Search results

Abstract

Aims
Sleep problems are common among individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and is often associated with a heightened relapse risk. The present study examines the relationship between sleep and alcohol use among individuals with current AUD during a 6-day quit attempt as part of a medication study.


Methods
The current study is a secondary analysis of a medication trial for individuals with AUD. Individuals with AUD (N = 53, 26 females) were randomized to active medication or matched placebo. Randomized participants completed a week-long medication titration (Days 1–7). Following the titration period, participants attended an in-person visit (Day 8) to begin a 6-day quit attempt. During the quit attempt, participants completed daily diary assessments to report on previous day alcohol consumption, sleep quality, and alcohol craving. In the present study, medication condition was controlled for in all models.


Results
Baseline global sleep quality was not a significant predictor of drinks per drinking day (P = 0.72) or percent days abstinent (P = 0.16) during the 6-day practice quit attempt. Daily diary analyses found that greater sleep quality was associated with higher next-day drinks per drinking day (b = 0.198, P = 0.029). In contrast, participants reported worse sleep quality following nights of greater alcohol intake, albeit at a trend-level (b = −0.12, P = 0.053).


Conclusions
These results suggest that better sleep quality was a risk factor for drinking during the 6-day quit period, such that better sleep may be associated with increased craving for alcohol and alcohol use the next day. These findings are limited to the early abstinence period and should be considered in studies exploring longer periods of abstinence.

Abstract

Aims
This study aimed to compare reward, relief, and habit treatment-seeking individuals on recent drinking, alcohol use disorder (AUD) phenomenology, and mood. The second aim of the study was to evaluate the predictive validity of reward, relief, and habit profiles.


Method
Treatment-seeking individuals with an AUD (n = 169) were recruited to participate in a medication trial for AUD (NCT03594435). Reward, relief, and habit drinking groups were assessed using the UCLA Reward Relief Habit Drinking Scale. Group differences at baseline were evaluated using univariate analyses of variance. A subset of participants were enrolled in a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled medication trial (n = 102), and provided longitudinal drinking and phenomenology data. The predictive validity of group membership was assessed using linear regression analyses.


Results
At baseline, individuals who drink primarily for relief had higher craving and negative mood than those who drink for reward and habit. Prospectively, membership in the relief drinking group predicted greater alcohol use, greater heavy drinking, and fewer days abstinent compared to those in the reward drinking group. Membership in the relief drinking group also predicted greater alcohol craving, more alcohol-related consequences, and more anxiety symptoms over 12 weeks compared to those in the reward drinking group.


Conclusions
This study provides support for reward and relief drinking motive profiles in treatment-seeking individuals with an AUD. Membership in the relief drinking motive group was predictive of poorer drinking outcomes and more negative symptomology over 12 weeks, indicating that individuals who drink for relief may be a particularly vulnerable sub-population of individuals with AUD.

AbstractAimsAlcohol use disorder is highly heterogeneous. One approach to understanding this heterogeneity is the identification of drinker subtypes. A candidate classification consists of reward and relief subtypes. The current study examines a novel self-report measure of reward, relief, and habit drinking for its clinical correlates and subjective response (SR) to alcohol administration.MethodsNon-treatment-seeking heavy drinkers (n = 140) completed the brief reward, relief, habit drinking scale (RRHDS). A subset of this sample (n = 67) completed an intravenous alcohol administration. Individuals were classified into drinker subtypes. A crowdsourced sample of heavy drinkers (n = 187) completed the RRHDS and a validated reward relief drinking scale to compare drinking classification results.ResultsThe majority of the sample was classified as reward drinkers (n = 100), with fewer classified as relief (n = 19) and habit (n = 21) drinkers. Relief and habit drinkers reported greater tonic alcohol craving compared to reward drinkers. Reward drinkers endorsed drinking for enhancement, while relief drinkers endorsed drinking for coping. Regarding the alcohol administration, the groups differed in negative mood, such that relief/habit drinkers reported a decrease in negative mood during alcohol administration, compared to reward drinkers. The follow-up crowdsourcing study found a 62% agreement in reward drinker classification between measures and replicated the tonic craving findings.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that reward drinkers are dissociable from relief/habit drinkers using the brief measure. However, relief and habit drinkers were not successfully differentiated, which suggests that these constructs may overlap phenotypically. Notably, measures of dysphoric mood were better at detecting group differences than measures capturing alcohol's rewarding effects.

Abstract

Aims
Natural processes of change have been documented in treatment-seekers who begin to reduce their drinking in anticipation of treatment. The study examined whether non-treatment-seeking problem drinkers would engage in drinking reduction in anticipation of participating in a research study.


Methods
Non-treatment-seeking problem drinkers (n = 935) were culled from five behavioral pharmacology studies. Participants reported on their alcohol use during the past 30 days using the Timeline Followback. Cluster analysis identified distinct groups/clusters based on drinking patterns over the 30-day pre-visit period. The identified clusters were compared on demographic and clinical measures.


Results
Three distinct clusters were identified (a) heavy-decreasing drinking group (n = 255, 27.27%); (b) a moderate-stable drinking group (n = 353, 37.75%) and (c) low-stable drinking group (n = 327, 34.97%). The three clusters differed significantly on a host of measures including pre-visit drinking (age at first drink, drinking days, drinks per week, drinks per drinking day), alcohol use severity, alcohol craving, readiness for change, depression and anxiety levels. These differences were alcohol dose-dependent such that the heavier drinking group reported the highest levels on all constructs, followed by the moderate group, and the low drinking group last.


Conclusions
Baseline drinking patterns of non-treatment-seekers were generally stable and pre-visit reductions were only observed among the heavy drinking group. This generally stable pattern stands in contrast to previous reports for treatment-seeking samples. Nevertheless, the heavier drinking group, which is most similar to treatment-seekers, displayed pre-study drinking reduction. Overall, naturalistic processes of change may pose less of a threat to randomization and testing in this population.