ObjectiveDevelop a risk index to estimate the likelihood of life‐threatening respiratory depression or overdose among medical users of prescription opioids.Subjects, Design, and MethodsA case‐control analysis of administrative health care data from the Veterans’ Health Administration identified 1,877,841 patients with a pharmacy record for an opioid prescription between October 1, 2010 and September 30, 2012. Overdose or serious opioid‐induced respiratory depression (OSORD) occurred in 817. Ten controls were selected per case (n = 8,170). Items for an OSORD risk index (RIOSORD) were selected through logistic regression modeling, with point values assigned to each predictor. Modeling of risk index scores produced predicted probabilities of OSORD; risk classes were defined by the predicted probability distribution.ResultsFifteen variables most highly associated with OSORD were retained as items, including mental health disorders and pharmacotherapy; impaired drug metabolism or excretion; pulmonary disorders; specific opioid characteristics; and recent hospital visits. The average predicted probability of experiencing OSORD ranged from 3% in the lowest risk decile to 94% in the highest, with excellent agreement between predicted and observed incidence across risk classes. The model's C‐statistic was 0.88 and Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness‐of‐fit statistic 10.8 (P > 0.05).ConclusionRIOSORD performed well in identifying medical users of prescription opioids within the Veterans’ Health Administration at elevated risk of overdose or life‐threatening respiratory depression, those most likely to benefit from preventive interventions. This novel, clinically practical, risk index is intended to provide clinical decision support for safer pain management. It should be assessed, and refined as necessary, in a more generalizable population, and prospectively evaluated.

Retrospective assessment of tobacco use underlies much of the data collected in epidemiological and genetic epidemiological research. Although individuals are asked to report lifetime tobacco use for periods spanning months to decades, the test-retest reliability intervals of the instruments often span only a few weeks to several months. The present analyses examined the test-retest reliability of retrospective tobacco use measures, including details of first use, circumstances of first use, and initial subjective reactions. The questions were part of the Lifetime Tobacco Use Questionnaire (LTUQ), a Web-based questionnaire designed to assess use of most forms of tobacco or nicotine retrospectively across the lifespan. A convenience sample of 236 men and women with history of tobacco use (Time 1 mean age, 44.9 years; 74.2% females; 75.1% regular monthly tobacco use) responded verifiably to invitations to self-administer the LTUQ two times, 2 years apart. Test-retest reliability analyses reflected high reliability for salient tobacco-use questions. Acceptable levels of reliability were observed for initial subjective reactions to smoking, if the scaled response options were dichotomized. Few differences in the reliability of recall were apparent between sexes and between age groups. These results indicate that recall of important tobacco use information can form a reliable basis for research.

Background Retrospectively collected data about the development and maintenance of behaviors that impact health are a valuable source of information. Establishing the reliability of retrospective measures is a necessary step in determining the utility of that methodology and in studying behaviors in the context of risk and protective factors.Objective The goal of this study was to examine the reliability of self-report of a specific health-affecting behavior, tobacco use, and its associated risk and protective factors as examined with a Web-based questionnaire.Methods Core tobacco use and risk behavior questions in the Lifetime Tobacco Use Questionnaire—a closed, invitation-only, password-controlled, Web-based instrument—were administered at a 2-month test-retest interval to a convenience sample of 1229 respondents aged 18 to 78 years. Tobacco use items, which covered cigarettes, cigars, smokeless tobacco, and pipe tobacco, included frequency of use, amount used, first use, and a pack-years calculation. Risk-related questions included family history of tobacco use, secondhand smoke exposure, alcohol use, and religiosity.Results Analyses of test-retest reliability indicated modest (.30 to .49), moderate (.50 to .69), or high (.70 to 1.00) reliability across nearly all questions, with minimal reliability differences in analyses by sex, age, and income grouping. Most measures of tobacco use history showed moderate to high reliability, particularly for age of first use, age of first weekly and first daily smoking, and age at first or only quit attempt. Some measures of family tobacco use history, secondhand smoke exposure, alcohol use, and religiosity also had high test-retest reliability. Reliability was modest for subjective response to first use.Conclusions The findings reflect the stability of retrospective recall of tobacco use and risk factor self-report responses in a Web-questionnaire context. Questions that are designed and tested with psychometric scrutiny can yield reliable results in a Web setting.

No abstract

This project studied the convergent validity of current recall of tobacco-related health behaviors, compared with prospective self-report collected earlier at two sites. Cohorts were from the Oregon Research Institute at Eugene (N = 346, collected 19.5 years earlier) and the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (N = 294, collected 3.9 years earlier). Current recall was examined through computer-assisted interviews with the Lifetime Tobacco Use Questionnaire from 2005 through 2008. Convergent validity estimates demonstrated variability. Validity estimates of some tobacco use measures were significant for Oregon subjects (age at first cigarette, number of cigarettes/day, quit attempts yes/no and number of attempts, and abstinence symptoms at quitting; all P < 0.03). Validity estimates of Pittsburgh subjects’ self-reports of tobacco use and abstinence symptoms were significant (P < 0.001) for all tobacco use and abstinence symptoms and for responses to initial use of tobacco. These findings support the utility of collecting recalled self-report information for reconstructing salient lifetime health behaviors and underscore the need for careful interpretation.

The present study correlates empirically constructed prospective adolescent smoking trajectories with indicators of nicotine dependence assessed in adolescence and in adulthood. Excluding individuals who reported no smoking during repeat assessment (nonadopters), we identified five smoking trajectory groups: experimenters (n=116, 48.5%), late increasers (n=39, 16.3%), early increasers (n=37, 15.5%), quitters (n=22, 9.2%), and persistent smokers (n=25, 10.5%). Higher frequency of nicotine dependence symptoms in adolescence occurred in the quitters and persistent smokers groups, who smoked at higher levels relative to the experimenters, late increasers, and early increasers groups, who reported a similar frequency of nicotine dependence symptoms and smoked at low levels. Lifetime nicotine dependence was assessed in adulthood in lifetime daily smokers using the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) and the Nicotine Dependence Scale (NDS). Lifetime FTND levels were similar across trajectory groups. Relative to experimenters, all remaining smoking trajectory groups had higher NDS levels that were similar to one another. These results suggest that higher levels of adolescent nicotine dependence were associated with heavier smoking trajectory groups, and that regardless of trajectory group membership, smoking more than a few cigarettes per week throughout adolescence resulted in similar levels of lifetime nicotine dependence as measured by the FTND and NDS.

No abstract

OBJECTIVES. This study evaluated the biological and subjective consequences observed in individual smokers after implementation of a workplace smoking-restriction policy. METHODS. Employees were evaluated for 4 weeks before and 4 weeks after their workplace became smoke-free (n = 34). A comparison group of smokers whose work-site smoking was unrestricted served as controls (n = 33). Daily exposure to tobacco constituents and withdrawal effects were measured. RESULTS. Smokers at the restricted site had verified smoking reduction (mean = four cigarettes per day) and significantly reduced nicotine and carbon monoxide during the work shift. There were increases in ratings of some common withdrawal symptoms (cravings/urges, concentration difficulties, increased eating, depression). No evidence of compensatory smoking during nonwork hours was found. Overall tobacco exposure, as measured in saliva cotinine, showed a nonsignificant 15% decline. CONCLUSIONS. Workplace smoking restriction markedly altered smoking patterns (i.e., reduced daytime smoking) and reduced cotinine levels to an amount consistent with cigarette reduction. Thus, work-site smoking restriction may promote meaningful, albeit limited, reductions in tobacco exposure and consequent health risks.