Cognitive-behavioural treatment of pathological gambling in individuals with chronic schizophrenia: A pilot study

Problem gambling among people with first-episode psychosis: protocol for a prospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

The limited available data suggest that the prevalence of problem gambling is increased among young adults with first-episode psychosis, possibly due in part to several risk factors for problem gambling that are common in this population. Aripiprazole, a widely used antipsychotic drug, has also been linked to cases of problem gambling, but causality remains uncertain. Although the consequences of problem gambling further hinder the recovery of people with first-episode psychosis, there is a paucity of research about this comorbidity and its risk factors. Additionally, to our knowledge, no screening instrument for problem gambling tailored to these individuals exists, contributing to its under-recognition. Further, treatment approaches for problem gambling adapted to this population are at an embryonic stage, while existing treatments effectiveness remains to be documented. Using an innovative screening and assessment procedure for problem gambling, this study aims to identify risk factors for problem gambling among people with first-episode psychosis and to document the effectiveness of standard treatment approaches.

METHODS

This is a multicenter prospective cohort study conducted in two first-episode psychosis clinics, including all patients admitted between November 1st, 2019, and November 1st, 2023, followed for up to 3 years until May 1st, 2024. These 2 clinics admit approximately 200 patients annually, for an expected sample size of 800 individuals. The primary outcome is the occurrence of a DSM-5 diagnosis of gambling disorder. All patients are screened and evaluated for problem gambling using a systematic procedure at admission, and every 6 months thereafter. Socio-demographic and clinical variables are prospectively extracted from the patients' medical records. The nature and effectiveness of treatments for problem gambling offered to affected individuals are also documented from medical records. Survival analyses with Cox regression models will be used to identify potential risk factors for problem gambling. Descriptive statistics will document the effectiveness of treatments for problem gambling in this population.

DISCUSSION

A better understanding of potential risk factors for problem gambling among people with first-episode psychosis will allow for better prevention and detection of this neglected comorbidity. Results of this study will also hopefully raise clinicians' and researchers' awareness and serve as the basis to adapted treatments that will better support recovery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05686772. Retrospectively registered, 9 January 2023.

Pharmacological interventions for the treatment of disordered and problem gambling

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological interventions for disordered and problem gambling have been employed in clinical practice. Despite the availability of several reviews of the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling, few have employed systematic search strategies or compared different categories of pharmacological interventions. Systematic reviews of high-quality evidence are therefore essential to provide guidance regarding the efficacy of different pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aims of the review were to: (1) examine the efficacy of major categories of pharmacological-only interventions (antidepressants, opioid antagonists, mood stabilisers, atypical antipsychotics) for disordered or problem gambling, relative to placebo control conditions; and (2) examine the efficacy of these major categories relative to each other.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (all years to 11 January 2022).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials evaluating a pharmacological intervention for the treatment of disordered or problem gambling. Eligible control conditions included placebo control groups or comparisons with another category of pharmacological intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures, including systematic extraction of included study characteristics and results and risk of bias assessment. Our primary outcome was reduction in gambling symptom severity. Our secondary outcomes were reduction in gambling expenditure, gambling frequency, time spent gambling, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and functional impairment; and responder status. We evaluated treatment effects for continuous and dichotomous outcomes using standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratios (RR), respectively, employing random-effects meta-analyses. A minimum of two independent treatment effects were required for a meta-analysis to be conducted (with only meta-analytic findings reported in this abstract).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies in the review (n = 1193 randomised) that reported outcome data scheduled for end of treatment. Length of treatment ranged from 7 to 96 weeks.  Antidepressants: Six studies (n = 268) evaluated antidepressants, with very low to low certainty evidence suggesting that antidepressants were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.09, n = 225), gambling expenditure (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.06, n = 144), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.23, n = 90), functional impairment (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.22, n = 110), and responder status (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.66, n = 268). Opioid antagonists: Four studies (n = 562) evaluated opioid antagonists, with very low to low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.19, n = 259), but no difference between groups in responder status (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.86 to 3.14, n = 562). Mood stabilisers: Two studies (n = 71) evaluated mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence suggesting that mood stabilisers were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -2.24 to 0.39, n = 71), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -1.14 to 0.83, n = 71), and anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.64 to 0.30, n = 71). Atypical antipsychotics:Two studies (n = 63) evaluated the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine, with very low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.08, n = 63). Comparative effectiveness: Two studies (n = 62) compared antidepressants with opioid antagonists, with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than opioid antagonists on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) at post-treatment. Two studies (n = 58) compared antidepressants with mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than mood stabilisers on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.56, n = 58) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.70, n = 58) at post-treatment. Tolerability and adverse events: Several common adverse effects were reported by participants receiving antidepressants (e.g. headaches, nausea, diarrhoea/gastrointestinal issues) and opioid antagonists (e.g. nausea, dry mouth, constipation). There was little consistency in the types of adverse effects experienced by participants receiving mood stabilisers (e.g. tiredness, headaches, concentration difficulties) or atypical antipsychotics (e.g. pneumonia, sedation, increased hypomania). Discontinuation of treatment due to these adverse events was highest for opioid antagonists (10% to 32%), followed by antidepressants (4% to 31%), atypical antipsychotics (14%), and mood stabilisers (13%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides preliminary support for the use of opioid antagonists (naltrexone, nalmefene) and atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine) to produce short-term improvements in gambling symptom severity, although a lack of available evidence precludes a conclusion regarding the degree to which these pharmacological agents can improve other gambling or psychological functioning indices. In contrast, the findings are inconclusive with regard to the effects of mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants) in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, and there is limited evidence to support the efficacy of antidepressants. However, these conclusions are based on very low to low certainty evidence characterised by a small number of included studies, high risk of bias, modest pooled sample sizes, imprecise estimates, moderate between-study heterogeneity, and exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidities. Moreover, there were insufficient studies to conduct meta-analyses on many outcome measures; to compare efficacy across and within major categories of interventions; to explore dosage effects; or to examine effects beyond post-treatment. These limitations suggest that, despite recommendations related to the administration of opioid antagonists in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, pharmacological interventions should be administered with caution and with careful consideration of patient needs. A larger and more methodologically rigorous evidence base with longer-term evaluation periods is required before definitive conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness and durability of pharmacological treatments for disordered or problem gambling.

The Recovery Process for Individuals With Schizophrenia in the Context of Evidence-Based Psychotherapy and Rehabilitation

Abstract. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), META Cognitive Therapy (MCT), Metacognitive Training (MCTR), Metacognitive Reflection and Insight Therapy (MERIT), of various rehabilitation programs and of recovery programs in schizophrenia. Medline/Pubmed was searched for studies published in English from January 2010 to August 2018, which were screened against inclusion criteria by two reviewers. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated by two independent raters, which are the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) quality assessment tool for quantitative studies and the fidelity criteria. The study included 41 RCTs and 12 case studies with n = 3,059 persons with schizophrenia. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) proved to be superior in terms of the improvement of primary and secondary outcomes. MCT decreased positive symptoms and improved metacognitive capacity and insight. MCTR reduced positive symptoms and socially disruptive behavior. MERIT improved metacognitive capacity and insight. Rehabilitation programs were efficacious in the improvement of cognition, symptoms, and functional outcome. The recovery programs enhanced illness-management knowledge, attitudes toward medication and insights related to negative symptoms. It is recommended to combine the above evidence based psychotherapeutic interventions. Limitations of this systematic review are discussed toward the end of the essay. Some important factors have to be considered in the future have been mentioned.

The prevalence and features of schizophrenia among individuals with gambling disorder

BACKGROUND-OBJECTIVES

Few studies have analyzed the comorbid presence of gambling disorder (GD) with schizophrenia, its sociodemographic correlates and clinical implications. This study estimated the prevalence of the dual diagnosis (GD with schizophrenia) and the differences in the profiles of patients with and without the dual condition.

METHOD

The sample included n = 3,754 patients consecutively accepted for treatment for GD. Sociodemographics, gambling-related variables, psychopathological state and personality traits were assessed and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The prevalence of schizophrenia within patients who met clinical criteria for GD was 4.4% (95% confidence interval: 3.8%-5.1%). Variables related to the dual presence of GD with schizophrenia were single marital status, lower education level, inactive working status, socioeconomic disadvantage, younger age, earlier onset of gambling problems, worse global psychopathological state and more dysfunctional personality profile (higher level in harm avoidance and lower level in cooperativeness, reward dependence, persistence and self-directedness).

CONCLUSION

The presence of schizophrenia among patients with GD was around 4 times higher than the prevalence rate estimated in the reference general population. The differences in the profiles of GD patients with and without schizophrenia suggest that individuals with the dual diagnosis condition require unique assessment considerations and tailored treatment interventions specifically designed for the clinical and functioning higher risk.

Gambling Problems in Patients with Psychotic Disorders in Rural Greece

There is a dearth of studies on gambling problems in patients with psychotic disorders. A retrospective chart review of treatment-engaged rural patients was performed. From a total of 79 patients that were included in the study, 6 had a history of gambling problems, whereas the 1-year prevalence was 5%. Most were male and they underreported their problems. The results of the study correspond to other studies that used more rigorous methodology. Gambling problems in psychotic patients in rural Greece are not uncommon. Such problems can be traced by gathering information from all those who are involved in patients' care.

Considerations for Designing Context-Aware Mobile Apps for Mental Health Interventions

This work identifies major areas of knowledge and proposes a set of relevant dimensions by area that must be taken into account in the design and delivery of context-aware mobile applications for mental health interventions. We argue that much of the related research has focused only on a few dimensions, paying little or no attention to others and, most importantly, to potential relationships between them. Our belief is that the improvement of the effectiveness of mobile interventions to support mental health necessarily implies that developers and therapists comprehensively consider the interaction between the proposed dimensions. Taking as a starting point the three areas of knowledge (Technology, Context, and Mental Health), we re-examine each area to identify relevant dimensions, discuss the relationships between them and finally draw a series of considerations. The resulting considerations can help therapists and developers to devise, design, and generate custom mobile applications in a way that increases the motivation and engagement of patients and, therefore, the effectiveness of psychological treatments.

Correlates of frequent gambling and gambling-related chasing behaviors in individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders

Background and aims Published research on the relationship between disordered gambling and schizophrenia is limited. However, existing data suggest that individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder may have a high prevalence of co-occurring disordered gambling. As such, effective strategies for screening and assessing gambling-related problems in individuals with psychosis are needed. The goal of this study was to explore the correlates of increased gambling frequency and chasing behavior, a hallmark feature of gambling disorder, in a sample of individuals with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorders. Methods Data from 336 participants who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were used to examine differences between non-gamblers, infrequent gamblers, frequent gamblers who do not report chasing, and frequent gamblers who report chasing on a variety of associated features and symptoms of schizophrenia and disordered gambling. Results and discussion The results of the study support the conclusion that chasing behavior in individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder lies on a continuum of severity, with more frequent gamblers endorsing greater chasing. Chasing was also associated with indicators of lower functioning across co-occurring disorders, such as greater problems with alcohol and drugs, greater gambling involvement, and a family history of gambling problems. The findings from the study suggest the utility of screening for chasing behavior as a brief and efficient strategy for assessing risk of gambling problems in individuals with psychotic-spectrum disorders.

Prediction of Relapse After Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Gambling Disorder in Individuals With Chronic Schizophrenia: A Survival Analysis

Gambling disorder (GD) in individuals with chronic schizophrenia is relevant because there are higher rates of GD in schizophrenic populations (10%) than in the nonschizophrenic population (1%-5%). In addition, these patients have more severe alcohol use disorder (i.e., meeting at least 6 of the DSM-5 11 criteria for diagnosis of this disorder), higher depression scores, a poor adherence to treatment, and more frequent use of outpatient mental health care. One of the main problems in GD is therapeutic failure (defined as three or more lapse episodes during treatment) or relapse (three or more lapse episodes in the follow-up period). Predicting a relapse of GD in individuals with chronic schizophrenia can be useful in targeting the patients for aftercare services. The main aim of this study was to estimate the time to a GD relapse (survival rate) and to evaluate some of the qualitative and quantitative variables related to a GD relapse by a survival analysis. The sample consisted of 35 patients with chronic schizophrenia and GD who were treated with pharmacological and cognitive-behavioral therapy. The therapeutic failure rate in the treatment period was 43%, and it was associated with the number of episodes of schizophrenia, the age of gambling onset, and the age of the patients. The relapse rate in the follow-up period was 32%, and it was associated with the patients' age, educational level, and weekly allowance. The implications of this study for future research are discussed.

Interventions for comorbid problem gambling and psychiatric disorders: Advancing a developing field of research

Despite significant psychiatric comorbidity in problem gambling, there is little evidence on which to base treatment recommendations for subpopulations of problem gamblers with comorbid psychiatric disorders. This mini-review draws on two separate systematic searches to identify possible interventions for comorbid problem gambling and psychiatric disorders, highlight the gaps in the currently available evidence base, and stimulate further research in this area. In this mini-review, only 21 studies that have conducted post-hoc analyses to explore the influence of psychiatric disorders or problem gambling subtypes on gambling outcomes from different types of treatment were identified. The findings of these studies suggest that most gambling treatments are not contraindicated by psychiatric disorders. Moreover, only 6 randomized studies comparing the efficacy of interventions targeted towards specific comorbidity subgroups with a control/comparison group were identified. The results of these studies provide preliminary evidence for modified dialectical behavior therapy for comorbid substance use, the addition of naltrexone to cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for comorbid alcohol use problems, and the addition of N-acetylcysteine to tobacco support programs and imaginal desensitisation/motivational interviewing for comorbid nicotine dependence. They also suggest that lithium for comorbid bipolar disorder, escitalopram for comorbid anxiety disorders, and the addition of CBT to standard drug treatment for comorbid schizophrenia may be effective. Future research evaluating interventions sequenced according to disorder severity or the functional relationship between the gambling behavior and comorbid symptomatology, identifying psychiatric disorders as moderators of the efficacy of problem gambling interventions, and evaluating interventions matched to client comorbidity could advance this immature field of study.

A qualitative analysis of the effects of a comorbid disordered gambling diagnosis with schizophrenia

Little research has examined the association between disordered gambling and psychosis. In addition, clinicians treating schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorders rarely screen for or treat comorbid gambling problems due to diagnostic overshadowing. Thus, the effects of disordered gambling on symptoms of schizophrenia and vice versa remain largely unexplored and unidentified in research and clinical practice. The goal of the present study was to explore qualitatively the reciprocal associations between schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder and disordered gambling through content and functional analyses from the perspective of the affected individual. Eight participants who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and disordered gambling participated in a qualitative interview examining key antecedents associated with their gambling, as well as perceived functional consequences of gambling. Content analysis revealed unique patterns of responses specific to individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder that are not typically observed in individuals with disordered gambling alone. Specifically, gambling as filling a need for activity, and gambling as a means of connecting with society/world were the notable reasons for engaging in problematic gambling. Furthermore, some, but not all participants described a direct exacerbation of their psychosis by gambling and a greater involvement in gambling due to their symptoms of schizophrenia.

Gambling in Spain: update on experience, research and policy

AIMS

To describe the current situation of gambling in Spain, sketching its history and discussing the regulations and legislation currently in force within the framework of the European Union (EU), and to review the epidemiology of gambling in Spain, the self-help groups and professional treatments available, and their potential effectiveness.

METHODS

A systematic computerized search was performed in three databases (EMBASE, PubMed and PsychINFO, including articles and chapters) and the reference lists from previous reviews to obtain some of the most relevant studies published up to now on the topic of pathologic gambling in Spain.

RESULTS

Similar to other EU countries, Spain has a high prevalence of pathologic gambling, focused on specific culturally bounded types of gambling. Expenditure in online gaming has risen significantly in the last few years, prompting the Spanish government to draft new legislation to regulate gaming.

CONCLUSIONS

The gaming industry is expected to be one of the fastest growing sectors in Spain in the coming years owing to the rise of new technologies and the development of online gaming.

Assessing Randomised Clinical Trials of Cognitive and Exposure Therapies for Gambling Disorders: A Systematic Review

Aims:Problem or pathological gambling is associated with significant disruption to the individual, family and community with a range of adverse outcomes, including legal, financial and mental health impairment. It occurs more frequently in younger populations, and comorbid conditions are common. Cognitive–behaviour therapy (CBT) is the most empirically established class of treatments for problematic gambling. This article reports on a systematic review and evaluation of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) concerning two core techniques of CBT: cognitive and behavioural (exposure-based) therapies.Methods:PsycINFO, MEDLINE and the Cochrane library were searched from database inception to December 2012. The CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) for non-pharmacological treatments was used to evaluate each study.Results:The initial search identified 104 references. After two screening phases, seven RCTs evaluating either cognitive (n= 3), exposure (n= 3) or both (n= 1) interventions remained. The studies were published between 1983 and 2003 and conducted across Australia, Canada, and Spain. On average, approximately 31% of CONSORT items were rated as ‘absent’ for each study and more than 52% rated as ‘present with some limitations’. For all studies, 70.83% of items rated as ‘absent’ were in the methods section.Conclusions:The findings from this review of randomised clinical trials involving cognitive and exposure-based treatments for gambling disorders show that the current evidence base is limited. Trials with low risk of bias are needed to be reported before recommendations are given on their effectiveness and clinicians can appraise their potential utility with confidence.

Psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling

BACKGROUND

Various psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling have been evaluated in randomised trials. A synthesis of best-quality evidence is required.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to synthesise evidence from randomised trials of psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling (cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT), motivational interviewing therapy, integrative therapy, other psychological therapy), in order to indicate the efficacy of therapies and durability of therapy effects, relative to control conditions.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a search of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR), which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) (all years), EMBASE (1974 -), MEDLINE (1950 -) and PsycINFO (1967 -). We also carried out complementary searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS and CENTRAL for studies published between January 1980 and October 2011. We examined the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov and also conducted manual searches of selected journals and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were clinical trials using random allocation to groups, considering pathological or problem gamblers, and evaluating a psychological therapy for pathological or problem gambling. Control conditions included 'no treatment' controls, referral to Gamblers Anonymous and non-specific treatment component controls.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We systematically extracted data on the characteristics and results of studies. Primary outcomes were measures of gambling symptom severity, financial loss from gambling and frequency of gambling. Secondary outcomes were occurrence of pathological gambling diagnoses and depression and anxiety symptoms. Treatment effects were defined by comparisons between therapy and control conditions at post-treatment assessments (conducted from 0 to 3 months following completion of treatment) and follow-up assessments (conducted from 9 to 12 months following completion of treatment), respectively, using the standardised mean difference (SMD) or risk ratio (RR). We synthesised results through random-effects meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies (n = 1245) met the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies compared CBT with control and comparisons at 0 to 3 months post-treatment showed beneficial effects of therapy that ranged from medium (when defined by financial loss from gambling: SMD -0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.71 to -0.33, n = 505) to very large (for gambling symptom severity: SMD -1.82; 95% CI -2.61 to -1.02, n = 402). Only one study (n = 147) compared groups at 9 to 12 months follow-up and produced smaller effects that were not significant. Four studies of motivational interviewing therapy were identified and mainly considered samples demonstrating less severe gambling (relative to studies of pathological gamblers). Data suggested reduced financial loss from gambling following motivational interviewing therapy at 0 to 3 months post-treatment (SMD -0.41; 95% CI -0.75 to -0.07, n = 244), although comparisons on other outcomes were not significant. The effect approached zero when defined by gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.03; 95% CI -0.55 to 0.50, n = 163). Studies compared groups at 9 to 12 months follow-up and found a significant effect of motivational interviewing therapy in terms of frequency of gambling (SMD -0.53; 95% CI -1.04 to -0.02, n = 62), with comparisons on other outcomes that were not significant. Two studies of integrative therapies also considered samples demonstrating overall low gambling severity, and found no significant effects of therapy at 0 to 3 months post-treatment. Comparisons at 9 to 12 months follow-up suggested a medium effect from therapy in terms of gambling symptom severity, with no significant differences for other outcomes. One study (n = 18) considered another psychological therapy (i.e.Twelve-Step Facilitated Group Therapy) and suggested beneficial effects in terms of most outcomes at 0 to 3 months post-treatment. The evidence supporting these various classes of therapy ranged from very low to low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review supports the efficacy of CBT in reducing gambling behaviour and other symptoms of pathological and problem gambling immediately following therapy. However, the durability of therapeutic gain is unknown. There is preliminary evidence for some benefits from motivational interviewing therapy in terms of reduced gambling behaviour, although not necessarily other symptoms of pathological and problem gambling. However, the findings are based on few studies and additional research is needed to inform conclusions. There is also evidence suggestive of some possible benefit from integrative therapies, and other psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling. However, there are too few studies and evidence is insufficient to evaluate these therapies. The majority of studies in this review varied in risk of bias, and much of the evidence comes from studies with multiple limitations. The current data may thus reflect overestimates of treatment efficacy.