Identifying treatment response subgroups for adolescent cannabis use

Cannabis-related treatment demand at the eve of German cannabis legalization - a 20-years trend analysis

Post-2000, the prevalence of cannabis consumption has been rising internationally. This paper investigates whether cannabis-related treatment demand in German outpatient addiction care facilities (OACFs) has been following this trend. Treatment demand related to cannabis use disorder (CUD) for the period 2001 to 2021 was investigated using data from the nation-wide standardized German Addiction Care Statistical Service. Analyses covered all and first-time treatment admissions, demographics, and treatment outcomes. We identified years with significant changes in slope or direction of trends through joinpoint regression. Trends within the CUD client population were contrasted with trends among the entire OACF client population. CUD is the second-most common cause for OACF admissions in Germany. Between 2001 and 2021, the share of CUD-related cases among total OACF caseload increased from 7.1 to 19.9%, whereby the share of first-time treatment admissions declined from 79.6 to 55.6%. The share of CUD client population > 35 years almost tripled from 6.0 to 17.4%, that of female client population rose from 15.6 to 18.1%. From 2001 to 2007, the share of CUD-related treatments completed with improved symptomatology increased from 54.7 to 65.6%, followed by a marginal decline. CUD-related treatment demand is growing in Germany's OACFs, involving a client population that is increasingly older and more experienced with the addiction care system. As current intervention programmes mainly target adolescents and young adults who have been consuming cannabis only for a short time, adapting service offers to the changing client profiles appears paramount to improve treatment effectiveness.

Functional Family Therapy for families of youth (age 11-18) with behaviour problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Functional Family Therapy (FFT) is a short-term family-based intervention for youth with behaviour problems. FFT has been widely implemented in the USA and other high-income countries. It is often described as an evidence-based program with consistent, positive effects.

Objectives

We aimed to synthesise the best available data to assess the effectiveness of FFT for families of youth with behaviour problems.

Search Methods

Searches were performed in 2013-2014 and August 2020. We searched 22 bibliographic databases (including PsycINFO, ERIC, MEDLINE, Science Direct, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, World CAT dissertations and theses, and the Web of Science Core Collection), as well as government policy databanks and professional websites. Reference lists of articles were examined, and experts were contacted to search for missing information.

Selection Criteria

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) with parallel cohorts and statistical controls for between-group differences at baseline. Participants were families of young people aged 11-18 with behaviour problems. FFT programmes were compared with usual services, alternative treatment, and no treatment. There were no publication, geographic, or language restrictions.

Data Collection and Analysis

Two reviewers independently screened 1039 titles and abstracts, read all available study reports, assessed study eligibility, and extracted data onto structured electronic forms. We assessed risks of bias (ROB) using modified versions of the Cochrane ROB tool and the What Works Clearinghouse standards. Where possible, we used random effects models with inverse variance weights to pool results across studies. We used odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean differences for continuous outcomes. We used Hedges g to adjust for small sample sizes. We assessed the heterogeneity of effects with χ 2 and I 2. We produced separate forest plots for conceptually distinct outcomes and for different endpoints (<9, 9-14, 15-23, and 24-42 months after referral). We grouped studies by study design (RCT or QED), and then assessed differences between these two subgroups of studies with χ 2 tests. We generated robust variance estimates, using correlated effects (CE) models with small sample corrections to synthesise all available outcome data. Exploratory CE analyses assessed potential moderators of effects within these domains. We used GRADE guidelines to assess the certainty of evidence on six primary outcomes at 1 year after referral.

Main Results

Twenty studies (14 RCTs and 6 QEDs) met our inclusion criteria. Fifteen of these studies provided some valid data for meta-analysis; these studies included 10,980 families in relevant FFT and comparison groups. All included studies had high risks of bias on at least one indicator. Half of the studies had high risks of bias on baseline equivalence, support for intent-to-treat analysis, selective reporting, and conflicts of interest. Fifteen studies had incomplete reporting of outcomes and endpoints. Using the GRADE rubric, we found that the certainty of evidence for FFT was very low for all of our primary outcomes. Using pairwise meta-analysis, we found no evidence of effects of FFT compared with other active treatments on any primary or secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were: recidivism, out-of-home placement, internalising behaviour problems, external behaviour problems, self-reported delinquency, and drug or alcohol use. Secondary outcomes were: peer relations and prosocial behaviour, youth self esteem, parent symptoms and behaviour, family functioning, school attendance, and school performance. There were few studies in the pairwise meta-analysis (k < 7) and little heterogeneity of effects across studies in most of these analyses. There were few differences between effect estimates obtained in RCTs versus QEDs. More comprehensive CE models showed positive results of FFT in some domains and negative results in others, but these effects were small (standardised mean difference [SMD] <|0.20|) and not significantly different from no effect with one exception: Two studies found positive effects of FFT on youth substance abuse and two studies found null results in this domain, and the overall effect estimate for this outcome was statistically different from zero. Over all outcomes (15 studies and 293 effect sizes), small positive effects were detected (SMD = 0.19, SE = 0.09), but these were not significantly different from zero effect. Prediction intervals showed that future FFT evaluations are likely to produce a wide range of results, including moderate negative effects and strong positive results (-0.37 to 0.75).

Authors’ Conclusions

Results of 10 RCTs and five QEDs show that FFT does not produce consistent benefits or harms for youth with behavioural problems and their families. The positive or negative direction of results is inconsistent within and across studies. Most outcomes are not fully reported, the quality of available evidence is suboptimal, and the certainty of this evidence is very low. Overall estimates of effects of FFT may be inflated, due to selective reporting and publication biases.

Adolescents with substance abuse problems in outpatient treatment: A one-year prospective follow-up study

Aim:

There is a lack of knowledge about how adolescents with substance abuse problems manage after taking part in treatment. It is also difficult to perform traditional follow-up studies with this group. This article presents the outcome of a prospective study of 455 adolescents who underwent outpatient treatment, based on data taken from official registers. It aims to describe and analyse indications of continued use of substance (CUS) and how various risk and protective factors predict outcomes after initiated treatment at a Maria clinic in Sweden.

Design:

The study is based on structured interviews at intake, and the data that indicated CUS were taken from several different national registers. The analyses included descriptive data and bivariate associations, logistic regressions and a CHAID analysis.

Results:

Almost two thirds of the adolescents have no indication of CUS at one-year follow-up. The ten studied risk factors independently were weak predictors of CUS and it was instead the accumulation of risk factors that were linked to a negative outcome.

Conclusion:

The majority of adolescents who start outpatient treatment for substance abuse problems return to a lesser extent in registers that may indicate a continued problem with alcohol and drugs one year later. A concentration of more than five risk factors appears to be associated with a registration. The study also provides an example of an alternative method for following up adolescents with alcohol and drug abuse problems.

Pattern of predictive features of continued cannabis use in patients with recent-onset psychosis and clinical high-risk for psychosis

Continued cannabis use (CCu) is an important predictor for poor long-term outcomes in psychosis and clinically high-risk patients, but no generalizable model has hitherto been tested for its ability to predict CCu in these vulnerable patient groups. In the current study, we investigated how structured clinical and cognitive assessments and structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI) contributed to the prediction of CCu in a group of 109 patients with recent-onset psychosis (ROP). We tested the generalizability of our predictors in 73 patients at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR). Here, CCu was defined as any cannabis consumption between baseline and 9-month follow-up, as assessed in structured interviews. All patients reported lifetime cannabis use at baseline. Data from clinical assessment alone correctly classified 73% (p < 0.001) of ROP and 59 % of CHR patients. The classifications of CCu based on sMRI and cognition were non-significant (ps > 0.093), and their addition to the interview-based predictor via stacking did not improve prediction significantly, either in the ROP or CHR groups (ps > 0.065). Lower functioning, specific substance use patterns, urbanicity and a lack of other coping strategies contributed reliably to the prediction of CCu and might thus represent important factors for guiding preventative efforts. Our results suggest that it may be possible to identify by clinical measures those psychosis-spectrum patients at high risk for CCu, potentially allowing to improve clinical care through targeted interventions. However, our model needs further testing in larger samples including more diverse clinical populations before being transferred into clinical practice.

Evidence Base on Outpatient Behavioral Treatments for Adolescent Substance Use, 2014-2017: Outcomes, Treatment Delivery, and Promising Horizons

This article updates the evidence base on outpatient behavioral treatments for adolescent substance use (ASU) since publication of the previous review completed for this journal by Hogue, Henderson, Ozechowski, and Robbins (2014). It first summarizes the Hogue et al. findings along with those from recent literature reviews and meta-analytic studies of ASU treatments. It then presents study design and methods criteria used to select 11 comparative studies subjected to Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology level of support evaluation. These 11 studies are detailed in terms of their sample characteristics, methodological quality, and substance use outcomes. Cumulative level of support designations are then made for each identified treatment approach. These cumulative designations are virtually identical to those of the previous review: ecological family-based treatment, individual cognitive-behavioral therapy, and group cognitive-behavioral therapy remain well-established; behavioral family-based treatment and motivational interviewing remain probably efficacious; drug counseling remains possibly efficacious; and an updated total of 5 multicomponent treatments combining more than 1 approach (3 of which include contingency management) are deemed well-established or probably efficacious. Treatment delivery issues associated with evidence-based approaches are then reviewed, focusing on client engagement, fidelity and mediator, and predictor and moderator effects. Finally, to help accelerate innovation in ASU treatment science and practice, the article outlines promising horizons in improving youth identification and access, specifying and implementing pragmatic treatment in community settings, and leveraging emerging lessons from implementation science.

Marijuana commercialization and adolescent substance treatment outcomes in Colorado

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In Colorado, marijuana was legalized for medical use in 2000, commercialized in 2009, and approved for recreational purposes in 2012. Little is known about the association between recent policy changes and adolescent substance treatment outcomes measured by urine drug screens (UDS). This study addressed this research gap.

METHODS

Participants were youth (N = 523) aged 11-19 years who were enrolled in an outpatient motivational interviewing (MI)/cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) plus contingency management (CM) in Denver, Colorado from October 2007 to June 2014. The measures included UDS collected during weekly treatment sessions and sent to a commercial laboratory for quantitative analysis of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)/Creatinine (Cr). Linear regression models and logistic regression models using a Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) approach for repeated measures were completed to answer the study aims.

RESULTS

Males, but not females, had a marginally significant increasing trend over time in monthly average THC/Cr (β = 1.99, p = 0.046). There was a significant increasing trend over time (per 30 days) in the odds of having a negative UDS within 6 sessions (OR = 1.02, 95%CI = 1.003-1.04, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Based on these data, substance treatment outcomes from MI and CBT are mixed, but overall treatment appears to remain effective in a state with legalized marijuana. (Am J Addict 2017;26:802-806).

Cannabis Epidemiology: A Selective Review

BACKGROUND

Globally, the most widely used set of compounds among the internationally regulated drugs is cannabis.

OBJECTIVE

To review evidence from epidemiological research on cannabis, organized in relation to this field's five main rubrics: quantity, location, causes, mechanisms, and prevention/ control.

METHOD

The review covers a selection of evidence from standardized population surveys, official statistics, and governmental reports, as well as published articles and books identified via MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar as of July 2016.

RESULTS

In relation to quantity, an estimated 3% to 5% of the world population is thought to have tried a cannabis product, with at least one fairly recent use, mainly extra-medical and outside boundaries of prescribed use. Among cannabis users in the United States, roughly one in 7-8 has engaged in medical marijuana use. In relation to location, prevalence proportions reveal important variations across countries and between subgroups within countries. Regarding causes and mechanisms of starting to use cannabis, there is no compelling integrative and replicable conceptual model or theoretical formulation. Most studies of mechanisms have focused upon a 'gateway sequence' and person-to-person diffusion, with some recent work on disability-adjusted life years. A brief review of cannabis use consequences, as well as prevention and control strategies is also provided.

CONCLUSION

At present, we know much about the frequency and occurrence of cannabis use, with too little replicable definitive evidence with respect to the other main rubrics. Given a changing regulatory environment for cannabis products, new institutions such as an independent International Cannabis Products Safety Commission may be required to produce evidence required to weigh benefits versus costs. It is not clear that governmentsponsored research will be sufficient to meet consumer demand for balanced points of view and truly definitive evidence.