Substance use among the mentally ill: a comparison of Italian and American samples

Improved Rehabilitation Outcomes for Persons With and Without Problematic Substance Use After 2 Years With Assertive Community Treatment-A Prospective Study of Patients With Severe Mental Illness in 12 Norwegian ACT Teams

Background: Persons with severe mental illness often face difficulties in accessing and receiving adequate services enabling them to live independently. Many have co-occurring substance use problems that increase the risk of adverse outcomes. Community-based service models have been implemented around the world, including assertive community treatment (ACT), but the knowledge of rehabilitation outcomes in different subgroups is limited. We aimed to explore rehabilitation outcomes among patients suffering severe mental illness with and without substance use problems who had received ACT services for at least 2 years. Additionally, we compared differences in changes between the two groups. Methods: A total of 142 patients who received services for 2 years from the first 12 Norwegian ACT teams were included. Eighty-four (59%) had problematic substance use, while 58 (41%) did not. Data regarding housing, activity, symptoms, functioning, and subjective quality of life were collected upon enrollment into ACT and at 2 years of follow-up. Clinician-rated scales and self-report questionnaires were used. Changes within the two groups and differences in change between the groups were assessed using generalized linear mixed models. Results: Both groups were more likely to have good housing, higher level of functioning, and less anxiety and depressive symptoms after 2 years. The odds of good housing among participants with problematic substance use increased only after adjusting for age and gender. Participants with problematic substance use had less severe symptoms, particularly negative and manic symptoms, while participants without problematic substance use reported improved satisfaction with life in general. Neither group experienced a change in having a meaningful daily activity, positive symptoms, practical and social functioning, or subjective quality of life. The reduction of manic symptoms in the substance use group was the only difference between the groups. Conclusion: After 2 years, patients with and without problematic substance use experienced improvements in several important domains. Furthermore, the improvements were similar in both groups for most outcomes. This may suggest that ACT has a place in the continued effort toward integrated and comprehensive community services empowering patients with severe mental illness to achieve and sustain an independent life, including marginalized groups with severe substance use.

Risperidone versus other antipsychotics for people with severe mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Up to 75% of people with serious mental illness (SMI) such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder have co-occurring substance use disorders (dual diagnosis). Dual diagnosis can have an adverse effect on treatment and prognosis of SMI.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of risperidone compared to treatment with other antipsychotics (first-generation and other second-generation antipsychotics) used in people with serious mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse.

SEARCH METHODS

On 6 January 2016 and 9 October 2017, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (including trial registers).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised trials of risperidone versus any other antipsychotic in people with SMI and substance abuse (dual diagnosis). We included trials meeting our inclusion criteria and reporting useable data. We excluded trials that either did not meet our inclusion criteria or met our inclusion criteria but did not report any useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and selected studies. For included studies, we independently extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes we calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence intervals. We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the quality of evidence, creating a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight randomised trials containing a total of 1073 participants with SMI and co-occurring substance misuse. Seven of these contributed useable data to the review. There was heterogeneity in trial design and measurement. Risperidone was compared to clozapine, olanzapine, perphenazine, quetiapine and ziprasidone. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents. Few trials examined participants with a dual diagnosis from the outset and most trials only contained separate analyses of subgroups with a dual diagnosis or were secondary data analyses of subgroups of people with a dual diagnosis from existing larger trials.For risperidone versus clozapine we found no clear differences between these two antipsychotics in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), n = 36, mean difference (MD) 0.90, 95% CI -2.21 to 4.01, very low quality evidence), or reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 14, risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.35, very low quality evidence), improvement in subjective well-being (1 RCT, n = 36, MD -6.00, 95% CI -14.82 to 2.82, very low quality evidence), numbers discontinuing medication (1 RCT, n = 36, RR 4.05, 95% CI 0.21 to 78.76, very low quality evidence), extrapyramidal side-effects (2 RCTs, n = 50, RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.30 to 24.08; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCTs, n = 45, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.51; I² = 34%, very low quality evidence). Clozapine was associated with lower levels of craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 28, MD 7.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 11.63, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus olanzapine we found no clear differences in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 RCT, n = 37, MD -1.50, 95% CI -3.82 to 0.82, very low quality evidence), reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 0.40, 95% CI -4.72 to 5.52, very low quality evidence), craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 5.00, 95% CI -4.86 to 14.86, very low quality evidence), parkinsonism (1 RCT, n = 16, MD -0.08, 95% CI -1.21 to 1.05, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCT, n = 77, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.35; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus perphenazine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 281, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.20, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus quetiapine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 294, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.07, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus ziprasidone, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 240, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10, low-quality evidence).For many comparisons, important outcomes were missing; and no data were reported in any study for metabolic disturbances, global impression of illness severity, quality of life or mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is not sufficient good-quality evidence available to determine the effects of risperidone compared with other antipsychotics in people with a dual diagnosis. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents, leading to limited applicability to settings where access to second-generation agents is limited, such as in low- and middle-income countries. Moreover, heterogeneity in trial design and measurement of outcomes precluded the use of many trials in our analyses. Future trials in this area need to be sufficiently powered but also need to conform to consistent methods in study population selection, use of measurement scales, definition of outcomes, and measures to counter risk of bias. Investigators should adhere to CONSORT guidelines in the reporting of results.

Hospitalisation of severely mentally ill patients with and without problematic substance use before and during Assertive Community Treatment: an observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Co-occurring substance use increases the risk of hospitalisation in people with severe mental illness, whereas Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) generally reduces hospitalisation in patients with severe mental illness and high inpatient service use. Because the superiority of ACT over standard services amongst patients with problematic substance use is uncertain, the present study examined inpatient service use amongst patients with and without problematic substance use in the 2 years before and the 2 years after they enrolled into ACT teams.

METHODS

This naturalistic observational study included 142 patients of 12 different ACT teams throughout Norway. The teams assessed the patients upon enrolment into ACT using clinician-rated and self-reported questionnaires. We obtained hospitalisation data from the Norwegian Patient Register for the 2 years before and the 2 years after enrolment into ACT. We used linear mixed models to assess changes in hospitalisation and to explore associations between problematic substance use and changes in hospitalisation, controlling for socio-demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 84 (59%) participants had problematic substance use upon enrolment into the ACT teams. In the 2 years after ACT enrolment both participants with and without problematic substance use experienced a reduction in total inpatient days. Those with problematic substance use also had fewer involuntary inpatient days. Exploratory analyses suggested that symptom severity and functioning level interacted with problematic substance use to influence change in total inpatient days.

CONCLUSION

These findings may suggest that ACT teams successfully support people with complex mental health problems in the community, including those with problematic substance use, and thereby contribute to a reduction in inpatient service use.

Substance use disorders in hospitalized psychiatric patients: the experience of one psychiatric emergency service in Turin

In the present study we sought: 1) to estimate the frequency of substance use disorders (SUD), and 2) to investigate whether there is a mere association between diagnosis and SUD in a large cohort of patients with severe psychiatric disorders representative of the usual setting and modality of care of a psychiatric emergency service in a geographically well-defined catchment area in Italy, independent of sociodemographic features, anamnestic data and clinical status. The study was conducted between January 2007 and December 2008. The following rating scales were performed: the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), the Global Assessment of Functioning scale (GAF) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Factors found to be associated (p<0.05) with SUD[+] in the univariate analyses were subjected to multilevel logistic regression model with a backward stepwise procedure. Among 848 inpatients of our sample 29.1% had a SUD codiagnosis. Eleven factors accounted for 30.6% of the variability in SUD[+]: [a] a Personality Disorder diagnosis, [b] a Depressive Disorder diagnosis, [c] male gender, [d] previous outpatient contacts, [e] single marital status, [f] no previous psychiatric treatments, [g] younger age, [h] lower scores for BPRS Anxiety-depression and [i] BPRS Thought Disturbance, [l] higher scores for BPRS Activation and [m] BPRS Hostile-suspiciousness. The findings are important in identifying (1) the complexity of the clinical presentation of SUD in a inpatients sample, (2) the need for collaboration among health care workers, and (3) the need to develop and apply treatment programs that are targeted at particular risk groups.

Substance use in severe mental illness: self-medication and vulnerability factors

The aim of this article is to examine the onset and clinical correlates of substance use in patients with psychotic disorders. One hundred and eight inpatients and outpatients with DSM-IV psychotic disorders were evaluated with the SCI-SUBS, an instrument designed to explore the spectrum of substance use and its clinical correlates. Comparisons were made between subjects with (n=47) and without (n=61) a DSM-IV diagnosis of substance use disorder (SUD). In patients with an early onset of psychosis (<17 years), the onset of SUD was subsequent. Patients with SUD had higher substance sensitivity, higher sensation-seeking traits and were more likely to self-medicate than patients without SUD. The reasons for self-medication endorsed by patients with SUD included relieving depression, achieving or maintaining euphoria, improving self-confidence and social abilities. Our results, based on a cross-sectional study, suggest that early onset of psychosis, substance sensitivity and sensation-seeking traits represent vulnerability factors for SUD. The relationships between SUD and psychosis should be examined systematically and clarified in longitudinal studies.

Schizophrenia and the environment: speculative interventions

OBJECTIVE

Starting from research on environmental factors that influence schizophrenia, the author speculates on innovations that could reduce the occurrence of the illness, improve its course and enhance the quality of life of sufferers and their relatives.

RESULTS

Ranging from education about obstetric risks to a stigma-reducing campaign, the suggestions could be of interest, not only to clinicians, but also to advocates, policy-makers and communications specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

Several of the suggestions, which would be innovative in the United States, are already established features of Italian mental health care. These features include social enterprises, family support payments and a disability pension system without severe disincentives to work.