Neighborhood Disadvantage and Birth Weight: The Role of Perceived Danger and Substance Abuse

In this analysis we connect structural neighborhood conditions to birth outcomes through their intermediate effects on mothers’ perceptions of neighborhood danger and their tendency to abuse substances during pregnancy. We hypothesize that neighborhood poverty and racial/ethnic concentration combine to produce environments that mothers perceive as unsafe, thereby increasing the likelihood of negative coping behaviors (substance abuse). We expect these behaviors, in turn, to produce lower birth weights. Using data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, a survey of a cohort mothers and children born between 1998 and 2000 in large cities in the United States, we find little evidence to suggest that neighborhood circumstances have strong, direct effects on birth weight. Living in a neighborhood with more foreigners had a positive effect on birth weight. To the extent that neighborhood conditions influence birth weight, the effect mainly occurs through an association with perceived neighborhood danger and subsequent negative coping behaviors. Poverty and racial/ethnic concentration increase a mother’s sense that her neighborhood is unsafe. The perception of an unsafe neighborhood, in turn, associates with a greater likelihood of smoking cigarettes and using illegal drugs, and these behaviors have strong and significant effects in reducing birth weight. However, demographic characteristics, rather than perceived danger or substance abuse, mediate the influence of neighborhood characteristics on birth weight.

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.

Rapid and simple LC-MS/MS-Screening of 64 novel psychoactive substances using dried blood spots

The range of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) including phenethylamines, cathinones, piperazines, tryptamines, etc. is continuously growing. Therefore, fast and reliable screening methods for these compounds are essential and needed. The use of dried blood spots (DBS) for a fast straightforward approach helps to simplify and shorten sample preparation significantly. DBS were produced from 10 µl of whole blood and extracted offline with 500 µl methanol followed by evaporation and reconstitution in mobile phase. Reversed-phase chromatographic separation and mass spectrometric detection (RP-LC-MS/MS) was achieved within a run time of 10 min. The screening method was validated by evaluating the following parameters: limit of detection (LOD), matrix effect, selectivity and specificity, extraction efficiency, and short-term and long-term stability. Furthermore, the method was applied to authentic samples and results were compared with those obtained with a validated whole blood method used for Routine analysis of NPS. LOD was between 1 and 10 ng/ml. No interference from Matrix compounds was observed. The method was proven to be specific and selective for the analytes, although with limitations for 3-FMC/flephedrone and MDDMA/MDEA. Mean extraction efficiency was 84.6 %. All substances were stable in DBS for at least a week when cooled. Cooling was essential for the stability of cathinones. Prepared samples were stable for at least 3 days. Comparison to the validated whole blood method yielded similar results. DBS were shown to be useful in developing a rapid screening method for NPS with simplified sample preparation. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

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.

The International ADHD in Substance Use Disorders Prevalence (IASP) study: background, methods and study population

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is an increasingly recognized comorbid condition in subjects with substance use disorders (SUDs). This paper describes the methods and study population of the International ADHD in Substance Use Disorders Prevalence (IASP) study. Objectives of the IASP are to determine the prevalence of ADHD in adult treatment seeking patients with SUD in different countries and SUD populations, determine the reliability and validity of the Adult ADHD Self-report Scale V 1.1 (ASRS) as ADHD screening instrument in SUD populations, investigate the comorbidity profile of SUD patients with and without ADHD, compare risk factors and protective factors in SUD patients with and without a comorbid diagnosis of ADHD, and increase our knowledge about the relationship between ADHD and the onset and course of SUD. In this cross-sectional, multi-centre two stage study, subjects were screened for ADHD with the ASRS, diagnosed with the Conner's Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV (CAADID), and evaluated for SUD, major depression, bipolar disorder, anti social personality disorder and borderline personality disorder. Three thousand five hundred and fifty-eight subjects from 10 countries were included. Of these 40.9% screened positive for ADHD. This is the largest international study on this population evaluating ADHD and comorbid disorders.

The influence of staff and organizational characteristics on social environment in substance abuse treatment facilities

The staff of 20 substance abuse treatment facilities were administered the Ward Atmosphere Scale, an instrument which measures treatment environment. Ten facilities were freestanding and ten were hospital based, and were drawn from a large, not-for-profit national chain using a random selection process. Controlling for several staff and facility attributes, it was found that no substantial effects on treatment environment existed due to facility type, freestanding or hospital-based. Implications of the study exist in selection of facility type for purchasers of substance abuse treatment and for the hiring and training of clinical staff for treatment facilities. Study findings also suggest that inadequate or insufficient measures exist to examine the construct 'treatment environment'. ^

The role of substance abuse treatment in preventing human immunodeficiency virus transmission among injecting drug users

This exploratory study assesses the utility of substance abuse treatment as a strategy for preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission among injecting drug users (IDUs). Data analyzed in this study were collected in San Antonio, TX, 1989 through 1995 using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Qualitative data included ethnographic interviews with 234 active IDUs; quantitative data included baseline risk assessments and HIV screening plus interviews follow-up interviews administered approximately six months later to 823 IDUs participating in a Federally-funded AIDS community outreach demonstration project.^ Findings that have particularly important implications for substance abuse treatment as an HIV prevention strategy for IDUs are listed below. (1) IDUs who wanted treatment were significantly more likely to be daily heroin users. (2) IDUs who want treatment were significantly more likely to have been to treatment previously. (3) IDUs who wanted treatment at baseline reported significantly higher levels of HIV risk than IDUs who did not want treatment. (4) IDUs who went to treatment between their baseline and follow-up interviews reported significantly higher levels of HIV risk at baseline than IDUs who did not go to treatment. (5) IDUs who went to treatment between their baseline and follow-up interviews reported significantly greater decreases in injection-related HIV risk behaviors. (6) IDUs who went to treatment reported significantly greater decreases in sexual HIV risk behaviors than IDUs who did not go to treatment.^ This study also noted a number of factors that may limit the effectiveness of substance abuse treatment in reducing HIV risk among IDUs. Findings suggest that the impact of methadone maintenance on HIV risk behaviors among opioid dependent IDUs may be limited by the negative manner in which it is perceived by IDUs as well as other elements of society. One consequence of the negative perception of methadone maintenance held by many elements of society may be an unwillingness to provide public funding for an adequate number of methadone maintenance slots. Thus many IDUs who would be willing to enter methadone maintenance are unable to enter it and many IDUs who do enter it are forced to drop out prematurely. ^

Patterns of alcohol and illicit substance use in the United States and Mexico. Substantive and methodologic issues in the cross-national analysis of alcohol and drug use data

This research examines prevalence of alcohol and illicit substance use in the United States and Mexico and associated socio-demographic characteristics. The sources of data for this study are public domain data from the U.S. National Household Survey of Drug Abuse, 1988 (n = 8814), and the Mexican National Survey of Addictions, 1988 (n = 12,579). In addition, this study discusses methodologic issues in cross-cultural and cross-national comparison of behavioral and epidemiologic data from population-based samples. The extent to which patterns of substance abuse vary among subgroups of the U.S. and Mexican populations is assessed, as well as the comparability and equivalence of measures of alcohol and drug use in these national samples.^ The prevalence of alcohol use was somewhat similar in the two countries for all three measures of use: lifetime, past year and past year heavy use, (85.0%, 68.1%, 39.6% and 72.6%, 47.7% and 45.8% for the U.S. and Mexico respectively). The use of illegal substances varied widely between countries, with U.S. respondents reporting significantly higher levels of use than their Mexican counterparts. For example, reported use of any illicit substance in lifetime and past year was 34.2%, 11.6 for the U.S., and 3.3% and 0.6% for Mexico. Despite these differences in prevalence, two demographic characteristics, gender and age, were important correlates of use in both countries. Men in both countries were more likely to report use of alcohol and illicit substances than women. Generally speaking, a greater proportion of respondents in both countries 18 years of age or older reported use of alcohol for all three measures than younger respondents; and a greater proportion of respondents between the ages of 18 and 34 years reported use of illicit substances during lifetime and past year than any other age group.^ Additional substantive research investigating population-based samples and at-risk subgroups is needed to understand the underlying mechanisms of these associations. Further development of cross-culturally meaningful survey methods is warranted to validate comparisons of substance use across countries and societies. ^

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.

Towards a new model of care: integrating mental health, substance use, and somatic care

Although research and clinical interventions for patients with dual disorders have been described since as early as the 1980s, the day-to-day treatment of these patients remains problematic and challenging in many countries. Throughout this book, many approaches and possible pathways have been outlined. Based upon these experiences, some key points can be extracted in order to guide to future developments. (1) New diagnostic approaches are warranted when dealing with patients who have multiple problems, given the limitations of the current categorical systems. (2) Greater emphasis should be placed on secondary prevention and early intervention for children and adolescents at an increased risk of later-life dual disorders. (3) Mental, addiction, and somatic care systems can be integrated, adopting a patient-focused approach to care delivery. (4) Recovery should be taken into consideration when defining treatment intervention and outcome goals. (5) It is important to reduce societal risk factors, such as poverty and early childhood adversity. (6) More resources are needed to provide adequate mental health care in the various countries. The development of European guidance initiatives would provide benefits in many of these areas, making it possible to ensure a more harmonized standard of care for patients with dual disorders.