The daily association between affect and alcohol use: a meta-analysis of individual participant data

Influential psychological theories hypothesize that people consume alcohol in response to the experience of both negative and positive emotions. Despite two decades of daily diary and ecological momentary assessment research, it remains unclear whether people consume more alcohol on days they experience higher negative and positive affect in everyday life. In this preregistered meta-analysis, we synthesized the evidence for these daily associations between affect and alcohol use. We included individual participant data from 69 studies (N = 12,394), which used daily and momentary surveys to assess affect and the number of alcoholic drinks consumed. Results indicate that people are not more likely to drink on days they experience high negative affect, but are more likely to drink and drink heavily on days high in positive affect. People self-reporting a motivational tendency to drink-to-cope and drink-to-enhance consumed more alcohol, but not on days they experienced higher negative and positive affect. Results were robust across different operationalizations of affect, study designs, study populations, and individual characteristics. These findings challenge the long-held belief that people drink more alcohol following increases in negative affect. Integrating these findings under different theoretical models and limitations of this field of research, we collectively propose an agenda for future research to explore open questions surrounding affect and alcohol use.The present study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Grant MOP-115104 (Roisin M. O’Connor), Canadian Institutes of Health Research Grant MSH-122803 (Roisin M. O’Connor), John A. Hartford Foundation Grant (Paul Sacco), Loyola University Chicago Research Support Grant (Tracy De Hart), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Grant T03OH008435 (Cynthia Mohr), National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant F31AA023447 (Ryan W. Carpenter), NIH Grant R01AA025936 (Kasey G. Creswell), NIH Grant R01AA025969 (Catharine E. Fairbairn), NIH Grant R21AA024156 (Anne M. Fairlie), NIH Grant F31AA024372 (Fallon Goodman), NIH Grant R01DA047247 (Kevin M. King), NIH Grant K01AA026854 (Ashley N. Linden-Carmichael), NIH Grant K01AA022938 (Jennifer E. Merrill), NIH Grant K23AA024808 (Hayley Treloar Padovano), NIH Grant P60AA11998 (Timothy Trull), NIH Grant MH69472 (Timothy Trull), NIH Grant K01DA035153 (Nisha Gottfredson), NIH Grant P50DA039838 (Ashley N. Linden-Carmichael), NIH Grant K01DA047417 (David M. Lydon-Staley), NIH Grant T32DA037183 (M. Kushner), NIH Grant R21DA038163 (A. Moore), NIH Grant K12DA000167 (M. Potenza, Stephanie S. O’Malley), NIH Grant R01AA025451 (Bruce Bartholow, Thomas M. Piasecki), NIH Grant P50AA03510 (V. Hesselbrock), NIH Grant K01AA13938 (Kristina M. Jackson), NIH Grant K02AA028832 (Kevin M. King), NIH Grant T32AA007455 (M. Larimer), NIH Grant R01AA025037 (Christine M. Lee, M. Patrick), NIH Grant R01AA025611 (Melissa Lewis), NIH Grant R01AA007850 (Robert Miranda), NIH Grant R21AA017273 (Robert Miranda), NIH Grant R03AA014598 (Cynthia Mohr), NIH Grant R29AA09917 (Cynthia Mohr), NIH Grant T32AA07290 (Cynthia Mohr), NIH Grant P01AA019072 (P. Monti), NIH Grant R01AA015553 (J. Morgenstern), NIH Grant R01AA020077 (J. Morgenstern), NIH Grant R21AA017135 (J. Morgenstern), NIH Grant R01AA016621 (Stephanie S. O’Malley), NIH Grant K99AA029459 (Marilyn Piccirillo), NIH Grant F31AA022227 (Nichole Scaglione), NIH Grant R21AA018336 (Katie Witkiewitz), Portuguese State Budget Foundation for Science and Technology Grant UIDB/PSI/01662/2020 (Teresa Freire), University of Washington Population Health COVID-19 Rapid Response Grant (J. Kanter, Adam M. Kuczynski), U.S. Department of Defense Grant W81XWH-13-2-0020 (Cynthia Mohr), SANPSY Laboratory Core Support Grant CNRS USR 3413 (Marc Auriacombe), Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada Grant (N. Galambos), and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada Grant (Andrea L. Howard)

Suitability of Bupropion SR for nicotine-dependent smokers: Problems in a practice setting

Background: Bupropion SR ( Zyban) has been shown in randomized controlled trials to be an efficacious pharmacological aid for smoking cessation; however, recent reports have raised serious concerns about the breadth of its applicability without complications or contraindications. Methods: We examined this issue in a well-documented medical population, i.e. veterans volunteering to participate in a smoking cessation treatment research program involving the use of bupropion SR. Results: Overall, 22% of the 78 subjects who met the study criteria were appropriate for and completed the course of medication. Conclusions: Thus, bupropion SR in nicotine-dependent veterans may not be broadly applicable when conservative prescribing guidelines are carefully followed. Copyright (C) 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel

Does Acceptance and Relationship Focused Behavior Therapy Contribute to Bupropion Outcomes? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Functional Analytic Psychotherapy and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Smoking Cessation

This study evaluated a treatment combining bupropion with a novel acceptance and relationship focused behavioral intervention based on the acceptance and relationship context (ARC) model. Three hundred and three smokers from a community sample were randomly assigned to bupropion, a widely used smoking cessation medication, or bupropion plus functional analytic psychotherapy (FAP) and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). Objective measures of smoking outcomes and self-report measures of acceptance and relationship processes were taken at pretreatment, posttreatment, 6-month, and 1-year follow-up. The combined treatment was significantly better than bupropion alone at 1-year follow-up with 7-day point prevalence quit rates of 31.6% in the combined condition versus 17.5% in the medication-alone condition. Acceptance and the therapeutic relationship at posttreatment statistically mediated 12-month outcomes. Bupropion outcomes were enhanced with an acceptance and relationship focused behavioral treatment

A preliminary trial of Twelve-Step Facilitation and acceptance and commitment therapy with polysubstance-abusing methadone-maintained opiate addicts

The present study compared methadone maintenance alone to methadone maintenance in combination with 16 weeks of either Intensive Twelve-Step Facilitation (ITSF) or Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in a preliminary efficacy trial with polysubstance-abusing opiate addicts who were continuing to use drugs while on methadone maintenance. Results showed that the addition of ACT was associated with lower objectively assessed opiate and total drug use during follow-up than methadone maintenance alone, and lower subjective measures of total drug use at follow-up. An intent-to-treat analysis which assumed that missing drug data indicated drug use also provided support for the reliability of objectively assessed total drug use decreases in the ACT condition. ITSF reduced objective measures of total drug use during follow-up but not in the intent-to-treat analyses. Most measures of adjustment and psychological distress improved in all conditions, but there was no evidence of differential improvement across conditions in these areas. Both ACT and ITSF merit further exploration as a means of reducing severe drug abuse

Census tract socioeconomic indicators and COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates-COVID-NET surveillance areas in 14 states, March 1-April 30, 2020.

ObjectivesSome studies suggested more COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among racial and ethnic minorities. To inform public health practice, the COVID-19-associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) quantified associations between race/ethnicity, census tract socioeconomic indicators, and COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates.MethodsUsing data from COVID-NET population-based surveillance reported during March 1-April 30, 2020 along with socioeconomic and denominator data from the US Census Bureau, we calculated COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates by racial/ethnic and census tract-level socioeconomic strata.ResultsAmong 16,000 COVID-19-associated hospitalizations, 34.8% occurred among non-Hispanic White (White) persons, 36.3% among non-Hispanic Black (Black) persons, and 18.2% among Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) persons. Age-adjusted COVID-19-associated hospitalization rate were 151.6 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 147.1-156.1) in census tracts with >15.2%-83.2% of persons living below the federal poverty level (high-poverty census tracts) and 75.5 (95% CI: 72.9-78.1) in census tracts with 0%-4.9% of persons living below the federal poverty level (low-poverty census tracts). Among White, Black, and Hispanic persons living in high-poverty census tracts, age-adjusted hospitalization rates were 120.3 (95% CI: 112.3-128.2), 252.2 (95% CI: 241.4-263.0), and 341.1 (95% CI: 317.3-365.0), respectively, compared with 58.2 (95% CI: 55.4-61.1), 304.0 (95%: 282.4-325.6), and 540.3 (95% CI: 477.0-603.6), respectively, in low-poverty census tracts.ConclusionsOverall, COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates were highest in high-poverty census tracts, but rates among Black and Hispanic persons were high regardless of poverty level. Public health practitioners must ensure mitigation measures and vaccination campaigns address needs of racial/ethnic minority groups and people living in high-poverty census tracts