ABSTRACT
Introduction: Impaired quality of life (QoL) and premature death in patients with primary non-affective psychotic disorders is related to lifestyle-induced comorbidities. Current municipal health-promoting treatment and care do not embrace the challenges of living with psychotic disorders. Aim: This cross-sectional study aimed to identify the proportion of outpatients diagnosed with primary psychotic disorders who need health-promoting treatment and care, and who receive municipal health-promoting interventions. Methods: Of 206 eligible invited outpatients from three psychiatric services clinics in Southern Denmark, 165 participated. Demographic and health characteristics, and use of alcohol, cannabis, drugs, and cigarettes were identified via a screening tool. Blood test information, body measurements, and medication status were extracted from the outpatients' medical records. The need for health promotion was assessed based on body mass index (BMI), and use of alcohol, cannabis, drugs, and cigarettes. Results: Seventy-three percent of outpatients needed health promotion, of whom 61 % were not offered municipal health-promoting treatment and care. Thirty-six percent had one or more somatic comorbidities, including diabetes mellitus (15 %) and cardiovascular disease (10 %); 41 % smoked a mean (SD) of 19 (10) cigarettes daily. Mean (SD) BMI was 34 (8) kg/m2 for women and 29 (7) kg/m2 for men. Conclusion: The majority of outpatients with non-affective psychotic disorders need health-promoting interventions, but only about 40 % of these patients receive such municipal health-promoting treatment and care. Future studies should clarify the impact of these interventions on the health status, QoL, and life expectancy of these patients.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: Many patients with alcohol use disorders are challenged by cravings leading to repeated relapses. Both cue exposure therapy (CET) and acamprosate target alcohol cravings and are often combined (CET + acamprosate). The main aim of this study was to investigate whether aftercare treatment consisting of CET combined with acamprosate is equivalent to (A) CET as monotherapy, (B) aftercare as usual (AAU) as monotherapy or (C) AAU combined with acamprosate. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either CET with urge-specific coping skills (USCS) as aftercare or AAU. Acamprosate prescription data were extracted from patient case records. Alcohol consumption, cravings, and USCS were assessed at pre-aftercare, post-aftercare, and 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, patients increased their alcohol consumption during and following aftercare treatment, thereby relapsing despite any treatment. However, CET + acamprosate achieved greater abstinence compared to AAU + acamprosate at follow-up (p=.047). CET + acamprosate also reduced number of drinking days (p=.020) and number of days with excessive drinking (p=.020) at post-aftercare, when compared to AAU monotherapy. CET monotherapy increased sensible drinking at post-aftercare compared to AAU monotherapy (p=.045) and AAU + acamprosate (p=.047). Only CET monotherapy showed improvement in cravings, when compared to AAU at follow-up (mean urge level: p=.032; peak urge level: p=.014). CONCLUSION: The study showed that CET both as monotherapy and combined with acamprosate was superior to AAU monotherapy and AAU + acamprosate in reducing alcohol consumption. Only CET + acamprosate was capable of reducing alcohol consumption in the longer term, indicating that anti-craving medication may not impede CET from exerting an effect on alcohol consumption. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02298751 (24/11-2014).
