utility of collateral informants to inform treatment for gambling disorder megan m. petra, msw renee...

18
Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Upload: noah-hoover

Post on 23-Dec-2015

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling

Disorder

Megan M. Petra, MSW

Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Page 2: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Gambling Disorder (GD)

• DSM 5 now classifies Gambling Disorder (GD) as an addictive disorder

• GD occurs in ~1-2% of the population, 1-3

• But is 6.5 times more likely in those with substance use disorders

• Thus, clinicians are likely to have patients/ clients with GD

Page 3: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Screening, Diagnosis, & Treatment

• Accurate information on GD is critical 4

• But no biological “gold standard” test to verify clients’ self-reports of gambling

• Collateral informants (CIs) may be able to assist clinicians by providing information

Page 4: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Collateral Informants (CIs)

• Collateral informants are family or friends of the client, who can report on their gambling behavior

• If CIs’ information is accurate (concordant), clinicians can use them to verify client self-reports

• This information will inform diagnostic and treatment decisions

Page 5: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Research Objective

• Investigate concordance between gambler self-reports & CI reports

• Determine if concordance is: – Associated with gambler-CI relationship– Influenced by gamblers’ comorbid substance use

disorders (SUDs) or psychiatric disorders

Page 6: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Methods

• Community-recruited adults (N=128) who had gambled at least five times in their lives nominated CIs

• Gamblers & CIs interviewed separately via phone

• Psychometric study of a computerized diagnostic interview (C-Gam © 5)

Page 7: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Methods: Measures

• Gambler Measures– DSM Gambling Disorder criteria (C-Gam © 5)– DSM Substance Use Disorder criteria

(GAM-DA © 5)– DSM Depression criteria (CES-D 6)– DSM Personality disorder criteria (SCID-II 7)

• CI Measures– DSM Gambling Disorder criteria for the gambler’s

behavior (GAM-CI © 5)

Page 8: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Methods: Concordance

• Cohen’s kappa (κ) & Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC)

• Κ & ICC interpretation8:– Fair (0-.2)– Poor (.2-.4)– Moderate (.4-.6)– Substantial (.6-.8)– Almost perfect (.8-1.0)

• Comparisons made via Fisher’s Z transformation

Page 9: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Results: Participant Demographics

• Gambler sex: 46% male, 54% female• Gambler race: 76% Caucasian, 19% African-

American, 6% Other• Gambler-CI relationship: 49% family member,

51% friend

Page 10: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Results: Overall Concordance

Page 11: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Concordance and Gambler-CI Relationship

Page 12: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Concordance and Gambler Personality Disorder

Page 13: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Concordance and Gambler Depression

Page 14: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Concordance and Gambler Substance Use Disorders

Page 15: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Implications

• Treatment providers can be confident in using CIs to verify gambler self-reports– Concordance is likely to be moderate – substantial – Concordance is unaffected by gamblers’ comorbid

conditions

• Family members are better to use as CIs than are friends

Page 16: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Conclusions

• CIs are a valuable source of information which treatment providers can use to inform diagnosis of Gambling Disorder, and treatment decisions

Page 17: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

References

1. Shaffer, H. J., Hall, M. N., & Vander Bilt, J. (1999). Estimating the prevalence of disordered gambling behavior in the United States and Canada: A research synthesis. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1369-1376.

2. Welte, J., Barnes, G., Wieczorek, W., Tidwell, M., & Parker, J. (2001). Alcohol and gambling pathology among U.S. adults: Prevalence, demographic patterns and comorbidity. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62, 706-712.

3. Petry, N. M., Stinson, F. S., & Grant, B. F. (2005). Comorbidity of DSM-IV pathological gambling and other psychiatric disorders: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66(5), 564-574.

4. Westphal, J. R., & Johnson, L. J. (2003). Gender differences in psychiatric comorbidity and treatment-seeking among gamblers in treatment. Electronic Journal of Gambling Issues, 8, 79-90. Retrieved from http://www.camh.net/egambling/

5. Cunningham-Williams, RM. Computerized Gambling Assessment Module (C-GAM). St Louis, Missouri: Washington University; 2003.

6. Radloff, LS. The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement 1977;1:385–401.

7. First, MB.; Spitzer, RL.; Gibbon, M.; Williams, JBW.; Benjamin, LS. Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV personality disorders (SCID-II). Washington D. C.: American Psychiatric Press; 1997.

8. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.

Page 18: Utility of Collateral Informants to Inform Treatment for Gambling Disorder Megan M. Petra, MSW Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, PhD

Acknowledgements

• NIDA grants: T32DA07313 (Megan M. Petra, Fellow; Renee M. Cunningham-Williams, Director), K01DA00430 (RCW), R01 DA015032 (RCW)

• Author contact: [email protected]