The Impact of the Proposed Changes for the DSM-5 on Diagnoses of First-time DUI/DWI Offenders

A descriptive analysis of drivers under the influence of opioids in Kentucky

Despite the ongoing opioid epidemic and evidence of the increasing prevalence of driving under the influence of opioids, particularly in rural communities, there remains a limited understanding of those who drive under the influence of opioids. The current study aims to fill this gap in the literature by examining drivers under the influence of opioids (DUIOs) using the clinical substance use assessment records of a statewide sample of drivers convicted of driving under the influence (N = 15,917); first identifying differences between DUIOs and drivers under the influence of other, non-opioid substances, followed by an examination of factors associated with driving under the influence of opioids in combination with other substances, and finally, comparing rural and urban DUIOs (N = 1,571). Bivariate analyses were used to compare groups, while a logistic regression model was used to identify correlates of other substance involvement. DUIOs differed from drivers under the influence of other, non-opioid substances, such as being more likely to be convicted in a rural community (65.7% vs 53.6%) and to be under the influence of multiple substances at the time of arrest (42.0% vs 7.1%). Among DUIOs, a rural conviction (p =.016) and meeting DSM criteria for an alcohol (p <.001) and drug use disorder (p <.001) were positively associated with driving under the influence of opioids in combination with other substances. Results also highlighted a number of differences between rural and urban DUIOs, including other substance involvement. Urban DUIOs were more likely to report alcohol involvement in their DUI arrest (16.7% vs 9.1%), and rural DUIOs were more likely to report other, non-opioid drug involvement (36.9% vs 29.1%). Results suggest a possible need for different prevention and treatment approaches depending on rural/urban environment, which is noteworthy given limited treatment availability and other barriers to substance use treatment in rural communities.

The impact of DSM classification changes on the prevalence of alcohol use disorder and 'diagnostic orphans' in Lebanese college youth: Implications for epidemiological research, health practice, and policy

Background

Studies comparing prevalence of alcohol use disorder (AUD) using DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnostic criteria in college students are limited. This study examines changes in AUD prevalence estimates using DSM-IV versus DSM-5 and characterizes the profile of DSM-5 “diagnostic orphans.”

Methods and findings

A college student sample (n = 1,155; mean age: 21 ±1.97) selected conveniently from six large private and public universities in Greater Beirut, Lebanon completed an anonymous survey in May 2016. The study response rate was 83.1%. Data on DSM-IV and DSM-5 AUD criteria were gathered from 582 past-year drinkers, of which 377 (65%) were screened to have DSM-IV abuse/dependence, and 203 (35%) to have any DSM-5 AUD (58% mild, 21% moderate, and 21% severe). Overall percent agreement between measures was 68% (kappa = 0.41). One hundred and ninety-one students met one DSM-5 AUD criterion only (i.e. “diagnostic orphans,” herein DOs), of which the majority (82%) endorsed “hazardous use.” Compared to past-year drinkers with zero-endorsed DSM-5 criteria, DOs were more likely to be aged 21 or above [OR = 1.57(1.21–2.03)], less likely to perceive their socioeconomic status (SES) as poorer vs. same as others [OR = 0.17(0.07–0.43)], more likely to drink 1–2 times/week vs. ≤3 times per month [OR = 2.24(1.44–3.49)], and more likely to report past-year cigarette smoking [OR = 2.16(1.10–4.24)]. When compared to past-year drinkers with DSM-5 AUD, DOs were more likely to be pursuing a graduate or medical degree (vs. undergraduate degree) [2.06 (1.09–3.89)], and to be living with parents most of the time vs. not [OR = 2.68(1.14–6.31)]. DOs (versus drinkers with AUD) were less likely to drink at a high frequency (3–4 times /week or more vs.≤3 times per month) [OR = 0.15(0.05–0.48)], and to report past-year waterpipe smoking [OR = 0.54(0.34–0.85)], but more likely to report past-year marijuana use [1.89(1.10–3.23)]. The findings are subject to recall bias and under-reporting and the study could not infer causality because temporality of associations cannot be established in a cross-sectional study design.

Conclusions

DSM-IV abuse/dependence prevalence rate was higher than DSM-5 AUD prevalence mainly due to the high percentage of students who engaged in “hazardous use”. The DO screen might capture a young person in transition between non-drinking/occasional drinking to drinking frequently/developing an AUD. The prevention, identification, and management of DOs may be critical components of a national alcohol harm-reduction policy.

Different demographic and drinking profiles of motorcyclists and car drivers with the first-time offense of driving/riding under the influence of alcohol

BACKGROUND

Driving/riding under the influence (DUI) of alcohol is a major public concern worldwide. Only a few studies have distinguished DUI-related variables between motorcyclists and car drivers. This study examined the differences in demographic characteristics and drinking behaviors among first-time DUI offenders operating different transportation vehicles, and risk factors for frequent DUI (fDUI) among them.

METHODS

We conducted an anonymous survey for 561 first-time DUI offenders who attended a mandatory educational program. Participants self-administered questionnaires concerning alcohol drinking behaviors and DUI. We defined fDUI as at least two DUI behaviors per month based on self-reported information. Demographic and drinking characteristics were compared between DUI offenders, car drivers and motorcyclists. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine risk factors for fDUI.

RESULTS

Two-thirds of first-time DUI offenders were motorcyclists. Compared with car drivers, motorcyclists were younger and less educated, with a higher percentage of them being women and unmarried. Car drivers reported a higher rate of fDUI than motorcyclists (16.5% vs. 9.7%). Regression analysis revealed that binge drinkers had a higher fDUI risk in both groups. Regarding the drinking place prior to DUI behavior, workplace was significantly associated with fDUI in car drivers.

CONCLUSIONS

Distinct strategies may be required for motorcyclists and car drivers for DUI recidivism prevention, and drinking place interventions should also be considered.

The Prevalence of Substance Use Disorders among Community-based Adults with Legal Problems in the U.S

BACKGROUND

Current national prevalence estimates of DSM-5 diagnosed substance use disorders (SUDs) among adults with justice system involvement are lacking.

METHODS

This study drew from NESARC-III data (n = 36,309; 2012-2013), a nationally representative U.S. sample, to examine current and lifetime alcohol use disorder (AUD) and drug use disorder (DUD) diagnoses among adults reporting current or prior drug-related, alcohol-related, and general legal problems.

RESULTS

Adults reporting current alcohol-related legal problems were 22 times more likely to have a current AUD diagnosis (AOR = 22.0, 95% CI = 12.1; 40.1) and 15 times more likely to have had a lifetime AUD diagnosis (AOR = 15.2, 95% CI = 7.5; 30.9) than adults without alcohol-related legal problems. Adults with lifetime drug-related legal problems were 3-5 times more likely to have a current (AOR = 2.6, 95% CI = 2.1; 3.2) and lifetime (AOR = 5.1, 95% CI = 4.3; 6.1) DUD diagnosis, with stimulant use disorder being the most prevalent (AOR = 5.4, 95% CI = 4.5; 6.5). Adults with general legal problems were around 3 times more likely to have a current AUD (AOR = 3.2, 95% CI = 2.6; 4.0) or DUD (AOR = 3.5, 95% CI = 2.8; 4.4). Women with any type of legal problem were more likely to have SUD diagnoses than men.

CONCLUSIONS

SUD diagnoses are prevalent among adults reporting legal problems, particularly those involving alcohol. There is a continued need for community-based addiction prevention and intervention efforts, especially for women with justice system involvement.