Five-Factor Model personality profiles of drug users

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Personality traits are considered risk factors for drug use, and, in turn, the psychoactive substances impact individuals' traits. Furthermore, there is increasing interest in developing treatment approaches that match an individual's personality profile. To advance our knowledge of the role of individual differences in drug use, the present study compares the personality profile of tobacco, marijuana, cocaine, and heroin users and non-users using the wide spectrum Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality in a diverse community sample.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Participants (<it>N </it>= 1,102; mean age = 57) were part of the Epidemiologic Catchment Area (ECA) program in Baltimore, MD, USA. The sample was drawn from a community with a wide range of socio-economic conditions. Personality traits were assessed with the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R), and psychoactive substance use was assessed with systematic interview.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Compared to never smokers, current cigarette smokers score lower on Conscientiousness and higher on Neuroticism. Similar, but more extreme, is the profile of cocaine/heroin users, which score very high on Neuroticism, especially Vulnerability, and very low on Conscientiousness, particularly Competence, Achievement-Striving, and Deliberation. By contrast, marijuana users score high on Openness to Experience, average on Neuroticism, but low on Agreeableness and Conscientiousness.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In addition to confirming high levels of negative affect and impulsive traits, this study highlights the links between drug use and low Conscientiousness. These links provide insight into the etiology of drug use and have implications for public health interventions.</p

Exercise therapy in Type 2 diabetes

Structured exercise is considered an important cornerstone to achieve good glycemic control and improve cardiovascular risk profile in Type 2 diabetes. Current clinical guidelines acknowledge the therapeutic strength of exercise intervention. This paper reviews the wide pathophysiological problems associated with Type 2 diabetes and discusses the benefits of exercise therapy on phenotype characteristics, glycemic control and cardiovascular risk profile in Type 2 diabetes patients. Based on the currently available literature, it is concluded that Type 2 diabetes patients should be stimulated to participate in specifically designed exercise intervention programs. More attention should be paid to cardiovascular and musculoskeletal deconditioning as well as motivational factors to improve long-term treatment adherence and clinical efficacy. More clinical research is warranted to establish the efficacy of exercise intervention in a more differentiated approach for Type 2 diabetes subpopulations within different stages of the disease and various levels of co-morbidity

Cognitive function and risks of cardiovascular disease and hypoglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes: the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial.

Item does not contain fulltextAIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The relationship between cognitive function, cardiovascular disease and premature death is not well established in patients with type 2 diabetes. We assessed the effects of cognitive function in 11,140 patients with type 2 diabetes who participated in the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial. Furthermore, we tested whether level of cognitive function altered the beneficial effects of the BP-lowering and glycaemic-control regimens in the trial. METHODS: Cognitive function was assessed using the Mini Mental State Examination at baseline, and defined by scores 28-30 ('normal', n = 8,689), 24-27 ('mild dysfunction', n = 2,231) and <24 ('severe dysfunction', n = 212). Risks of major cardiovascular events, death and hypoglycaemia and interactions with treatment were assessed using Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: Relative to normal function, both mild and severe cognitive dysfunction significantly increased the multiple-adjusted risks of major cardiovascular events (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.46 and 1.42, 95% CI 1.01-1.99; both p < 0.05), cardiovascular death (1.41, 95% CI 1.16-1.71 and 1.56, 95% CI 0.99-2.46; both p <or= 0.05) and all-cause death (1.33, 95% CI 1.16-1.54 and 1.50, 95% CI 1.06-2.12; both p < 0.03). Severe, but not mild, cognitive dysfunction increased the risk of severe hypoglycaemia (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.14-3.87; p = 0.018). There was no evidence of heterogeneity of treatment effects on cardiovascular outcomes in subgroups defined by cognitive function at baseline. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Cognitive dysfunction is an independent predictor of clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes, but does not modify the effects of BP lowering or glucose control on the risks of major cardiovascular events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00145925