Núria Aragay1, Maite Barrios2, Isabel Ramirez-Gendrau3, Anna Garcia-Caballero3, Gemma Garrido4, Irene Ramos-Grille4, Yésika Galindo4, Jonatan Martin-Dombrowski4, Vicenç Vallès4. 1. Pathological Gambling Unit, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, (Spain); Department of Mental Health, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, (Spain). Electronic address: naragay@cst.cat. 2. Quantitative Psychology Unit, Faculty of Psychology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Institute of Neurosciences (Neuro UB), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Pathological Gambling Unit, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, (Spain); Department of Mental Health, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, (Spain). 4. Department of Mental Health, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, (Spain).
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In gambling disorder (GD), impulsivity has been related with severity, treatment outcome and a greater dropout rate. The aim of the study is to obtain an empirical classification of GD patients based on their impulsivity and compare the resulting groups in terms of sociodemographic, clinical and gambling behavior variables. METHODS: 126 patients with slot machine GD attending the Pathological Gambling Unit between 2013 and 2016 were included. The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale was used to assess impulsivity, and the severity of past-year gambling behavior was established with the Screen for Gambling problems questionnaire (NODS). Depression and anxiety symptoms and executive function were also assessed. A two-step cluster analysis was carried out to determine impulsivity profiles. RESULTS: According to the UPPS-P data, two clusters were generated. Cluster 1 showed the highest scores on all the UPPS-P subscales, whereas patients from cluster 2 exhibited only high scores on two UPPS-P subscales: Negative Urgency and Lack of premeditation. Additionally, patients on cluster 1 were younger and showed significantly higher scores on the Beck Depression Inventory and on the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaires, worse emotional regulation and executive functioning, and reported more psychiatric comorbidity compared to patients in cluster 2. With regard to gambling behavior, cluster 1 patients had significantly higher NODS scores and a higher percentage presented active gambling behavior at treatment start than in cluster 2. CONCLUSIONS: We found two impulsivity subtypes of slot machine gamblers. Patients with high impulsivity showed more severe gambling behavior, more clinical psychopathology and worse emotional regulation and executive functioning than those with lower levels of impulsivity. These two different clinical profiles may require different therapeutic approaches.
INTRODUCTION: In gambling disorder (GD), impulsivity has been related with severity, treatment outcome and a greater dropout rate. The aim of the study is to obtain an empirical classification of GDpatients based on their impulsivity and compare the resulting groups in terms of sociodemographic, clinical and gambling behavior variables. METHODS: 126 patients with slot machine GD attending the Pathological Gambling Unit between 2013 and 2016 were included. The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale was used to assess impulsivity, and the severity of past-year gambling behavior was established with the Screen for Gambling problems questionnaire (NODS). Depression and anxiety symptoms and executive function were also assessed. A two-step cluster analysis was carried out to determine impulsivity profiles. RESULTS: According to the UPPS-P data, two clusters were generated. Cluster 1 showed the highest scores on all the UPPS-P subscales, whereas patients from cluster 2 exhibited only high scores on two UPPS-P subscales: Negative Urgency and Lack of premeditation. Additionally, patients on cluster 1 were younger and showed significantly higher scores on the Beck Depression Inventory and on the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaires, worse emotional regulation and executive functioning, and reported more psychiatric comorbidity compared to patients in cluster 2. With regard to gambling behavior, cluster 1 patients had significantly higher NODS scores and a higher percentage presented active gambling behavior at treatment start than in cluster 2. CONCLUSIONS: We found two impulsivity subtypes of slot machine gamblers. Patients with high impulsivity showed more severe gambling behavior, more clinical psychopathology and worse emotional regulation and executive functioning than those with lower levels of impulsivity. These two different clinical profiles may require different therapeutic approaches.
Authors: Marta Sancho; Céline Bonnaire; Silvia Costa; Gemma Casalé-Salayet; Javier Vera-Igual; Rita Cristina Rodríguez; Santiago Duran-Sindreu; Joan Trujols Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 3.390