Problem and Pathological Gambling in a Sample of Casino Patrons

UCLA Gambling Studies Program, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, USA.
Journal of Gambling Behavior (Impact Factor: 1.28). 03/2011; 27(1):35-47. DOI: 10.1007/s10899-010-9200-6
Source: PubMed


Relatively few studies have examined gambling problems among individuals in a casino setting. The current study sought to examine the prevalence of gambling problems among a sample of casino patrons and examine alcohol and tobacco use, health status, and quality of life by gambling problem status. To these ends, 176 casino patrons were recruited by going to a Southern California casino and requesting that they complete an anonymous survey. Results indicated the following lifetime rates for at-risk, problem, and pathological gambling: 29.2, 10.7, and 29.8%. Differences were found with regards to gambling behavior, and results indicated higher rates of smoking among individuals with gambling problems, but not higher rates of alcohol use. Self-rated quality of life was lower among pathological gamblers relative to non-problem gamblers, but did not differ from at-risk or problem gamblers. Although subject to some limitations, our data support the notion of higher frequency of gambling problems among casino patrons and may suggest the need for increased interventions for gambling problems on-site at casinos.

Download full-text


Available from: Richard J Rosenthal, Nov 27, 2014
  • Source
    • "To strengthen this association, it is well established that pathological and problem gamblers display high rates of comorbidity (Petry, 2005; Westphal & Johnson, 2007). For example, elevated rates of substance use disorders are commonly observed in this specific population, most notably alcohol abuse, tobacco consumption and drug use (Fong, Campos, et al., 2011; Gerstein et al., 1999; Johansson, Grant, Kim, Odlaug, & Gö testam, 2009; Momper, Delva, Grogan-Kaylor, Sanchez, & Volberg, 2010; Petry, 2005; Petry, Stinson, & Grant, 2005; Tidwell, & Parker, 2001; Welte, Barnes, Wieczorek, Westphal & Johnson, 2007). The frequency of mood disorders, particularly depression, is also substantially higher in this population compared to the respective frequencies in non-gamblers and non-problem gamblers (Bland, Newman, Orn, & Stebelsky, 1993; Cunningham-Williams, Cottler, Compton, & Spitznagel, 1998; Johansson et al., 2009; Momper et al., 2010; Petry, 2005; Petry et al., 2005; Westphal & Johnson, 2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study estimates the Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) costs of gambling addiction. Pathological gamblers were recruited from treatment centers in Western Switzerland. The difference in HRQoL between pathological gamblers (n = 52) and a sample drawn from the general population (n = 93) was measured through a multi-item instrument, the SF-6D. We used a tobit regression to estimate the effect of pathological gambling on HRQoL, controlling for comorbidities and age. Finally, to obtain a monetary value of the HRQoL loss attributable to gambling addiction, we applied an existing value of a life year estimate. Results showed that pathological gambling is significantly associated with a decrease in the quality of life by 0.076 quality adjusted life year (QALY). The resulting cost per pathological gambler and per year was estimated at CHF 3,830. This study suggests that ignoring quality of life costs results in an underestimation of the social burden of gambling addiction. © 2014, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. All rights reserved.
    Journal of Gambling Issues 10/2014; 29(29):1-23. DOI:10.4309/jgi.2014.29.9
  • Source
    • "Estimated prevalence rates for PG vary worldwide [2]. In the United States, reported rates range from 0.4% to 1.1% [2] [3], and approximately 20% to 40% of individuals with PG are women [4] [5]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: For pathological gambling (PG), a 12-month prevalence rate of up to 0.66% has been reported. Multiple financial, occupational and relationship problems and losses, humiliation of the person and the environment are possible side effects and may lead to hopelessness, suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior. Suicide attempt rates among pathological gamblers of between 4% and 40% and suicidal ideation of between 12% and 92% have been reported. This study aims at assessing the prevalence of suicide attempts in PG and at elucidating differences between the patients with and without suicide attempt history (SAH) in a large nationwide Austrian sample. Between 2002 and 2011, the Austrian Society for the Research of Non-Substance Related Addiction collected 862 questionnaires of pathological gamblers undergoing outpatient and inpatient treatment for PG in Austria. (a) Of all pathological gamblers, 9.7% had an SAH. (b) The SAH group suffered significantly more from a comorbid disorder and was more often in previous inpatient treatments. (c) The SAH patients had a longer time of an abstinence period in their PG career. One in 10 pathological gamblers has an SAH, demonstrating the relevance of suicidality in this population. Significant differences for several parameters were found for PG with and without SAH. However, a regression analysis only explained 15% of the variance. This suggests that suicidality must be considered in pathological gamblers in general.
    General hospital psychiatry 02/2014; 36(3). DOI:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2014.01.012 · 2.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Además, este fracaso compromete, altera o lesiona los intereses personales, familiares y vocacionales (Belloch, Sandín y Ramos, 1995). Existen diferentes estudios que han tratado de identificar características psicológicas que pueden hacer vulnerables a las personas para desarrollar este tipo de comportamientos, entre las que se cuentan la búsqueda de estimulación (Echeburúa, 1992), el ajuste individual (Fong et al., 2011), la inestabilidad emocional (Echeburúa et al., 1994), la impulsividad y dificultades en las relaciones interpersonales. Otro de los factores que aparecen como importantes para el análisis de la vulnerabilidad y la diferencia entre jugadores patológicos y jugadores ocasionales o recreativos es la manera cómo el sujeto percibe, interpreta y valora el juego (Breen, Kruedelbach y Walker, 2001; Christie, 2008; Estévez y Calvete, 2007; Fernández-Alba et al., 2000; Labrador, Mañoso y Fernández, 2008; Labrador y Ruiz, 2008; Ladouceur, 1993; Myrseth, Brunborg y Eidem, 2010; Sylvain y Ladouceur, 1992; Sylvain, Ladouceur y Boisvert, 1997; Thrasher, 2003; Tobón, Cano y Londoño, 2010; Xian et al., 2008). "

    12/2013; 11(2). DOI:10.11144/404
Show more