid MDD/AUD. Results also provide some evidence of efficacy for mirtazapine for decreasing the level of depression of persons with co-occurring MDD/AUD, and suggest that decreases in depression may occur relatively quickly after starting treatment, but provide no evidence of effectiveness for decreasing the level of alcohol ingestion. Large-scale double-blind, placebo-controlled studies are warranted to further clarify the tolerability and efficacy of mirtazapine among individuals with MDD/AUD.

Oxford House recovery homes are unusual compared to most recovery homes in that they function entirely without the use of staff; instead members are elected to officer positions. The aim of this study was to perform preliminary analysis of the types of leadership styles utilized by members of oxford house. Twentynine house residents of five Oxford Houses were asked to rate their own leadership styles using the leader behavior description questionnaire and the multifactor leader questionnaire. Results showed that participants were more likely to use person-oriented behaviors above task-oriented actions. Transformational leadership was associated with higher outcomes than Transactional leadership. Implications for future research are discussed.

Objective: Treatment with an opioid agonist such as methadone or buprenorphine is the standard of care for opioid use disorder. Persons with opioid use disorder are frequently hospitalized, and may be undertreated due to provider misinformation regarding the legality of prescribing methadone for inpatients. Using a case-based review, this article aims to describe effective management of active opioid withdrawal and ongoing opioid use disorder using methadone or buprenorphine among acutely ill, hospitalized patients.

Methods: We reviewed pertinent medical and legal literature and consulted with national legal experts regarding methadone for opioid withdrawal and opioid maintenance therapy in hospitalized, general medical and surgical patients, and describe a real-life example of successful implementation of inpatient methadone for these purposes.

Results: Patients with opioid use disorders can be effectively and legally initiated on methadone maintenance therapy or buprenorphine during an inpatient hospitalization by clinical providers and successfully transitioned to an outpatient methadone maintenance or buprenorphine clinic after discharge for ongoing treatment.

Conclusions: Inpatient methadone or buprenorphine prescribing is safe and evidence-based, and can be used to effectively treat opioid withdrawal and also serves as a bridge to outpatient treatment of opioid use disorders.

This study assessed the effect of race/ethnicity on the prevalence of inconsistent reports regarding ever smoking, time since smoking cessation, and age of initiating regular smoking. We used the Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey data, which came from a test-retest reliability study, and considered three racial/ethnic subpopulations, Hispanics, Non-Hispanic (NH) Blacks and NH Whites. Initial exploration of highly disagreeing reports of time since smoking cessation and age of onset of regular smoking initiation indicated that the majority of these reports corresponded to NH Whites. However, the proportion of the extremely discrepant reports was very small (less than 0.8%), and these reports were not included in the main analyses. Univariate analyses revealed that for each smoking measure, NH Whites tended to report most consistently when compared to Hispanics and NH Blacks. However, the only statistically significant result was that Hispanics were more likely to report their regular smoking initiation age inconsistently than were NH Whites. Analyses that adjusted for other factors confirmed this finding, i.e., Hispanics were 1.8 times more likely to provide inconsistent reports of their age of onset of regular smoking than were NH Whites. Furthermore, these analyses showed that the impact of race/ethnicity on the prevalence of inconsistent reporting may depend on other factors, e.g., age and employment status. For example, non-employed NH Blacks were 1.9 times more likely to recant ever smoking than were non-employed NH Whites. The lower consistency in reports by Hispanics and NH Blacks underscores the importance of developing new survey design and research strategies for detecting relatively small differences in reporting among the racial/ethnic minorities. Additional efforts to motivate racial/ethnic minorities to participate in national surveys may not only help increase representation of these subpopulations in study samples but also help improve overall data quality.

Study background: Despite efforts to promote the use of tobacco cessation services (TCS), implementation extensiveness remains limited. This study investigated three factors (cognitive, behavioral, environmental) identified by social cognitive theory as predictors of substance use disorder counselors' likelihood of use versus non-use of tobacco cessation (TC) 5 A's (ask patients about tobacco use, advise to quit, assess willingness to quit, assist in quitting, arrange for follow-up contact), counseling, and pharmacotherapy with their patients who smoke cigarettes.

Methods: Data were collected in 2010 from 942 counselors working in 257 treatment programs that offered TCS. Cognitive factors included perceived job competence and TC attitudes. Behavioral factors encompassed TC-related skills and general training. External factors consisted of TC financial resource availability and coworker TC attitudes. Data were analyzed using logistic regression models with nested data.

Results: Approximately 86% of counselors used the 5 A's, 76% used counseling, and 53% used pharmacotherapy. When counselors had greater TC-related skills and greater general training they were more likely to implement the 5 A's. Implementation of counseling was more likely when counselors had more positive attitudes toward TC treatment, greater general training, greater financial resource availability, and when coworkers had more positive attitudes toward TC treatment. Implementation of pharmacotherapy was more likely when counselors had more positive attitudes toward TC treatment, greater general training, and greater financial resource availability.

Conclusion: Findings indicate that interventions to promote TCS implementation should consider all three factors simultaneously as suggested by social cognitive theory.

Objective: Buprenorphine, a medication for treating opioid dependence, is underutilized in specialty addiction treatment organizations. Only physicians who have obtained a buprenorphine prescribing license or "waiver" may administer this medication. A limited number of physicians are pursuing this waiver, and a concern in the substance use disorder treatment field is that the shortage of prescribers could be contributing to the low use of buprenorphine at specialty addiction treatment centers. The objective of this study is to assess Ohio specialty treatment organizations' access to buprenorphine prescribers and the barriers they encounter when seeking new physician prescribing capacity.

Methods: Forty-one Ohio specialty addiction treatment organizations were invited to complete a survey of their buprenorphine practices and availability of buprenorphine prescribers during August-October 2014. Data was collected on pharmacotherapies used in the treatment of opioid dependence, arrangements treatment organizations have with prescribing physicians, buprenorphine prescribing capacity, and barriers encountered in recruiting new physician prescribers.

Results: Thirty-seven treatment organizations responded, for a response rate of 90.2%. Seventy-eight percent (n=29) of the sample provided buprenorphine therapy. Of those treatment organizations, 48.3% (n=14) reported insufficient prescribing capacity. Of those, 50% (n=7) indicated they had to turn patients away from buprenorphine therapy due to limited physician prescribing capacity.

Conclusion: The study suggests that buprenorphine use is constrained by limited physician prescribing capacity, to the degree that 24.1% of the organizations surveyed using buprenorphine therapy had to turn patients away. Potential remedies include encouraging more specialty treatment organizations to have physicians on staff, removing the Drug Addiction Treatment Act (DATA 2000) cap that limits physician buprenorphine caseloads at 100 patients (after year 1), and developing strategies to recruit physicians into addiction treatment practice. Additional research is needed to increase the knowledge of physician prescribing capacity as a barrier to buprenorphine use, how to overcome these barriers, and to understand the extent physician capacity shortages are affecting buprenorphine use.

Aims: Drug and alcohol use-related stigma affects employment, physical and mental health, and has been shown to be a barrier to seeking treatment. Thus, the need to address stigma in substance use disorders treatment has been noted in the clinical literature. We aimed to examine whether stigma is related to alcohol/substance use as well as whether treatment as usual for substance use disorders affects stigma, depressive symptoms, and quality of life.

Methods: Participants were individuals attending intensive outpatient treatment for substance use disorders. Baseline sample consisted of 17 Caucasian, predominantly male (i.e. 65%) participants, averaging 34.06 years of age. At post-treatment and one month follow-up assessments there were 12 and 7 participants respectively.

Results: Higher post-treatment stigma was significantly related to a greater number of drug use days at follow-up. We did not find significant differences between baseline, post-treatment and follow-up assessment on self-stigma. However, participants reported a significant decrease in symptoms of depression from baseline to post-treatment and a significant increase in these symptoms between post-treatment and follow-up.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that stigma may have a detrimental impact on substance use. Also, while depressive symptoms may improve as a result of treatment as usual for substance use disorders, symptoms of depression may worsen shortly after treatment. These results highlight the need for more work on these relationships due to the very preliminary nature of these findings.