Understanding the concurrence of environmental characteristics in Latino youth: A person-centered approach.

The current study aimed to identify profiles of youth presenting with a unique combination of environmental characteristics and understand the differential relationship between profile membership, anxiety, and depression symptoms. Data were drawn from 158 Latino youth between the ages of 11 and 13. Youth provided information on community violence exposure, acculturative stress, familial and peer support, and parental supervision. Main analyses included Latent Profile Analysis and Multivariate Analysis of Variance. Support for a four-profile model was found. Profiles are distinguished by mean levels of community violence exposure, acculturative stress, familial and peer support, and parental supervision. Profile membership was significantly associated with anxiety and depression, separately. Those belonging to the profile with the highest levels of environmental risk reported the highest levels of anxiety and depression. Findings contribute to a personalized understanding of risk and protective experiences in the environment for Latino youth.

Perceptions of Safety of Daily Cannabis vs Tobacco Smoking and Secondhand Smoke Exposure, 2017-2021.

Importance: While rates of cigarette use are declining, more US adults are using cannabis. Perceptions of safety are important drivers of substance use and public policy; however, little is known about the comparative views of US adults on tobacco and cannabis safety. Objective: To compare public perceptions of safety of cannabis vs tobacco smoke and evaluate how perceptions may be changing over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal survey study was conducted using a web-based survey administered in 2017, 2020, and 2021. US adults participating in Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a nationally representative, population-based survey panel, were included. Data were analyzed from March 2021 through June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Two questions directly compared the perception of safety of cannabis vs tobacco in terms of daily smoking and secondhand smoke exposure. Additional questions assessed perceptions of safety of secondhand tobacco smoke for adults, children, and pregnant women, with an analogous set of questions for secondhand cannabis smoke. Results: A total of 5035 participants (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [16.2] years; 2551 males [50.7%]) completed all 3 surveys and provided responses for tobacco and cannabis risk questions. More than one-third of participants felt that daily smoking of cannabis was safer than tobacco, and their views increasingly favored safety of cannabis vs tobacco over time (1742 participants [36.7%] in 2017 vs 2107 participants [44.3%] in 2021; P < .001). The pattern was similar for secondhand cannabis smoke, with 1668 participants (35.1%) responding that cannabis was safer than tobacco in 2017 vs 1908 participants (40.2%) in 2021 (P < .001). Participants who were younger (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for ages 18-29 years vs ≥60 years, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1-1.8]; P = .01) or not married (aOR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0-1.4]; P = .01) were more likely to move toward safer views of cannabis use over time, while those who were retired (aOR vs working, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.7-0.9]; P = .01) were less likely to move toward a safer view of cannabis. Participants were also more likely to rate secondhand smoke exposure to cannabis vs tobacco as completely or somewhat safe in adults (629 participants [12.6%] vs. 119 participants [2.4%]; P < .001), children (238 participants [4.8%] vs. 90 participants [1.8%]; P < .001), and pregnant women (264 participants [5.3%] vs. 69 participants [1.4%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that US adults increasingly perceived daily smoking and secondhand exposure to cannabis smoke as safer than tobacco smoke from 2017 to 2021. Given that these views do not reflect the existing science on cannabis and tobacco smoke, the findings may have important implications for public health and policy as the legalization and use of cannabis increase.

Emotion regulation and combat severity differentiates PTSD diagnostic status among veterans.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined whether posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnostic groups in veterans were differentiated by combat severity and specific avoidance and approach-related emotion regulation (ER) strategies. METHOD: In a cohort study, 725 participants (Mage = 58.39, SD = 11.27, 94.5% male, 58.2% White) recruited from VHA facilities completed the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), Combat Exposure Scale (CES), and Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ). Participants were categorized into three PTSD groups: Current, Remitted, and Never. RESULTS: Multinomial logistic regressions adjusting for age, sex, and race, showed combat severity significantly differentiated all groups from each other (ps < .001). Specifically, combat severity was significantly associated with increased odds of Current PTSD versus Remitted (OR: 1.02, 95% CI [1.01, 1.05]) and Never PTSD (OR: 1.14, [1.12, 1.17]) and odds of Remitted compared with Never PTSD (OR: 1.11, [1.09, 1.14]). Suppression, but not reappraisal, was significantly associated with increased odds of Current PTSD compared with Remitted (OR: 1.15, [1.06, 1.24]) and Never PTSD (OR: 1.14, [1.06, 1.22]; ps < .001). Lower reappraisal was only significantly associated with the likelihood of Remitted PTSD compared with Never PTSD (OR: 0.93, [0.88, 0.99], p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing levels of combat severity differentiated veterans with current, remitted, and no history of PTSD, suggesting screening for severity of combat may be helpful. Greater habitual suppression distinguished current versus non-current PTSD status, whereas only less reappraisal distinguished non-current groups from each other. Lower suppression may be an important treatment target for veterans with moderate and high combat severity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Comparison of mental health outcomes of augmenting medications for patients with posttraumatic stress disorder: A national veterans affairs study.

RATIONALE: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is highly prevalent among veterans. Many veterans with PTSD respond well to serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs). Nonresponders may be prescribed augmenting medications, which are not as well-studied in PTSD. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: We used Veterans Health Administration electronic records to compare mental health outcomes (PTSD symptoms and rates of mental health hospitalizations and psychiatric emergency room visits) in patients with PTSD who were prescribed four different groups of augmenting medications (atypical antipsychotics, mirtazapine, prazosin or tricyclic antidepressants) in addition to SRIs-from the year before to the year after the start of the augmenting medication. METHOD: We included data from 169,982 patients with a diagnosis of PTSD (excluding patients with comorbid bipolar or psychotic disorders) seen in Veterans Affairs care from 2007 to 2015 who were taking an SRI and filled a new prescription for one of the four augmenting medications for at least 60 days. RESULTS: Patients evidenced minimal (<2%) reduction in PTSD symptoms and a larger reduction in psychiatric hospitalizations and psychiatric emergency room visits after receiving augmenting medications; this effect was largely similar across the four medication groups. Initiating augmenting medications was preceded by increases in PTSD symptoms, psychiatric hospitalizations and psychiatric emergency room visits. After initiating an augmenting medication, PTSD symptoms/hospitalizations/emergency room visits returned to baseline levels (before the start of the augmenting medication), but generally did not improve beyond baseline. CONCLUSION: Importantly, these effects could be explained by regression to the mean, additional interventions or confounding. These findings should be further explored with placebo controlled randomized clinical trials.

Trends in Medication Prescribing in Patients With PTSD From 2009 to 2018: A National Veterans Administration Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate longitudinal prescription practice trends for patients diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) using a national cohort of veterans who engaged in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) care from 2009 to 2018. METHODS: Using ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes to determine diagnoses, 1,353,416 patients diagnosed with PTSD in VHA care were retrospectively identified who were not diagnosed with bipolar or psychotic spectrum disorder. Veterans were included in the analytic sample starting in the year of their first PTSD diagnosis for each year that they were active in VHA care. Outpatient prescription records were examined from 2009 to 2018 for medications that are commonly used as recommended (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs], serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors [SNRIs]) or second-line/adjunctive (atypical antipsychotics [AAPs], mirtazapine, prazosin, trazodone, tricyclic antidepressants, and non-benzodiazepine hypnotics) medications for PTSD. Benzodiazepine prescriptions were also examined. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2018, the percentage of patients active in VHA care who received at least one of the examined recommended or second-line/adjunctive medications for PTSD in a calendar year declined by 9.0% (absolute change). The largest absolute change in rates of prescribing for medication classes over the last decade were observed among SSRIs (-12.3%) and SNRIs (+6.4%). AAP use decreased 5.4% from 2009 to 2018, with most of this change (-4.3%) occurring from 2009 to 2013. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with clinical practice guidelines, SSRIs/SNRIs were the most common prescriptions for patients in the current study. Reductions in the percentage of patients receiving PTSD medications may reflect concerns regarding effectiveness, adverse side effects, increases in access to evidence-based psychotherapy for PTSD, and/or symptom improvement such that medication was no longer needed.

PTSD and Physical Health.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We review evidence linking PTSD to physical health symptoms and specific disorders, highlighting areas with multiple studies and objective measures of disease states when available. We also examine evidence for biological, behavioral, and psychosocial mechanisms underlying these associations and discuss the clinical implications of recent research. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent meta-analyses have found that evidence is particularly strong for increased risk of cardiovascular, metabolic, and musculoskeletal disorders among patients with PTSD. Numerous studies have found alterations in the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, sympathetic nervous system, inflammation, and health behaviors that could increase risk of illness, but few studies have simultaneously incorporated measures of mechanisms and disease outcomes. Future research should focus on expanding the diversity of populations studied, particularly with respect to underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. Longitudinal studies that incorporate repeated measures of PTSD, pathogenic mechanisms of disease, and physical health outcomes and the addition of physical health outcomes to PTSD treatment trials will be most informative for the field.