clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00006206.

No abstract

Numerous biological and psychological factors associated with impaired neurological functioning have been identified as common among the homeless, but there has been relatively little systematic examination of the cognitive functioning of homeless people. This study explored the neuropsychological functioning of 90 homeless men. There was great variability in their test scores, but the presence of possible cognitive impairment was detected in 80% of the sample. Average general intellectual functioning and reading abilities were found to be relatively low, and the incidence of impairments in reading, new verbal learning, memory, and attention and concentration was high. These findings suggest that the homeless men in this study had considerable assessment and treatment needs that were not being met by most of the health and social services offered to them.

Objective We examined the sociodemographic correlates of energy drink use and the differences between those who use them with and without alcohol in a representative community sample. Methods A random-digit-dial landline telephone survey of adults in the Milwaukee, Wisconsin area responded to questions about energy drink and alcohol plus energy drink use. Results Almost one-third of respondents consumed at least one energy drink in their lifetime, while slightly over 25% used energy drinks in the past year and 6% were past-year alcohol plus energy drink users. There were important racial/ethnic differences in consumption patterns. Compared to non-users, past-year energy drink users were more likely to be non-Black minorities; and past-year alcohol plus energy drink users when compared to energy drink users only were more likely to be White and younger. Alcohol plus energy drink users also were more likely to be hazardous drinkers. Conclusions Our results which are among the first from a community sample suggest a bifurcated pattern of energy drink use highlighting important population consumption differences between users of energy drinks only and those who use alcohol and energy drinks together.

These findings are the first to demonstrate not only that a gradient of increasing concussion severity is represented by PTA and LOC but also that measurable neurocognitive abnormalities are evident immediately after injury without PTA or LOC.

Predictors of poor birth outcomes include modifiable behaviors. Prenatal interventions addressing these behaviors could help improve outcomes.

Context The COMBINE clinical trial recently evaluated the efficacy of medications, behavioral therapies, and their combinations for the outpatient treatment of alcohol dependence. The costs and cost-effectiveness of these combinations are unknown and of interest to clinicians and policy makers. Objective To evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of the COMBINE interventions at the end of 16 weeks of treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants A prospective cost and cost-effectiveness study of patients in COMBINE, a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) involving 1383 patients with diagnoses of primary alcohol dependence across 11 US clinical sites. Interventions Nine treatment arms, with 4 arms receiving medical management with 16 weeks of naltrexone (100 mg/d) or acamprosate (3 g/d), both, and/or placebo; 4 arms receiving the same options as above but delivered with combined behavioral intervention (CBI); and 1 arm receiving CBI only. Main Outcomes Measures Incremental cost per percentage point increase in percent days abstinent (PDA), incremental cost per patient of avoiding heavy drinking, and incremental cost per patient of achieving a good clinical outcome. Results Based on the mean values of cost and effectiveness, 3 interventions are cost-effective options relative to the other interventions for all three outcomes: medical management (MM) with placebo ($409 cost per patient), MM + naltrexone ($671 cost per patient), and MM + naltrexone + acamprosate ($1003 cost per patient). Conclusions This is only the second prospective RCT-designed cost-effectiveness study that has been performed for the treatment of alcohol dependence. Focusing just on effectiveness, MM + naltrexone + acamprosate is not significantly better than MM + naltrexone. However, looking at cost and effectiveness, MM + naltrexone + acamprosate may be a cost-effective choice, depending on whether the cost of the incremental increase in effectiveness is worth it to the decision maker.

No abstract