Vergemount Hospital, Dublin (correspondence: Dr Rita M. Condren, Research Registrar, St Vincent's Hospital, Richmond Road, Fairview, Dublin 3, Ireland)
Drug Treatment Centre, Dublin
|
|
|---|
To identify the prevalence and patterns of substance misuse in patients with schizophrenia in a catchment population in Dublin, and to compare this with that of a control group from general practice. Ninety-nine patients and 75 controls were interviewed using a semi-structured technique. Urine sample were obtained from all patients and controls were analysed for illicit substances.
RESULTS
Prevalence of illicit substance and alcohol misuse was similar among patients (illicit substances, 45%; alcohol, 33%) and controls (illicit substances, 43%; alcohol, 25%). Patterns of substances misuse were similar, apart from ecstasy, which was used more commonly by controls. Discrepancies were found between histories of drug use and urinalysis.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
Illicit substance misuse in patients with schizophrenia may mirror usage in the general population, rates of misuse reflecting cultural factors rather than illness and patterns of misuse reflecting geographical variations in the availability of drugs. A combination of screening methods is more effective than the use of a single source of information.
|
|
|---|
Among the possible motivations for substance misuse among patients with schizophrenia, it has been argued that they tend to self-medicate their symptoms by preferentially using certain types of substances (Khantzian, 1985). Schneier & Siris (1987), in a review of the literature, suggest that hallucinogens, stimulants and cannabis are used preferentially and that alcohol, hypnotics and opiates are used less frequently. However, other authors claim that alcohol use is far more common (Drake et al, 1990; Cuffel et al, 1993). Cuffel et al (1993), in their analysis of 231 patients with schizophrenia, found that 54% of the sample were not substance misusers, 31% misused primarily alcohol and cannabis and 14% were polysubstance misusers. It may be that geographical variation in the availability of illicit drugs accounts for much of the discrepancy between studies (Smith & Hucker, 1994). Only the assessment of the use of specific classes of substances by patients with schizophrenia can address this question. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of substance misuse among a representative sample of patients with schizophrenia in a catchment area in Dublin, to compare it with that of a matched control group and to examine patterns of substance use among the two groups.
|
|
|---|
Controls were recruited from two general practices from within the same catchment area. Patients and controls were matched for age and gender. Control recruitment was carried out by one of the authors (R.C.) in the practices at the same surgery time on consecutive weeks, when 85 consecutive patients in the waiting area were asked if they would participate in the study. Those with a past psychiatric history were excluded. The same interview technique was carried out for the control population and all were requested to provide a urine sample.
Data were collated using SPSS for Windows version 6
(Norusis, 1993). All
continuous variables were tested using independent t-testing.
Discrete variables were compared using Pearson
2 testing.
Matched discrete data were compared using McNemar testing, and unmatched
interval data were compared using MannWhitney U-testing.
|
|
|---|
2=33, d.f.=1, P=0.08). There was no significant
difference between cases and controls as regards social class of origin
(Z=-0.43, P=0.67).
History of substance misuse in cases and controls
Comparing cases to controls as regards a history of substance misuse
(excluding alcohol below a threshold of 21 units/week), 45 (45%) patients gave
a past history of misuse compared to 32 (43%) controls
(
2=0.13, d.f.=1, P=0.71). Comparison as regards use
in the previous 30 days showed that 5 (5%) patients gave a positive history
compared to 3 (4%) controls (
2=0.10, d.f.=1, P=0.74).
Of the patients, 33% gave a history of alcohol use exceeding 21 units per
week, against 25% of controls (P=0.25). The prevalence of use of
various substances by patients and controls is shown in
Table 1. No significant
differences exist between the substances used by both patients and controls,
except for the use of ecstasy, which was more common among controls.
|
View this table: [in a new window] | Table 1. Prevalence of substances used by patients and controls based on history |
Use of urinalysis
To establish the validity of the information provided by participants,
their history of exposure to substances over the previous 30 days was compared
to the laboratory findings on urinalysis. Alcohol was not included in this
comparison, in view of its rapid clearance from urine. The recent history of
consumption and urine findings were compared using matched samples based on
McNemar tests. There were no differences as regards amphetamine and cocaine
histories and urine tests. However, testing for opiates revealed that seven of
the total sample of 174 gave no history of opiate ingestion yet proved urine
positive, while five cases with a positive history of use had negative testing
results (binomial 2-tailed, P=0.02). Similarly, 32 of the sample with
no history of benzodiazepine use had benzodiazepines in their urine and 11
cases with a positive history of use were urine negative
(
2=5.9, P=0.02). Cannabis also showed differences
between history and urine tests findings: 15 participants giving a history of
use in the previous 30 days revealed no presence of cannabinoids in their
urine. Looking at those with schizophrenia, the only difference between recent
history and urine findings was in benzodiazepine testing, where 19 cases gave
no history yet were urine positive and 9 cases with a positive history were
urine negative. This forms 59% of the mismatched benzodiazepine tests from the
combined group of 174. Interestingly, no cases with schizophrenia were urine
positive for cannabinoids without a history of recent use.
|
|
|---|
It should be noted that toxicological screening may give misleading results because the duration of detectability is variable and substance use may be sporadic. If another source of information, such as collateral interviews with informants, had been used, the prevalence of substance misuse may have been found to be higher.
We did not examine the extent of usage of illicit substances in our study population, and therefore we cannot draw conclusions about whether our patient population uses these substances more extensively than controls. However, Drake et al (1989) have found that relatively small amounts of drinking predicts negative outcomes in schizophrenia and this may also be the case for illicit substances. Therefore, standard definitions of substance misuse may substantially underestimate the extent of the clinical problem.
The rate of alcohol misuse in our patient population is similar to that found in the ECA study (Regier et al, 1990), but higher than that found in UK studies (Bernadt & Murray, 1986; Duke et al, 1994). However, the rate of illicit substance misuse is higher than that found in other European studies (Soyka et al, 1993; Hambrecht & Hafner, 1996; Menezes et al, 1996), perhaps because of the broad definition of substance misuse used in this study. Research in this field is fraught with methodological problems, making comparisons between studies difficult.
The absence of data in many studies on the expected baseline prevalence of substance misuse in the general population obscure both the veracity and significance of high rates of comorbidity. However, Osher & Drake (1996) have stated that the weight of evidence indicates that the rate of substance misuse disorders in people with severe mental illness is substantially higher than in the general population. The evidence that the rates of drug and alcohol misuse found among those with mental illness are substantially greater than those in the general population in North America, as found in the ECA study (Regier et al, 1990), may not apply to the Irish situation, where substance misuse in the general population may be equally prevalent.
Cannabis, hallucinogens and stimulants were among the most popular drugs of misuse by our patient population, concurring with Schneier & Siris' review (1987). However, they were also among the most popular drugs used by our controls, indicating that preferential drug use among patients with schizophrenia may simply reflect that of the general population, and conclusions regarding patients' reasons for their use may therefore be less relevant. The less common use of ecstasy by our patient population may be because of its association with dance (rave) events (Lishman, 1998), in which patients with schizophrenia may have less interest.
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. R. E. BARNES, S. H. MUTSATSA, S. B. HUTTON, H. C. WATT, and E. M. JOYCE Comorbid substance use and age at onset of schizophrenia The British Journal of Psychiatry, March 1, 2006; 188(3): 237 - 242. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. GREEN, R. YOUNG, and D. KAVANAGH Cannabis use and misuse prevalence among people with psychosis The British Journal of Psychiatry, October 1, 2005; 187(4): 306 - 313. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Ley, D. Jeffery, J. Ruiz, S. McLaren, and C. Gillespie Underdetection of comorbid drug use at acute psychiatric admission Psychiatr. Bull., July 1, 2002; 26(7): 248 - 251. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. J. DUKE, C. PANTELIS, M. A. McPHILLIPS, and T. R. E. BARNES Comorbid non-alcohol substance misuse among people with schizophrenia: Epidemiological study in central London The British Journal of Psychiatry, December 1, 2001; 179(6): 509 - 513. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||