Executive function fails to predict smoking outcomes in a clinical trial to motivate smokers to quit

The Executive Functioning Paradox in Substance Use Disorders

Deficits in neurocognitive functioning are trait-like vulnerabilities that have been widely studied in persons with substance use disorders (SUD), but their role in the craving-use association and relapse vulnerability remains poorly understood. The main objectives of this study were to examine whether executive capacities moderate the magnitude of the craving-substance use relationship, and if this influence is correlated with the functional connectivity of cerebral networks, combining rsfMRI examinations and ecological momentary assessment (EMA). Eighty-six patients beginning outpatient treatment for alcohol, tobacco or cannabis addiction and 40 healthy controls completed neuropsychological tests followed by EMA to collect real-time data on craving. Fifty-four patients and 30 healthy controls also completed a resting-state fMRI before the EMA. Among the patients with SUD, better verbal fluency and resistance to interference capacities were associated with a greater propensity to use substances when the individual was experiencing craving. Preliminary rsfMRI results identified specific networks that interacted with executive performance capacities to influence the magnitude of the craving-use association. Individuals with better executive functioning may be more prone to relapse after craving episodes. Specifically, better resistance to interference and cognitive flexibility skills may reduce attention to distracting stimuli, leading to a greater awareness of craving and susceptibility to use substances.

Impact of Depression and Nicotine Dependence on Executive Functioning in Rural Older Adult Smokers: A Brief Report (NCT02510716)

INTRODUCTION

Rural older adults are an underserved population with high rates of smoking and related morbidity and mortality. Age-related executive function deficits are common in older smokers; however, the association of depression and nicotine dependence on executive function has not been explored. This study addressed whether depression and nicotine dependence are related to executive dysfunction in rural older adult smokers.

METHODS

The sample included 40 rural older adults recruited from two primary care clinics in North Carolina. Executive function was evaluated with the Behavioral Regulation Index (BRI), Metacognition Index, and Global Executive Composite (GEC) T scores from the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult. Nicotine dependence and depression symptoms were assessed using the Fagerstrom Test and Center for Epidemiologic Depression Scale-10, respectively. Analysis of variance was used to explore whether depression and/or nicotine dependence influences executive function. Nondirectional tests were performed with significance set at .10.

RESULTS

Smokers who screened positive for depression had significantly greater executive dysfunction than those who did not (BRI: p = .0003, Metacognition Index: p < .0001, GEC: p < .0001), and moderate/high dependence was associated with greater executive function deficits compared with those with mild dependence (BRI: p = .0942). Together, depression and nicotine dependence explained 50% of the variability of the GEC overall scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Executive dysfunction is common in rural older adult smokers and associated with depression and nicotine dependence severity. Futures studies should test the relationship of executive function and smoking cessation in the older adult population as it may have implications for cessation in this population.

Increasing Smoking Cessation Adherence: Do We Need to Consider the Role of Executive Function and Rumination?

Despite the cost and health consequences, a large number of people continue to smoke cigarettes worldwide every day. Notwithstanding, there have been a number of interventions to help people stop smoking but, in general, these have produced only limited success, and better interventions are needed. Accruing evidence affirmed that rumination and executive function play a pivotal role in cigarette smoking behavior, and in this editorial, we describe and discuss the key findings between these constructs and smoking, and argue that an impairment in executive functions does not act alone, but interacts with rumination by directing attention to depressive thoughts, thereby reducing the ability of smokers to engage in constructive behaviors, such as quitting smoking. Finally, we offer a new theory-driven model based on a deep understanding of the interactions between executive functions and rumination and potential moderator effects.

A fractionated analysis of hot and cool self-regulation in cigarette smokers from different socioeconomic backgrounds

Smoking cigarettes and low socioeconomic status (SES) are both related to impaired cognition. However, it is unknown whether people of lower SES, who comprise most tobacco smokers worldwide, are more susceptible to cognitive impairment associated with smoking. In this non-randomized, cross-sectional study we investigated the effects of cigarette smoking, SES and their interaction on dissociable executive or “cool” and “hot” measures of behavioural self-regulation. Participants (n = 80) were selected among young physically and mentally healthy smokers and non-smokers who had graduated high school and were from different SES backgrounds. Cool self-regulation was measured by executive function tasks that tap inhibition, updating, shifting, dual tasking, planning, access to long-term memory (semantic fluency), and working memory capacity. Hot measures assessed self-reported impulsivity, delay discounting and risk taking. Exposure to tobacco (cotinine, exhaled carbon monoxide, tobacco dependence, cigarette consumption) was assessed to determine to what extent it mediated the cognitive effects of smoking. Nicotine abstinence and its acute effects were controlled, as were sex, age, schooling, and psychiatric symptoms despite the fact that smokers and non-smokers were selected as being as similar as possible in these demographic characteristics. Lower SES (less years of parental schooling) was associated with worse performance on tasks that measured all cool domains except dual tasking and fluency, while smoking status was related to impaired delayed discounting and impulsivity (hot domains), effects that were not mediated by tobacco exposure. Smoking and SES, however, did not interact. In short, impaired performance in measures of most cool skills was associated with SES irrespective of smoking status; in contrast, regardless of SES, smokers showed specific impairment in hot self-regulation domains (more difficulty resisting immediate temptations and weighing future consequences of actions). Possible explanations for the lack of mediation of tobacco exposure on hot skills of smokers are discussed.

Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a directive patient-centred style of counselling, designed to help people to explore and resolve ambivalence about behaviour change. It was developed as a treatment for alcohol abuse, but may help people to a make a successful attempt to stop smoking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of MI for smoking cessation compared with no treatment, in addition to another form of smoking cessation treatment, and compared with other types of smoking cessation treatment. We also investigated whether more intensive MI is more effective than less intensive MI for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register for studies using the term motivat* NEAR2 (interview* OR enhanc* OR session* OR counsel* OR practi* OR behav*) in the title or abstract, or motivation* as a keyword. We also searched trial registries to identify unpublished studies. Date of the most recent search: August 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in which MI or its variants were offered to smokers to assist smoking cessation. We excluded trials that did not assess cessation as an outcome, with follow-up less than six months, and with additional non-MI intervention components not matched between arms. We excluded trials in pregnant women as these are covered elsewhere.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Smoking cessation was measured after at least six months, using the most rigorous definition available, on an intention-to-treat basis. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for smoking cessation for each study, where possible. We grouped eligible studies according to the type of comparison. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models. We extracted data on mental health outcomes and quality of life and summarised these narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 37 eligible studies involving over 15,000 participants who smoked tobacco. The majority of studies recruited participants with particular characteristics, often from groups of people who are less likely to seek support to stop smoking than the general population. Although a few studies recruited participants who intended to stop smoking soon or had no intentions to quit, most recruited a population without regard to their intention to quit. MI was conducted in one to 12 sessions, with the total duration of MI ranging from five to 315 minutes across studies. We judged four of the 37 studies to be at low risk of bias, and 11 to be at high risk, but restricting the analysis only to those studies at low or unclear risk did not significantly alter results, apart from in one case - our analysis comparing higher to lower intensity MI.We found low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias and imprecision, comparing the effect of MI to no treatment for smoking cessation (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.12; I² = 0%; adjusted N = 684). One study was excluded from this analysis as the participants recruited (incarcerated men) were not comparable to the other participants included in the analysis, resulting in substantial statistical heterogeneity when all studies were pooled (I² = 87%). Enhancing existing smoking cessation support with additional MI, compared with existing support alone, gave an RR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.36; adjusted N = 4167; I² = 47%), and MI compared with other forms of smoking cessation support gave an RR of 1.24 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.69; I² = 54%; N = 5192). We judged both of these estimates to be of low certainty due to heterogeneity and imprecision. Low-certainty evidence detected a benefit of higher intensity MI when compared with lower intensity MI (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; adjusted N = 5620; I² = 0%). The evidence was limited because three of the five studies in this comparison were at risk of bias. Excluding them gave an RR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.54; I² = n/a; N = 482), changing the interpretation of the results.Mental health and quality of life outcomes were reported in only one study, providing little evidence on whether MI improves mental well-being.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to show whether or not MI helps people to stop smoking compared with no intervention, as an addition to other types of behavioural support for smoking cessation, or compared with other types of behavioural support for smoking cessation. It is also unclear whether more intensive MI is more effective than less intensive MI. All estimates of treatment effect were of low certainty because of concerns about bias in the trials, imprecision and inconsistency. Consequently, future trials are likely to change these conclusions. There is almost no evidence on whether MI for smoking cessation improves mental well-being.