4.4 Article

Female smokers have the highest alcohol craving in a residential alcoholism treatment cohort

期刊

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
卷 150, 期 -, 页码 179-182

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.02.016

关键词

Alcoholism; Craving; Tobacco use disorder; Residential treatment; Recurrence; Alcohol abstinence

资金

  1. Mayo Foundation, Mayo Clinic Samuel C. Johnson Genomics of Addiction Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Cigarette smoking among female and male alcoholics has not been extensively studied as a factor related to intensity of alcohol craving during residential treatment and corresponding sobriety length. Methods: This retrospective cohort study assessed self-reported sobriety outcomes in patients with alcohol dependence at 3-month intervals over 12 months after completion of a 30-day residential treatment program. Demographic and clinical variables were collected including smoking status, alcohol craving utilizing the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS), and alcohol relapse. Statistical analyses included Chi-square, ANOVA, Tukey's test, Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox proportional hazards models as appropriate. Results: Of the 761 alcohol-dependent study subjects, 355 (47%) were current smokers. Alcohol craving intensity was higher in smoking females compared to nonsmoking females (p = 0.0096), smoking males (p < 0.0001), and nonsmoking males (p < 0.0001). Smoking status-by-sex interaction was not associated with post-treatment relapse. After controlling for other variables, higher PACS scores at admission were associated with higher probability of relapse (p = 0.0003). Conclusions: In this study, female alcoholic smokers experienced the highest level of alcohol craving in an alcohol treatment setting. Interestingly, this did not translate into higher rates of post-treatment relapse. Further research is warranted to explore the neurobiological basis for sex differences in this highly prevalent comorbidity. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据