4.4 Article

Tobacco craving in smokers with and without schizophrenia

Journal

SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH
Volume 127, Issue 1-3, Pages 241-245

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2010.06.017

Keywords

Schizophrenia; Nicotine; Smoking; Craving; Dependency

Categories

Funding

  1. NIH
  2. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
  3. NIDA Residential Research Support Services [HHSN271200599091CADB]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined tobacco craving and dependence in current smokers (18-65 years) with schizophrenia (N = 100) and those without a psychiatric disorder (normal controls, N = 100). During the 2-3 h visit participants completed demographic and smoking-related questionnaires and provided a breath CO sample. The Tobacco Craving Questionnaire-Short Form (TCQ-SF) was administered. Immediately after smoking one cigarette, no difference in TCQ-SF total score was noted (46.7 +/- 19.5 schizophrenia, 42.8 +/- 18.2 controls, p = 0.15); however, after 15 min TCQ-SF total score was significantly higher in people with schizophrenia (50.0 +/- 19.6) than in controls (38.6 +/- 19.4) (p = 0.0014). TCQ-SF factors of emotionality (p = 0.0015), compulsivity (p = 0.0003) and purposefulness (p = 0.0174) were significantly greater in the schizophrenia group than the control group. MID scores (5.5 +/- 2.0 vs 5.3 +/- 2.0, p = 0.62) number of cigarettes smoked daily (17.9 +/- 11.6 vs. 17.0 +/- 7.9), expired breath CO (28.0 +/- 14.5 ppm vs. 22.0 +/- 8.0 ppm) and age at smoking initiation (16.2 +/- 5.4 vs. 15.6 +/- 5.5 years, p = 0.44) did not differ in the schizophrenia and control groups respectively. In conclusion, tobacco craving as measured by the TCQ-SF was significantly greater in people with schizophrenia than controls 15 min post-smoking, despite similar scores in dependence and similar smoking histories and current smoking patterns. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available