Validity and reliability of the German version of the short understanding of substance abuse scale

This paper presents the German version of the Short Understanding of Substance Abuse Scale (SUSS) [Humphreys et al.: Psychol Addict Behav 1996;10:38-44], the Verstandnis von Storungen durch Substanzkonsum (VSS), and evaluates its psychometric properties. The VSS assesses clinicians' beliefs about the nature and treatment of substance use disorders, particularly their endorsement of psychosocial and disease orientation. The VSS was administered to 160 treatment staff members at 12 substance use disorder treatment programs in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. Because the confirmatory factor analysis of the VSS did not completely replicate the factorial structure of the SUSS, an exploratory factor analysis was undertaken. This analysis identified two factors: the Psychosocial model factor and a slightly different Disease model factor. The VSS Disease and Psychosocial subscales showed convergent and discriminant validity, as well as sufficient reliability.

Treatment for outpatients with comorbid schizophrenia and substance use disorders: a review

Aims: This review provides evidence of which interventions need to be part of effective outpatient integrated treatment for patients with comorbid schizophrenia and substance use disorders. Methods: A total of 14 randomized controlled trials were included. Effect sizes are provided to assess the magnitude of the treatments’ efficacy. Results: Despite the studies’ heterogeneity, we can conclude that certain programs (e.g., Behavioral Treatment for Substance Abuse in Schizophrenia) and specific interventions (e.g., motivational interviewing, family interventions) seem to be effective. Moreover, programs integrating multiple interventions are more likely to be positively related to better outcomes than single interventions. Finally, the lack of difference between effect sizes of assertive community treatment compared to case management suggests that a lower caseload is not necessary for positive treatment outcomes. Conclusion: Integrated treatment seems advantageous, although effect sizes are mostly modest. More homogeneous and qualitative sound studies are needed.

From nature versus nurture, via nature and nurture, to gene x environment interaction in mental disorders

It is now generally accepted that complex mental disorders are the results of interplay between genetic and environmental factors. This holds out the prospect that by studying G x E interplay we can explain individual variation in vulnerability and resilience to environmental hazards in the development of mental disorders. Furthermore studying G x E findings may give insights in neurobiological mechanisms of psychiatric disorder and so improve individualized treatment and potentially prevention. In this paper, we provide an overview of the state of field with regard to G x E in mental disorders. Strategies for G x E research are introduced. G x E findings from selected mental disorders with onset in childhood or adolescence are reviewed [such as depressive disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), obesity, schizophrenia and substance use disorders]. Early seminal studies provided evidence for G x E in the pathogenesis of depression implicating 5-HTTLPR, and conduct problems implicating MAOA. Since then G x E effects have been seen across a wide range of mental disorders (e.g., ADHD, anxiety, schizophrenia, substance abuse disorder) implicating a wide range of measured genes and measured environments (e.g., pre-, peri- and postnatal influences of both a physical and a social nature). To date few of these G x E effects have been sufficiently replicated. Indeed meta-analyses have raised doubts about the robustness of even the most well studied findings. In future we need larger, sufficiently powered studies that include a detailed and sophisticated characterization of both phenotype and the environmental risk.

Depressive symptoms as a predictor of alcohol relapse after residential treatment programs for alcohol use disorder

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and depressive disorders often co-occur. Findings on the effects of major depressive disorder (MDD) or depressive symptoms on posttreatment alcohol relapse are controversial. The study's aim is to examine the association of MDD and depressive symptoms with treatment outcomes after residential AUD programs. In a naturalistic-prospective, multisite study with 12 residential AUD treatment programs in the German-speaking part of Switzerland, 64 patients with AUD with MDD, 283 patients with AUD with clinically significant depressive symptoms at admission, and 81 patients with AUD with such problems at discharge were compared with patients with AUD only on alcohol use, depressive symptoms, and treatment service utilization. MDD was provisionally identified at admission and definitively defined at discharge. Whereas patients with MDD did not differ from patients with AUD only at 1-year follow-up, patients with AUD with clinically significant depressive symptoms had significantly shorter time-to-first-drink and a lower abstinence rate. These patients also had elevated AUD indices and treatment service utilization for psychiatric disorders. Our results suggest that clinically significant depressive symptoms are a substantial risk factor for relapse so that it may be important to treat them during and after residential AUD treatment programs.

Unhealthy alcohol use, HIV infection and risk of liver fibrosis in drug users with hepatitis C

Aim To analyze alcohol use, clinical data and laboratory parameters that may affect FIB-4, an index for measuring liver fibrosis, in HCV-monoinfected and HCV/HIV-coinfected drug users. Patients and Methods Patients admitted for substance abuse treatment between 1994 and 2006 were studied. Socio-demographic data, alcohol and drug use characteristics and clinical variables were obtained through hospital records. Blood samples for biochemistry, liver function tests, CD4 cell count, and serology of HIV and HCV infection were collected at admission. Multivariate linear regression was used to analyze the predictors of FIB-4 increase. Results A total of 472 (83% M, 17% F) patients were eligible. The median age at admission was 31 years (Interquartile range (IQR) 27–35 years), and the median duration of drug use was 10 years (IQR 5.5–15 years). Unhealthy drinking (>50 grams/day) was reported in 32% of the patients. The FIB-4 scores were significantly greater in the HCV/HIV-coinfected patients (1.14, IQR 0.76–1.87) than in the HCV-monoinfected patients (0.75, IQR 0.56–1.11) (p<0.001). In the multivariate analysis, unhealthy drinking (p = 0.034), lower total cholesterol (p = 0.042), serum albumin (p<0.001), higher GGT (p<0.001) and a longer duration of addiction (p = 0.005) were independently associated with higher FIB-4 scores in the HCV-monoinfected drug users. The effect of unhealthy drinking on FIB-4 scores disappeared in the HCV/HIV-coinfected patients, whereas lower serum albumin (p<0.001), a lower CD4 cell count (p = 0.006), higher total bilirubin (p<0.001) and a longer drug addiction duration (p<0.001) were significantly associated with higher FIB-4 values. Conclusions Unhealthy alcohol use in the HCV-monoinfected patients and HIV-related immunodeficiency in the HCV/HIV-coinfected patients are important risk factors associated with liver fibrosis in the respective populations.

Solid organ transplantation: are there predictors for posttransplant noncompliance? A literature overview

BACKGROUND: Many studies confirm that noncompliance or poor compliance is one of the great problems in health care as it results in waste of resources and funds. METHODS: This overview includes literature on heart, liver, and kidney transplants with emphasis on heart transplantation in adult and pediatric transplant patients and addresses the following variables as potential predictors of postoperative compliance problems: demographic variables (age, marital status, gender) psychological variables (anxiety, denial) psychiatric disorders (major depression, anxiety, and personality disorders), poor social support, pretransplant noncompliance, obesity, substance abuse, and health-related variables (distance from transplant center, indication for transplantation, required pretransplant assist device). Relevant studies on these topics that were conducted up to 1999 are included and discussed in this overview. The most important results are presented in tables. RESULTS: Unfortunately, there has not been any systematic and comprehensive review of the literature on predictors of noncompliance in organ transplant patients so far. With organ transplantation noncompliance impairs both life quality and life span as it is a major risk factor for graft rejection episodes and is responsible for up to 25% of deaths after the initial recovery period. Therefore, it might be assumed that well-informed transplant patients are a highly motivated group whose compliance is just as high. This is not the case. However, even when graft loss means loss of life as in heart or liver transplantation, noncompliance occurs. To best select potential organ recipients, it would be ideal if patients who are very likely to show noncompliant behavior could be identified already before being transplanted. CONCLUSION: The literature overview shows the necessity of preoperative psychosocial screening regarding predictors for posttransplant noncompliance.

Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices for Treatment of Alcohol and Drug Disorders: The Role of the State Authority

The current climate of increasing performance expectations and diminishing resources, along with innovations in evidence-based practices (EBPs), creates new dilemmas for substance abuse treatment providers, policymakers, funders, and the service delivery system. This paper describes findings from baseline interviews with representatives from 49 state substance abuse authorities (SSAs). Interviews assessed efforts aimed at facilitating EBP adoption in each state and the District of Columbia. Results suggested that SSAs are concentrating more effort on EBP implementation strategies such as education, training, and infrastructure development, and less effort on financial mechanisms, regulations, and accreditation. The majority of SSAs use EBPs as a criterion in their contracts with providers, and just over half reported that EBP use is tied to state funding. To date, Oregon remains the only state with legislation that mandates treatment expenditures for EBPs; North Carolina follows suit with legislation that requires EBP promotion within current resources.

Implementation of MET/CBT 5 for adolescents

Implementation of effective substance abuse treatment programs in community settings is a high priority. The selection of a proven cost-effective model is a first step; however, difficulty arises when the model is imported into a community setting. The Center on Substance Abuse Treatment selected a brief substance abuse treatment program for adolescents, the MET/CBT-5 program, determined to be the most cost-effective protocol in the Cannabis Youth Treatment trial, for implementation in two cohorts of Effective Adolescent Treatment grantees. A qualitative investigation of the protocol implementation with nine sites in the second cohort chronicled adaptations made by grantees and prospects for sustainability. The study found that agencies introduced adaptations without seeming to be aware of potential effects on validity. In most sites, sessions were lengthened or added to accommodate individual client needs, address barriers to client participation, and provide consistency with current norms of treatment. Implications for fidelity of future implementation projects are addressed.

Safety and tolerability of slow-release oral morphine versus methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence

Opioid substitution treatment (OST) for opioid dependence may be limited by adverse events (AEs). Increasing the range of therapeutic options optimizes outcomes and facilitates patient management. An international, multi-center, two-phase study investigated the efficacy and safety of slow-release oral morphine (SROM) versus methadone in patients receiving methadone therapy for opioid dependence. In phase 1 (two way cross-over, 11 weeks each period) patients were randomized to SROM or methadone oral solution. In phase 2 (25 weeks), patients continued treatment with SROM (group A) or switched from methadone to SROM (group B). In total, 211 out of 276 completed phase 1 and 198 entered phase 2 (n = 95 group A, n = 103 group B). Treatment with both SROM and methadone was well tolerated. However, the mean QTc-interval associated with methadone was significantly longer than that under SROM. Higher treatment satisfaction, fewer cravings for heroin, and lower mental stress were reported with SROM. This study adds a significant further weight of evidence that SROM is an effective and well tolerated long-term maintenance treatment for opioid dependence with a beneficial risk profile compared to methadone regarding cardiac effects and supports its clinical utility.

Estimating the Prevalence of Illicit Drug Use Among Students Using the Crosswise Model

The aim of our study is to compare the prevalence of illicit drug use estimated through a technique referred to as the “crosswise model” (CM) with the results from conventional direct questioning (DQ). Method: About 1,500 students from Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2009–2010 were first interviewed by DQ and, then three months later, by the CM. Result: The CM yielded significantly higher estimates than DQ for lifetime prevalence of use of any illicit drug (CM = 20.2%,DQ = 3.0%, p < .001) and for lifetime prevalence of use of opium or its residue (CM = 13.6%, DQ = 1.0%, p < .001). Also, for use of any illicit drug in the last month and use of opium or its residue in the last month, the CM yielded higher point estimates than DQ, although these differences were not significant (any drug: CM = 1.5%, DQ = 0.2%, p = .66; opium: CM = 3.8%, DQ = 0.0%, p = .21). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the CM is a fruitful data collection method for sensitive topics such as substance abuse.

Patients with substance use and personality disorders: a comparison of patient characteristics, treatment process, and outcomes in Swiss and U.S. substance use disorder programs

Cross-cultural comparisons may increase our understanding of different models of substance use treatment and help identify consistent associations between patients' characteristics, treatment conditions, and outcomes.

Variability in the prevalence of adult ADHD in treatment seeking substance use disorder patients: results from an international multi-center study exploring DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria

Background: Available studies vary in their estimated prevalence of attention deficit/hyperactivity disor-der (ADHD) in substance use disorder (SUD) patients, ranging from 2 to 83%. A better understanding ofthe possible reasons for this variability and the effect of the change from DSM-IV to DSM-5 is needed.Methods: A two stage international multi-center, cross-sectional study in 10 countries, among patientsform inpatient and outpatient addiction treatment centers for alcohol and/or drug use disorder patients. Atotal of 3558 treatment seeking SUD patients were screened for adult ADHD. A subsample of 1276 subjects,both screen positive and screen negative patients, participated in a structured diagnostic interview. 5AdultsResults: Prevalence of DSM-IV and DSM-5 adult ADHD varied for DSM-IV from 5.4% (CI 95%: 2.4–8.3) forHungary to 31.3% (CI 95%:25.2–37.5) for Norway and for DSM-5 from 7.6% (CI 95%: 4.1–11.1) for Hungary to32.6% (CI 95%: 26.4–38.8) for Norway. Using the same assessment procedures in all countries and centersresulted in substantial reduction of the variability in the prevalence of adult ADHD reported in previousstudies among SUD patients (2–83% → 5.4–31.3%). The remaining variability was partly explained byprimary substance of abuse and by country (Nordic versus non-Nordic countries). Prevalence estimatesfor DSM-5 were slightly higher than for DSM-IV.Conclusions: Given the generally high prevalence of adult ADHD, all treatment seeking SUD patientsshould be screened and, after a confirmed diagnosis, treated for ADHD since the literature indicates poorprognoses of SUD in treatment seeking SUD patients with ADHD.

Psychiatric comorbidity in treatment-seeking substance use disorder patients with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: results of the IASP study

Aims To determine comorbidity patterns in treatment-seeking substance use disorder (SUD) patients with and without adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with an emphasis on subgroups defined by ADHD subtype, taking into account differences related to gender and primary substance of abuse. Design Data were obtained from the cross-sectional International ADHD in Substance use disorder Prevalence (IASP) study. Setting Forty-seven centres of SUD treatment in 10 countries. Participants A total of 1205 treatment-seeking SUD patients. Measurements Structured diagnostic assessments were used for all disorders: presence of ADHD was assessed with the Conners' Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV (CAADID), the presence of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), major depression (MD) and (hypo)manic episode (HME) was assessed with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview-Plus (MINI Plus), and the presence of borderline personality disorder (BPD) was assessed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II (SCID II). Findings The prevalence of DSM-IV adult ADHD in this SUD sample was 13.9%. ASPD [odds ratio (OR) = 2.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.8–4.2], BPD (OR = 7.0, 95% CI = 3.1–15.6 for alcohol; OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.8–6.4 for drugs), MD in patients with alcohol as primary substance of abuse (OR = 4.1, 95% CI = 2.1–7.8) and HME (OR = 4.3, 95% CI = 2.1–8.7) were all more prevalent in ADHD+ compared with ADHD− patients (P < 0.001). These results also indicate increased levels of BPD and MD for alcohol compared with drugs as primary substance of abuse. Comorbidity patterns differed between ADHD subtypes with increased MD in the inattentive and combined subtype (P < 0.01), increased HME and ASPD in the hyperactive/impulsive (P < 0.01) and combined subtypes (P < 0.001) and increased BPD in all subtypes (P < 0.001) compared with SUD patients without ADHD. Seventy-five per cent of ADHD patients had at least one additional comorbid disorder compared with 37% of SUD patients without ADHD. Conclusions Treatment-seeking substance use disorder patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are at a very high risk for additional externalizing disorders.

Validity of the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) as a screener for adult ADHD in treatment seeking substance use disorder patients

Background: To detect attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in treatment seeking substance use disorders (SUD) patients, a valid screening instrument is needed. Objectives: To test the performance of the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale V 1.1(ASRS) for adult ADHD in an international sample of treatment seeking SUD patients for DSM-IV-TR; for the proposed DSM-5 criteria; in different subpopulations, at intake and 1–2 weeks after intake; using different scoring algorithms; and different externalizing disorders as external criterion (including adult ADHD, bipolar disorder, antisocial and borderline personality disorder). Methods: In 1138 treatment seeking SUD subjects, ASRS performance was determined using diagnoses based on Conner's Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV (CAADID) as gold standard. Results: The prevalence of adult ADHD was 13.0% (95% CI: 11.0–15.0%). The overall positive predictive value (PPV) of the ASRS was 0.26 (95% CI: 0.22–0.30), the negative predictive value (NPV) was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96–0.98). The sensitivity (0.84, 95% CI: 0.76–0.88) and specificity (0.66, 95% CI: 0.63–0.69) measured at admission were similar to the sensitivity (0.88, 95% CI: 0.83–0.93) and specificity (0.67, 95% CI: 0.64–0.70) measured 2 weeks after admission. Sensitivity was similar, but specificity was significantly better in patients with alcohol compared to (illicit) drugs as the primary substance of abuse (0.76 vs. 0.56). ASRS was not a good screener for externalizing disorders other than ADHD. Conclusions: The ASRS is a sensitive screener for identifying possible ADHD cases with very few missed cases among those screening negative in this population.

Early developmental, temperamental and educational problems in ‘substance use disorder’ patients with and without ADHD. Does ADHD make a difference?

Introduction: The prevalence of ADHD among patients with substance use disorder (SUD) is substantial. This study addressed the following research questions: Are early developmental, temperamental and educational problems overrepresented among SUD patients with ADHD compared to SUD patients without ADHD? Do this comorbid group receive early help for their ADHD, and are there signs of self-medicating with illicit central stimulants? Method: An international, multi-centre cross-sectional study was carried out involving seven European countries, with 1205 patients in treatment for SUD. The mean age was 40 years and 27% of the sample was female. All par- ticipants were interviewed with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus and the Conners' Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV. Results: SUD patients with ADHD (n = 196; 16.3% of the total sample) had a significantly slower infant develop- ment than SUD patients without ADHD (n = 1,009; 83.4%), had greater problems controlling their temperament, and had lower educational attainment. Only 24 (12%) of the current ADHD positive patients had been diagnosed and treated during childhood and/or adolescence. Finally, SUD patients with ADHD were more likely to have central stimulants or cannabis as their primary substance of abuse, whereas alcohol use was more likely to be the primary substance of abuse in SUD patients without ADHD. Conclusion: The results emphasize the importance of early identification of ADHD and targeted interventions in the health and school system, as well as in the addiction field.