Search

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.

Abstract Purpose Only about 20% of people suffering from substance use disorders access available treatments due to various obstacles; digital interventions could potentially overcome some of these. Meta-analyses suggest the strongest evidence for interventions targeting alcohol use reduction, followed by cannabis and illicit substances. However, most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) used unguided standalone interventions compared to non-active controls, with limited follow-up periods and disregarded comorbidity. This review examines the literature published over the last three years (2016–2019), with a focus on recent RCTs and whether they addressed some of these gaps. Recent findings Except for digital interventions targeting alcohol use, the number of RCTs in the last three years is limited. Although there is considerable heterogeneity between the studies, most of them applied unguided add-on interventions compared to active control groups, and a limited number investigated guided interventions. In addition, there is a need for longer follow-up periods, active rather than non-active control groups, outcome standardization, and increased focus on comorbidity. Summary Although the number of studies using guided add-on or blended interventions compared to active controls has increased, future studies should consider our identified gaps and suggestions to further strengthen the evidence of digital interventions for reducing the use of alcohol and other substances.

Continuing care is widely believed to be an important component of effective treatment for substance use disorder, particularly for those individuals with greater problem severity. The purpose of this review was to examine the research literature on continuing care for alcohol and drug use disorders, including studies that addressed efficacy, moderators, mechanisms of action, and economic impact. This narrative review first considered findings from prior reviews (published through 2014), followed by a more detailed examination of studies published more recently. The review found that research has generally supported the efficacy of continuing care for both adolescents and adults, but the picture is complex. Reviews find relatively small effects when results from individual studies are combined. However, continuing care of longer duration that includes more active efforts to keep patients engaged may produce more consistently positive results. Moreover, patients at higher risk for relapse may benefit to a greater degree from continuing care. Several newer approaches for the provision of continuing care show promise. These include incentives for abstinence and automated mobile health interventions to augment more conventional counselor-delivered interventions. Primary care can be used to provide medications for opioid and alcohol use disorders over extended periods, although more research is needed to determine the optimal mix of behavioral treatments and other psychosocial services in this setting. Regardless of the intervention selected for use, the status of most patients will change and evolve over time, and interventions need to include provisions to assess patients on a regular basis and to change or adapt treatment when warranted.

BACKGROUND: Youth often experience unique pathways into homelessness, such as family conflict, child abuse and neglect. Most research has focused on adult homeless populations, yet youth have specific needs that require adapted interventions. This review aims to synthesize evidence on interventions for youth and assess their impacts on health, social, and equity outcomes. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and other databases from inception until February 9, 2018 for systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials on youth interventions conducted in high income countries. We screened title and abstract and full text for inclusion, and data extraction were completed in duplicate, following the PRISMA-E (equity) review approach. RESULTS: Our search identified 11,936 records. Four systematic reviews and 18 articles on randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Many studies reported on interventions including individual and family therapies, skill-building, case management, and structural interventions. Cognitive behavioural therapy led to improvements in depression and substance use, and studies of three family-based therapies reported decreases in substance use. Housing first, a structural intervention, led to improvements in housing stability. Many interventions showed inconsistent results compared to services as usual or other interventions, but often led to improvements over time in both the intervention and comparison group. The equity analysis showed that equity variables were inconsistently measured, but there was data to suggest differential outcomes based upon gender and ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a variety of interventions for youth experiencing homelessness. Promising interventions include cognitive behavioural therapy for addressing depression, family-based therapy for substance use outcomes, and housing programs for housing stability. Youth pathways are often unique and thus prevention and treatment may benefit from a tailored and flexible approach.

INTRODUCTION: Research has shown that eating disorder (ED) patients who abuse substances demonstrate worse ED symptomatology and poorer outcomes than those with EDs alone, including increased general medical complications and psychopathology, longer recovery times, poorer functional outcomes and higher relapse rates. This article provides a broad overview of the prevalence, aetiology, assessment and management of co-morbid EDs and substance use disorders (SUDs). REVIEW: The co-occurrence of EDs and SUDs is high. The functional relationship between EDs and SUDs vary within and across ED subtypes, depends on the class of substance, and needs to be carefully assessed for each patient. Substances such as caffeine, tobacco, insulin, thyroid medications, stimulants or over the counter medications (laxatives, diuretics) may be used to aid weight loss and/or provide energy, and alcohol or psychoactive substances could be used for emotional regulation or as part of a pattern of impulsive behaviour. A key message conveyed in the current literature is the importance of screening and assessment for co-morbid SUDs and EDs in patients presenting with either disorder. There is a paucity of treatment studies on the management of co-occurring EDs and SUDs. Overall, the literature indicates that the ED and SUD should be addressed simultaneously using a multi-disciplinary approach. The need for medical stabilization, hospitalization or inpatient treatment needs to be assessed based on general medical and psychiatric considerations. Common features across therapeutic interventions include psycho-education about the aetiological commonalities, risks and sequelae of concurrent ED behaviours and substance abuse, dietary education and planning, cognitive challenging of eating disordered attitudes and beliefs, building of skills and coping mechanisms, addressing obstacles to improvement and the prevention of relapse. Emphasis should be placed on building a collaborative therapeutic relationship and avoiding power struggles. Cognitive behavioural therapy has been frequently used in the treatment of co-morbid EDs and SUDs, however there are no randomized controlled trials. More recently evidence has been found for the efficacy of dialectical behavioural therapy in reducing both ED and substance use behaviours. CONCLUSION: Future research would benefit from a meta-analysis of the current research in order to better understand the relationships between these two commonly co-occurring disorders.

Substance use disorders (SUD) are highly prevalent in bipolar disorder (BD) and significantly affect clinical outcomes. Incidence and management of illicit drug use differ from alcohol use disorders, nicotine use of behavioral addictions. It is not yet clear why people with bipolar disorder are at higher risk of addictive disorders, but recent data suggest common neurobiological and genetic underpinnings and epigenetic alterations. In the absence of specific diagnostic instruments, the clinical interview is conducive for the diagnosis. Treating SUD in bipolar disorder requires a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach. Most treatment trials focus on single drugs, such as cannabis alone or in combination with alcohol, cocaine, or amphetamines. Synopsis of data provides limited evidence that lithium and valproate are effective for the treatment of mood symptoms in cannabis users and may reduce substance use. Furthermore, the neuroprotective agent citicoline may reduce cocaine consumption in BD subjects. However, many of the available studies had an open-label design and were of modest to small sample size. The very few available psychotherapeutic trials indicate no significant differences in outcomes between BD with or without SUD. Although SUD is one of the most important comorbidities in BD with a significant influence on clinical outcome, there is still a lack both of basic research and clinical trials, allowing for evidence-based and specific best practices.

In the last decade, Internet usage has grown tremendously on a global scale. The increasing popularity and frequency of Internet use has led to an increasing number of reports highlighting the potential negative consequences of overuse. Over the last decade, research into Internet addiction has proliferated. This paper reviews the existing 68 epidemiological studies of Internet addiction that (i) contain quantitative empirical data, (ii) have been published after 2000, (iii) include an analysis relating to Internet addiction, (iv) include a minimum of 1000 participants, and (v) provide a full-text article published in English using the database Web of Science. Assessment tools and conceptualisations, prevalence, and associated factors in adolescents and adults are scrutinised. The results reveal the following. First, no gold standard of Internet addiction classification exists as 21 different assessment instruments have been identified. They adopt official criteria for substance use disorders or pathological gambling, no or few criteria relevant for an addiction diagnosis, time spent online, or resulting problems. Second, reported prevalence rates differ as a consequence of different assessment tools and cut-offs, ranging from 0.8% in Italy to 26.7% in Hong Kong. Third, Internet addiction is associated with a number of sociodemographic, Internet use, and psychosocial factors, as well as comorbid symptoms and disorder in adolescents and adults. The results indicate that a number of core symptoms (i.e., compulsive use, negative outcomes and salience) appear relevant for diagnosis, which assimilates Internet addiction and other addictive disorders and also differentiates them, implying a conceptualisation as syndrome with similar etiology and components, but different expressions of addictions. Limitations include the exclusion of studies with smaller sample sizes and studies focusing on specific online behaviours. Conclusively, there is a need for nosological precision so that ultimately those in need can be helped by translating the scientific evidence established in the context of Internet addiction into actual clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Executive cognitive functions (ECF) have been linked to skills such as planning, organizing, problem solving, decision-making, initiating and self-regulating behavior, working memory, and motivation; critical activities needed to monitor and change substance use behavior. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to investigate how ECF may impact important variables associated with changing substance use behavior. METHODS: This study is a critical review of the extant literature about how ECF may influence substance abuse treatment outcomes and behavior change. RESULTS: A review of the literature found evidence that poorer ECF likely hinders substance use behavior change and is often associated with behavior labeled as denial. However, the relationship between ECF and substance abuse appears to be highly complex. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional methods of substance abuse assessment, interpretation of behavior, and intervention may need to be reconsidered in light of new research about executive cognitive dysfunction. Implications for future research are discussed.

In order to assess the impacts of the NPM we first define NPM and then set out what we mean by impacts. Subsequently we report our analysis of our database of nearly 520 relevant studies (the database can be accessed through the COCOPS website at www.cocops.eu). Our main findings are, first, that only a minority of studies deal with outputs, and a very small percentage with outcomes. Most studies of NPM confine themselves to ‘internal’ changes in the activities and processes of public organizations. Subsequently we focus on the minority of studies that do report on outputs and outcomes. Whilst the largest proportion of these do register performance improvements, very substantial percentages report no change or even an actual worsening of performance. This high degree of variation appears to be connected with a number of contextual influences, so in the later sections of the paper we analyse the different types of contextual factors that seem to be important. Finally, we offer informed speculation on why NPM reforms have been so widespread when their evidence base appears so fragile.