Expectancies regarding the interaction between smoking and substance use in alcohol-dependent smokers in early recovery

Motivation to Quit Drinking in Individuals Coinfected with HIV and Hepatitis C

Alcohol consumption is common among individuals coinfected with HIV and hepatitis C (HCV) despite the uniquely harmful effects in this population. Limited research has examined factors that could influence drinking reduction or cessation among HIV/HCV coinfected persons; this study investigates motivation to quit. Participants were 110 alcohol-consuming HIV/HCV coinfected patients recruited from medical clinics. Participants self-reported 90-day drinking frequency and intensity; alcohol-related problems; reasons to quit drinking; reasons to drink; and motivation to quit drinking. Participants consumed alcohol on 54.1 (± 26.9) of the past 90 days. In a multivariate model that controlled for demographic variables, motivation to quit drinking was directly associated with alcohol-related problems (β_y·x = 0.35, p = .007) and reasons to quit drinking (β_y·x = 0.23, p = .021), and inversely associated with drinking for enhancement (β_y·x = - 0.36, p = .004). This study identified several factors associated with motivation to quit drinking in a sample of alcohol-consuming HIV/HCV patients.

Characteristics and clinical treatment of tobacco smokers enrolled in a VA substance use disorders clinic

Individuals with a substance use disorder (SUD) diagnosis are more than twice as likely to smoke cigarettes as the general population. Emerging research has suggested that treating a substance use disorder simultaneously with tobacco use leads to a higher rate of treatment success for both substances. Despite this, substance use treatment protocols tend not to focus on tobacco use; in fact, traditional substance use treatments often discourage patients from attempting to quit smoking. One rationale is that patients may not be motivated to quit smoking. In the current study, data from veterans enrolled in outpatient treatment for a SUD were examined to assess for general characteristics of smokers as compared to non-smokers as well as to examine motivation to quit smoking. Baseline (i.e., pre-treatment) data from 277 Veterans were used. Charts of smokers in the SUD clinic (SUDC) were reviewed to assess how smoking is handled by SUDC providers, and if smokers attempt cessation. Of 277, 163 (59%) SUDC patients reported that they currently smoke cigarettes (M=16.3 cigarettes per day, SD=11.1). Smokers in the clinic reported greater general impairment than nonsmokers on the Short Index of Problems, F(1248)=8.9, p=0.003, as well as greater specific impairment: Physical Problems, F(1258)=13.5, p=0.000; Interpersonal Problems, F(1262)=5.6, p=0.019; Intrapersonal Problems, F(1260)=6.5, p=0.011, and Social Responsibility, F(1262)=14.7, p=0.000. Smokers in the sample were marginally more anxious than their non-smoking counterparts as measured by the GAD-7, F(1254)=4.6, p=0.053, though they were not significantly more depressed (p=0.19). On a 1-10 scale, smokers reported moderate levels of importance (M=5.4, SD=3.1), readiness (M=5.6, SD=3.2), and confidence (M=5.0, SD=3.0) regarding quitting smoking. Review of smokers' medical records reveal that while SUDC providers assess tobacco use at intake (90%) and offer treatment (86.5%), a substantially small portion of smokers attempt cessation (41.1%) while enrolled in SUDC. Moreover, no patients were enrolled in smoking-specific behavioral interventions while in SUDC, though 78 patients did obtain nicotine replacement or another smoking cessation medication (41% were prescribed by a SUDC provider). Contrary to the belief that treatment-seeking substance users are not motivated to quit smoking, these preliminary analyses demonstrate that Veterans were at least contemplating quitting smoking while they were enrolled in substance use treatment. Further, there is evidence that cigarette smokers have greater impairment caused by substance use, suggesting that this subgroup is of particular high need. Specific treatment recommendations are discussed, including how behavioral health providers in SUD clinics may be better able to capitalize on patients' moderate motivation to quit at intake.

Interventions for tobacco use cessation in people in treatment for or recovery from substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

Smoking rates in people with alcohol and other drug dependencies are two to four times those of the general population. Concurrent treatment of tobacco dependence has been limited due to concern that these interventions are not successful in this population or that recovery from other addictions could be compromised if tobacco cessation was combined with other drug dependency treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether interventions for tobacco cessation are associated with tobacco abstinence for people in concurrent treatment for or in recovery from alcohol and other drug dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases, with the most recent search completed in August 2016. A grey literature search of conference abstracts from the Society on Nicotine Research and Treatment and the ProQuest database of digital dissertations yielded one additional study, which was excluded.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions among people in concurrent treatment for alcohol or other drug dependence or in outpatient recovery programmes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from tobacco use at the longest period of follow-up, and the secondary outcome was abstinence from alcohol or other drugs, or both. We reported the strictest definition of abstinence. We summarised effects as risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Two clustered studies did not provide intraclass correlation coefficients, and were excluded from the sensitivity analysis. We used the I² statistic to assess heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five randomised controlled trials, one ongoing, involving 5796 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Included studies assessed the efficacy of tobacco cessation interventions, including counselling, and pharmacotherapy consisting of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or non-NRT, or the two combined, in both inpatient and outpatient settings for participants in treatment and in recovery. Most studies did not report information to assess the risk of allocation, selection, and attrition bias, and were classified as unclear.Analyses considered the nature of the intervention, whether participants were in treatment or recovery and the type of dependency. Of the 34 studies included in the meta-analysis, 11 assessed counselling, 11 assessed pharmacotherapy, and 12 assessed counselling in combination with pharmacotherapy, compared to usual care or no intervention. Tobacco cessation interventions were significantly associated with tobacco abstinence for two types of interventions. Pharmacotherapy appeared to increase tobacco abstinence (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.12, 11 studies, 1808 participants, low quality evidence), as did combined counselling and pharmacotherapy (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.18, 12 studies, 2229 participants, low quality evidence) at the period of longest follow-up, which ranged from six weeks to 18 months. There was moderate evidence of heterogeneity (I² = 56% with pharmacotherapy and 43% with counselling plus pharmacotherapy). Counselling interventions did not significantly increase tobacco abstinence (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.95).Interventions were significantly associated with tobacco abstinence for both people in treatment (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.50) and people in recovery (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.67), and for people with alcohol dependence (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.81) and people with other drug dependencies (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.40).Offering tobacco cessation therapy to people in treatment or recovery for other drug dependence was not associated with a difference in abstinence rates from alcohol and other drugs (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03, 11 studies, 2231 participants, moderate evidence of heterogeneity (I² = 66%)).Data on adverse effect of the interventions were limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies included in this review suggest that providing tobacco cessation interventions targeted to smokers in treatment and recovery for alcohol and other drug dependencies increases tobacco abstinence. There was no evidence that providing interventions for tobacco cessation affected abstinence from alcohol and other drugs. The association between tobacco cessation interventions and tobacco abstinence was consistent for both pharmacotherapy and combined counselling and pharmacotherapy, for participants both in treatment and in recovery, and for people with alcohol dependency or other drug dependency. The evidence for the interventions was low quality due primarily to incomplete reporting of the risks of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the nature of treatment. Certain results were sensitive to the length of follow-up or the type of pharmacotherapy, suggesting that further research is warranted regarding whether tobacco cessation interventions are associated with tobacco abstinence for people in recovery, and the outcomes associated with NRT versus non-NRT or combined pharmacotherapy. Overall, the results suggest that tobacco cessation interventions incorporating pharmacotherapy should be incorporated into clinical practice to reduce tobacco addiction among people in treatment for or recovery from alcohol and other drug dependence.

Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Both behavioural support (including brief advice and counselling) and pharmacotherapies (including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline and bupropion) are effective in helping people to stop smoking. Combining both treatment approaches is recommended where possible, but the size of the treatment effect with different combinations and in different settings and populations is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of combining behavioural support and medication to aid smoking cessation, compared to a minimal intervention or usual care, and to identify whether there are different effects depending on characteristics of the treatment setting, intervention, population treated, or take-up of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in July 2015 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of NRT, bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating combinations of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support for smoking cessation, compared to a control receiving usual care or brief advice or less intensive behavioural support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Search results were prescreened by one author and inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials was agreed by two authors. Data was extracted by one author and checked by another.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-three studies with a total of more than 25,000 participants met the inclusion criteria. A large proportion of studies recruited people in healthcare settings or with specific health needs. Most studies provided NRT. Behavioural support was typically provided by specialists in cessation counselling, who offered between four and eight contact sessions. The planned maximum duration of contact was typically more than 30 minutes but less than 300 minutes. Overall, studies were at low or unclear risk of bias, and findings were not sensitive to the exclusion of any of the six studies rated at high risk of bias in one domain. One large study (the Lung Health Study) contributed heterogeneity due to a substantially larger treatment effect than seen in other studies (RR 3.88, 95% CI 3.35 to 4.50). Since this study used a particularly intensive intervention which included extended availability of nicotine gum, multiple group sessions and long term maintenance and recycling contacts, the results may not be comparable with the interventions used in other studies, and hence it was not pooled in other analyses. Based on the remaining 52 studies (19,488 participants) there was high quality evidence (using GRADE) for a benefit of combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural treatment compared to usual care, brief advice or less intensive behavioural support (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.68 to 1.98) with moderate statistical heterogeneity (I² = 36%).The pooled estimate for 43 trials that recruited participants in healthcare settings (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.18) was higher than for eight trials with community-based recruitment (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.76). Compared to the first version of the review, previous weak evidence of differences in other subgroup analyses has disappeared. We did not detect differences between subgroups defined by motivation to quit, treatment provider, number or duration of support sessions, or take-up of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions that combine pharmacotherapy and behavioural support increase smoking cessation success compared to a minimal intervention or usual care. Updating this review with an additional 12 studies (5,000 participants) did not materially change the effect estimate. Although trials differed in the details of their populations and interventions, we did not detect any factors that modified treatment effects apart from the recruitment setting. We did not find evidence from indirect comparisons that offering more intensive behavioural support was associated with larger treatment effects.

Cannabis use expectancies mediate the relation between depressive symptoms and cannabis use among cannabis-dependent veterans

OBJECTIVES

The current study examined the cross-sectional associations between depressive symptoms and cannabis use, and the mediating role of positive and negative expectancies of cannabis use.

METHODS

Participants (n = 100) were cannabis-dependent veterans recruited as part of a larger self-guided cannabis quit study. Baseline (prequit) data were used. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the General Depression subscale of the Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms (IDAS), and cannabis use expectancies were assessed using the Marijuana Effect Expectancies Questionnaire. Quantity of cannabis use in the past 90 days was assessed with the Timeline Follow-Back.

RESULTS

A parallel multiple mediation path analysis was conducted to simultaneously examine the effects of positive and negative expectancies as mediators of the relation between IDAS-Depression and prequit cannabis use. Results indicated that depressive symptoms were indirectly related to cannabis use through positive, but not negative, expectancies. This effect was unique to IDAS-Dysphoria symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Depressive symptoms, particularly cognitive-affective symptom features, may be important to consider in better understanding positive cannabis effect expectancies among veterans in regard to cannabis use.

Khat chewing among Ethiopian University Students--a growing concern

Background

Khat has amphetamine like effect. Students chew khat to stay alert. It has various negative physical, mental, social and cognitive effects. Poor academic performance has been associated with khat. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and identify factors associated with khat chewing among Ethiopian University students.

Methods

A cross sectional study was conducted on Bahir Dar University Students. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by 3268 students. Proportion was calculated to estimate prevalence of khat chewing. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with khat chewing.

Results

Lifetime prevalence of khat chewing was 24% (95% Confidence Interval: 22.5%, 26.6%). Half of these are current khat users with a prevalence of 12.7% (95% Confidence Interval: 11.5%, 13.9%). Male students Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 3.3 (95% Confidence Interval: 1.8, 6.0), students living in off campus housing AOR = 3.0 (95% Confidence Interval: 1.5, 6.0), students who have khat user friends AOR = 4.2 (95% Confidence Interval: 2.6, 6.9), and students who perceive khat use improves academic performance AOR = 6.6 (95% Confidence Interval: 4.6, 9.5) are more likely to use khat.

Conclusions

Prevalence of current use of khat reported in this study is higher than recent study done on university students in Ethiopia and heavily influenced with peer practice.

Prevalence and correlates of smoking status among veterans affairs primary care patients with probable major depressive disorder

In an attempt to guide planning and optimize outcomes for population-specific smoking cessation efforts, the present study examined smoking prevalence and the demographic, clinical and psychosocial characteristics associated with smoking among a sample of Veterans Affairs primary care patients with probable major depression. Survey data were collected between 2003 and 2004 from 761 patients with probable major depression who attended one of 10 geographically dispersed VA primary care clinics. Current smoking prevalence was 39.8%. Relative to nonsmokers with probable major depression, bivariate comparisons revealed that current smokers had higher depression severity, drank more heavily, and were more likely to have comorbid PTSD. Smokers with probable major depression were also more likely than nonsmokers with probable major depression to have missed a health care appointment and to have missed medication doses in the previous 5months. Smokers were more amenable than non-smokers to depression treatment and diagnosis, and they reported more frequent visits to a mental health specialist and less social support. Alcohol abuse and low levels of social support were significant concurrent predictors of smoking status in controlled multivariable logistic regression. In conclusion, smoking prevalence was high among primary care patients with probable major depression, and these smokers reported a range of psychiatric and psychosocial characteristics with potential to complicate systems-level smoking cessation interventions.

Symptoms of alcohol dependence and smoking initiation and persistence: a longitudinal study among US adults

BACKGROUND

A large number of adults report symptoms of, but do not meet diagnostic criteria for, an alcohol use disorder. Yet, little is known about the relationship between symptoms of alcohol use disorders and the initiation and persistence of smoking. This study prospectively examines the relationship between having 1-2 symptoms of alcohol dependence (without abuse) and smoking initiation and persistence as well as nicotine dependence over a 3-year period among adults in the United States.

METHODS

Data were drawn from Wave 1 (2001-2002) and Wave 2 (2004-2005) of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Relationships between Wave 1 symptoms of alcohol dependence, alcohol abuse, and alcohol dependence and initiation and persistence of cigarette smoking and nicotine dependence at Wave 2 were examined using logistic regression analyses. Analyses were adjusted for demographics, mood and anxiety disorders.

RESULTS

Symptoms of alcohol dependence were associated with smoking initiation at Wave 2. There was no association between symptoms of alcohol dependence and smoking persistence. Symptoms of alcohol dependence predicted incident and persistent nicotine dependence. Findings persisted after adjusting for demographic characteristics and mood/anxiety disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Even 1-2 symptoms of alcohol dependence are associated with increased vulnerability to smoking initiation and onset and persistence of nicotine dependence at a similar strength as alcohol use disorders. Efforts at smoking cessation must address problematic alcohol use, even at the subclinical level, in order to improve efficacy.

Expectancies for smoking cessation among drug-involved smokers: implications for clinical practice

Drug-involved smokers may be less motivated to quit smoking because they expect smoking cessation to occasion adverse outcomes (e.g., exacerbation of drug use). Non-treatment-seeking adult smokers from the community (N=507) reported drug involvement, expectancies for smoking abstinence via the Smoking Abstinence Questionnaire (SAQ), and motivation to quit smoking (desire to quit and abstinence goal). Mediation analyses evaluated the indirect effects of binge drinking, marijuana, cocaine, other stimulant, opiate, and barbiturate/other sedative involvement on motivation to quit smoking through the SAQ Adverse Outcomes scale. Adverse outcomes expectancies accounted for a reduced desire to quit smoking and a lower likelihood of endorsing a goal of complete smoking abstinence among those involved with binge drinking, marijuana, cocaine, other stimulants, opiates, and barbiturates/other sedatives. Drug-involved smokers' greater expectancies for adverse outcomes upon quitting smoking may deter smoking quit attempts. Interventions are encouraged to counteract the notion that smoking cessation jeopardizes sobriety.

Smoking cessation interventions for smokers with current or past depression

BACKGROUND

Individuals with current or past depression are often smokers who are more nicotine dependent, more likely to suffer from negative mood changes after nicotine withdrawal, and more likely to relapse to smoking after quitting than the general population, which contributes to their higher morbidity and mortality from smoking-related illnesses. It remains unclear what interventions can help them to quit smoking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions, with and without specific mood management components, in smokers with current or past depression.

SEARCH METHODS

In April 2013, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, other reviews, and asked experts for information on trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Criteria for including studies in this review were that they had to be randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing smoking cessation interventions in adult smokers with current or past depression. Depression was defined as major depression or depressive symptoms. We included studies where subgroups of participants with depression were identified, either pre-stated or post hoc. The outcome was abstinence from smoking after six months or longer follow-up. We preferred prolonged or continuous abstinence and biochemically validated abstinence where available.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

When possible, we estimated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with the Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed-effect model). We also performed subgroup analyses, by length of follow-up, depression measurement, depression group in study, antidepressant use, published or unpublished data, format of intervention, level of behavioural support, additional pharmacotherapy, type of antidepressant medication, and additional nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-nine RCTs were included of which 33 trials investigated smoking cessation interventions with specific mood management components for depression. In smokers with current depression, meta-analysis showed a significant positive effect for adding psychosocial mood management to a standard smoking cessation intervention when compared with standard smoking cessation intervention alone (11 trials, N = 1844, RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.92). In smokers with past depression we found a similar effect (13 trials, N = 1496, RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.77). Meta-analysis resulted in a positive effect, although not significant, for adding bupropion compared with placebo in smokers with current depression (5 trials, N = 410, RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.27). There were not enough trial data to evaluate the effectiveness of fluoxetine and paroxetine for smokers with current depression. Bupropion (4 trials, N = 404, RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.31 to 3.18) might significantly increase long-term cessation among smokers with past depression when compared with placebo, but the evidence for bupropion is relatively weak due to the small number of studies and the post hoc subgroups for all the studies. There were not enough trial data to evaluate the effectiveness of fluoxetine, nortriptyline, paroxetine, selegiline, and sertraline in smokers with past depression.Twenty-three of the 49 trials investigated smoking cessation interventions without specific components for depression. There was heterogeneity between the trials which compared psychosocial interventions with standard smoking cessation counselling for both smokers with current and past depression. Therefore, we did not estimate a pooled effect. One trial compared nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) versus placebo in smokers with current depression and found a positive, although not significant, effect (N = 196, RR 2.64, 95% CI 0.93 to 7.45). Meta-analysis also found a positive, although not significant, effect for NRT versus placebo in smokers with past depression (3 trials, N = 432, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.60). Three trials compared other pharmacotherapy versus placebo and six trials compared other interventions in smokers with current or past depression. Due to heterogeneity between the interventions of the included trials we did not estimate pooled effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that adding a psychosocial mood management component to a standard smoking cessation intervention increases long-term cessation rates in smokers with both current and past depression when compared with the standard intervention alone. Pooled results from four trials suggest that use of bupropion may increase long-term cessation in smokers with past depression. There was no evidence found for the use of bupropion in smokers with current depression. There was not enough evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of the other antidepressants in smokers with current or past depression. There was also not enough evidence to evaluate the group of trials that investigated interventions without specific mood management components for depression, including NRT and psychosocial interventions.

Validity and reliability of the nicotine and marijuana interaction expectancy (NAMIE) questionnaire

BACKGROUND

The co-occurring use of tobacco and marijuana among young people is a concern, yet little research has examined processes of co-use. Understanding expectancies around use of the two substances will help identify intervention targets. This study examined psychometric properties of the Nicotine and Marijuana Interaction Expectancy (NAMIE) questionnaire based on three modified scales of the Nicotine and Other Substance Interaction Expectancy (NOSIE) questionnaire.

METHOD

An anonymous online survey recruited participants (N=1152) age 18-25 (mean age 20 years, 67% male, 72% Caucasian) who reported use of cigarettes and marijuana in the past 30 days. Analyses examined reliability and validity of the NAMIE.

RESULTS

A confirmatory factor analysis indicated good model fit for a 3-factor model. Scales were marijuana increases tobacco use and urges, tobacco increases marijuana use and urges, and smoking to cope with marijuana urges. Subscales correlated significantly with measures of cigarette smoking (r=.08 to .27, p<.01) and nicotine dependence (r=-.07 to -.20, p<.01), marijuana use (r=.08 to .29, p<.01) and dependence (r=.27 to .42, p<.01), percent of days using both cigarettes and marijuana in the past 30 days (r=.15 to .30, p<.01), thoughts about tobacco and marijuana abstinence (r=-.09 to .44, p<.01), and motivation to quit using marijuana (F=9.43, p<.001). When entered into a regression model, variables of use and thoughts about use remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The NAMIE was well-adapted for use with a marijuana-using community sample of young adult smokers.