Who Seeks Treatment When Medicine Opens the Door to Pathological Gambling Patients—Psychiatric Comorbidity and Heavy Predominance of Online Gambling

Problem gambling has been identified as an emergent public health issue, and there is a need to identify gambling trends and to regularly update worldwide gambling prevalence rates. This paper aims to review recent research on adult gambling and problem gambling (since 2000) and then, in the context of a growing liberalization of the gambling market in the European Union, intends to provide a more detailed analysis of adult gambling behavior across European countries. A systematic literature search was carried out using academic databases, Internet, and governmental websites. Following this search and utilizing exclusion criteria, 69 studies on adult gambling prevalence were identified. These studies demonstrated that there are wide variations in past-year problem gambling rates across different countries in the world (0.12–5.8%) and in Europe (0.12–3.4%). However, it is difficult to directly compare studies due to different methodological procedures, instruments, cut-offs, and time frames. Despite the variability among instruments, some consistent results with regard to demographics were found. The findings highlight the need for continuous monitoring of problem gambling prevalence rates in order to examine the influence of cultural context on gambling patterns, assess the effectiveness of policies on gambling-related harms, and establish priorities for future research.

To present nationally representative data on lifetime prevalence and comorbidity of pathological gambling with other psychiatric disorders and to evaluate sex differences in the strength of the comorbid associations. Data were derived from a large national sample of the United States. Some 43,093 household and group quarters residents age 18 years and older participated in the 2001-2002 survey. Prevalence and associations of lifetime pathological gambling and other lifetime psychiatric disorders are presented. The diagnostic interview was the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-DSM-IV Version. Fifteen symptom items operationalized the 10 pathological gambling criteria. The lifetime prevalence rate of pathological gambling was 0.42%. Almost three quarters (73.2%) of pathological gamblers had an alcohol use disorder, 38.1% had a drug use disorder, 60.4% had nicotine dependence, 49.6% had a mood disorder, 41.3% had an anxiety disorder, and 60.8% had a personality disorder. A large majority of the associations between pathological gambling and substance use, mood, anxiety, and personality disorders were overwhelmingly positive and significant (p .05). Pathological gambling is highly comorbid with substance use, mood, anxiety, and personality disorders, suggesting that treatment for one condition should involve assessment and possible concomitant treatment for comorbid conditions.

Various psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling have been evaluated in randomised trials. A synthesis of best-quality evidence is required. The objective was to synthesise evidence from randomised trials of psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling (cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT), motivational interviewing therapy, integrative therapy, other psychological therapy), in order to indicate the efficacy of therapies and durability of therapy effects, relative to control conditions. We conducted a search of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR), which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) (all years), EMBASE (1974 -), MEDLINE (1950 -) and PsycINFO (1967 -). We also carried out complementary searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS and CENTRAL for studies published between January 1980 and October 2011. We examined the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov and also conducted manual searches of selected journals and reference lists of included studies. Included studies were clinical trials using random allocation to groups, considering pathological or problem gamblers, and evaluating a psychological therapy for pathological or problem gambling. Control conditions included 'no treatment' controls, referral to Gamblers Anonymous and non-specific treatment component controls. We systematically extracted data on the characteristics and results of studies. Primary outcomes were measures of gambling symptom severity, financial loss from gambling and frequency of gambling. Secondary outcomes were occurrence of pathological gambling diagnoses and depression and anxiety symptoms. Treatment effects were defined by comparisons between therapy and control conditions at post-treatment assessments (conducted from 0 to 3 months following completion of treatment) and follow-up assessments (conducted from 9 to 12 months following completion of treatment), respectively, using the standardised mean difference (SMD) or risk ratio (RR). We synthesised results through random-effects meta-analysis. Fourteen studies (n = 1245) met the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies compared CBT with control and comparisons at 0 to 3 months post-treatment showed beneficial effects of therapy that ranged from medium (when defined by financial loss from gambling: SMD -0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.71 to -0.33, n = 505) to very large (for gambling symptom severity: SMD -1.82; 95% CI -2.61 to -1.02, n = 402). Only one study (n = 147) compared groups at 9 to 12 months follow-up and produced smaller effects that were not significant. Four studies of motivational interviewing therapy were identified and mainly considered samples demonstrating less severe gambling (relative to studies of pathological gamblers). Data suggested reduced financial loss from gambling following motivational interviewing therapy at 0 to 3 months post-treatment (SMD -0.41; 95% CI -0.75 to -0.07, n = 244), although comparisons on other outcomes were not significant. The effect approached zero when defined by gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.03; 95% CI -0.55 to 0.50, n = 163). Studies compared groups at 9 to 12 months follow-up and found a significant effect of motivational interviewing therapy in terms of frequency of gambling (SMD -0.53; 95% CI -1.04 to -0.02, n = 62), with comparisons on other outcomes that were not significant. Two studies of integrative therapies also considered samples demonstrating overall low gambling severity, and found no significant effects of therapy at 0 to 3 months post-treatment. Comparisons at 9 to 12 months follow-up suggested a medium effect from therapy in terms of gambling symptom severity, with no significant differences for other outcomes. One study (n = 18) considered another psychological therapy (i.e.Twelve-Step Facilitated Group Therapy) and suggested beneficial effects in terms of most outcomes at 0 to 3 months post-treatment. The evidence supporting these various classes of therapy ranged from very low to low quality. This review supports the efficacy of CBT in reducing gambling behaviour and other symptoms of pathological and problem gambling immediately following therapy. However, the durability of therapeutic gain is unknown. There is preliminary evidence for some benefits from motivational interviewing therapy in terms of reduced gambling behaviour, although not necessarily other symptoms of pathological and problem gambling. However, the findings are based on few studies and additional research is needed to inform conclusions. There is also evidence suggestive of some possible benefit from integrative therapies, and other psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling. However, there are too few studies and evidence is insufficient to evaluate these therapies. The majority of studies in this review varied in risk of bias, and much of the evidence comes from studies with multiple limitations. The current data may thus reflect overestimates of treatment efficacy.