CANDIS treatment program for cannabis use disorders: findings from a randomized multi-site translational trial

Evaluation of the multimodal DELTA therapy for adolescents with substance use disorders: an exploratory pilot trial

Background

In order to address the lack of manualized treatment programs for adolescents with substance use disorders (SUDs), we developed a manualized group intervention (DELTA). DELTA focusses on substance use reduction and abstinence as well as alleviation of SUD symptoms via additional modules for co-occurring disorders. The goal of this exploratory trial was to assess if DELTA can be conducted in adolescent SUD patients and if participation is related to reductions in substance use, SUD-related problems, and further psychopathologies.

Method

We recruited adolescents at a psychiatric outpatient unit, which were then allocated to either DELTA intervention group (N = 85) or to a waiting-list control group (WL, N = 61) based on parental decision to start a therapy or not. Self-report measures were used as primary outcomes (substance use via interview, use-related problems via DUDIT-Drug Use Disorder Identification Test) and secondary outcomes (psychopathologies via YSR-Youth Self Report). T-tests and Pearson correlations were used to analyze between-group differences across time.

Results

On average, participants attended M = 7.7 (SD = 5.1) of the 16 sessions. Substance use and use-related problems regarding all substances but nicotine was decreased after the intervention, with small to medium not significant effects in favor of DELTA. Self-reported psychopathologies were also reduced at follow-up, with non-significant advantages for DELTA.

Conclusion

DELTA showed small effects on SUD-related and depression-related variables. However, the interpretation is limited by the small sample size. Nonetheless, the DELTA intervention is viable in SUD outpatient treatment and will be further evaluated.Clinical trial registration: The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov under NCT03444974. Registered February, 26th 2018 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03444974).

Gender differences in cannabis use disorder symptoms: A network analysis

BACKGROUND

While cannabis use in women is increasing worldwide, research into gender differences in cannabis use disorder (CUD) symptomology is lacking. In response to limited effectiveness of addiction treatment, research focus has been shifting from clinical diagnoses towards interactions between symptoms, as patterns of symptoms and their interactions could be crucial in understanding etiological mechanisms in addiction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the CUD symptom network and assess whether there are gender differences therein.

METHODS

A total of 1257 Dutch individuals reporting weekly cannabis use, including 745 men and 512 women, completed online questionnaires assessing DSM-5 CUD symptoms and additional items on plans to quit or reduce use, cigarette use, and the presence of psychological diagnoses. Gender differences were assessed for all variables and an Ising model estimation method was used to estimate CUD symptom networks in men and women using network comparison tests to assess differences.

RESULTS

There were gender differences in the prevalence of 6 of the 11 symptoms, but symptom networks did not differ between men and women. Cigarette use appeared to only be connected to the network through withdrawal, indicating a potential role of cigarette smoking in enhancing cannabis withdrawal symptoms. Furthermore, there were gender differences in the network associations of mood and anxiety disorders with CUD symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The association between smoking and withdrawal as well as gender differences in the role of comorbidities in the CUD network highlight the value of using network models to understand CUD and how symptom interactions might affect treatment.

Promoting self-change in cannabis use disorder: Findings from a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

A growing body of literature supports the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and motivational interviewing (MI) for the treatment of problematic cannabis use, diagnostically referred to as cannabis use disorder, though most individuals do not access formal treatment. Stepped-care-type models emphasize interventions across a continuum of severity and there is a need for more treatment options across this continuum. This project focused on the evaluation of the least intensive of the individual interventions - promotion of self-directed recovery.

METHODS

Using a three-arm randomized control trial design, adults (N = 186) with problematic cannabis use and who wished to recover with minimal professional support were recruited from across Canada and randomized to receive a self-directed treatment workbook based on CBT and MI principles (WB; n = 61), the workbook plus a single MI session (WMI; n = 61) or a delayed treatment control (DT; n = 65) condition. Participants completed 3-month and 6-month follow-up assessments.

RESULTS

Across conditions, GEE modeling revealed that the baseline to 3-month slopes differed significantly from zero, ps < 0.001. Participants in the WMI condition reduced their frequency of use to a greater extent than the WB alone, p = 0.005, and DT groups, p = 0.02. Chi-square analysis revealed that participants in the WMI condition also showed greater rates of abstinence at 3-months follow-up than participants in the WB or DT condition, p = 0.046. Changes in the frequency of cannabis use between 3-months and 6-months did not differ significantly between groups, ps > 0.05. For quantity of cannabis use, a significant effect of time emerged, p = 0.002. However, no between-group effects were significant from baseline to 3-months, or from 3- to 6-months, ps > 0.06.

CONCLUSION

Overall, results support the utility of a brief self-directed workbook in combination with a single MI session at promoting changes in cannabis use. This self-directed intervention has the potential to fill an important need in that the self-directed intervention can attract individuals who wish to recover with minimal professional support.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

[https://www.isrctn.com/], identifier [ISRCTN426 32893].

Cannabis, Cannabinoide und Cannabiskonsumstörungen

Keine Droge führt derzeit zu so intensiven, teilweise leidenschaftlich geführten Diskussionen wie Cannabis. Welche gesundheitlichen und sozialen Risiken birgt die Substanz, wenn sie zu Rauschzwecken gebraucht wird? Dieser Beitrag beschreibt die wichtigsten Cannabinoide, das endogene Cannabissystem sowie mögliche kurzund langfristige Risiken. Er zeigt zudem psychotherapeutische Behandlungsoptionen von Cannabismissbrauch und -abhängigkeit auf.

Psychotherapeutic interventions for cannabis use disorder. What do we know and what should we do?

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use disorder is the most commonly reported illegal substance use disorder and demand for treatment is growing worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to compare the two last Cochrane systematic reviews of the literature concerning psychotherapeutic and psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder to determine what new evidence emerged and how craving was considered as a treatment mediator.

METHOD

We extracted raw data from both reviews regarding their titles, objectives, methods and results. This information was analyzed by face validity to distinguish apparent differences from real differences. It enabled us to describe similarities and differences between reviews. We also screened both reviews looking for craving or related words.

RESULTS

The objective and methods of both reviews were mostly similar. Although the second review covered a wider range of psychotherapies, including drug counseling and mindfulness-based meditation as an intervention group and minimal treatment as a control group. Five of the six studies included in the first review were also included in the second review. One study excluded from the first review was included in the last review that included an additional 17 studies published after the first review. The 2016 review performed a meta-analysis whereas the first review was descriptive. Both reviews supported the efficacy of motivational enhancement therapy and cognitive and behavioral therapy interventions with adjunction of contingency management for abstinence when possible. There was no relevant mention of craving in the 2006 review and very few in the 2016 review.

CONCLUSION

The methods and results of the last two Cochrane reviews on psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder were mostly similar. Consistent with other reviews on the same subject and reviews of psychotherapies for other substance use disorders, the 2016 review confirmed evidence already available in the 2006 review. Instead of confirming already confirmed evidence, future research is needed to determine if craving focused treatment would increase efficiency and how to maintain initial treatment outcomes long-term.

[Differential diagnostic distinction between substance-induced and primary psychoses: : Recommendations for general psychiatric and forensic practice]

Substanzinduzierte psychotische Störungen (SIPS) sind häufig und für ca. 25 % der ersten Einweisungen in eine psychiatrische Klinik verantwortlich. Aus klinischer Sicht ist aufgrund ähnlicher psychopathologischer Phänomene die diagnostische Unterscheidung zwischen SIPS und primären (genuinen oder kryptogenen) psychotischen Störungen oft eine Herausforderung. Dieser Umstand wird dadurch erschwert, dass SIPS im Zusammenhang mit Cannabis, Halluzinogenen und Amphetaminen ein erhebliches Risiko des Übergangs in eine primäre psychotische Störung (z. B. Schizophrenie) haben. Im ersten Abschnitt dieser Arbeit werden zunächst zwei exemplarische Fallvignetten aus der allgemeinpsychiatrischen und forensischen Praxis vorgestellt. Danach wird im Sinne einer selektiven Literaturübersicht die Relevanz der differenzialdiagnostischen Unterscheidung beider Störungsbilder aus der Sicht der allgemeinen und forensischen Psychiatrie in Bezug auf Therapie, Prognose und richterliche Entscheidung bezüglich der Unterbringung im Maßregelvollzug (§ 63 vs. § 64 StGB) beleuchtet. Der letzte Abschnitt hat das Ziel, ein strukturiertes Vorgehen zur differenzialdiagnostischen Unterscheidung zwischen SIPS und primären psychotischen Störungen zu erarbeiten. Die in dieser Arbeit dargestellten und diskutierten Konzepte und Befunde sollen klinisch tätigen Psychiatern und Psychologen die Diagnosestellung im allgemeinen und forensischen Kontext erleichtern.

Psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for cannabis use disorder and mental health comorbidities: a narrative review

Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug worldwide, and it is estimated that up to 30% of people who use cannabis will develop a cannabis use disorder (CUD). Demand for treatment of CUD is increasing in almost every region of the world and cannabis use is highly comorbid with mental disorders, where sustained use can reduce treatment compliance and increase risk of relapse. In this narrative review, we outline evidence for psychosocial and pharmacological treatment strategies for CUD, both alone and when comorbid with psychosis, anxiety or depression. Psychosocial treatments such as cognitive behavioural therapy, motivational enhancement therapy and contingency management are currently the most effective strategy for treating CUD but are of limited benefit when comorbid with psychosis. Pharmacological treatments targeting the endocannabinoid system have the potential to reduce cannabis withdrawal and cannabis use in CUD. Mental health comorbidities including anxiety, depression and psychosis hinder effective treatment and should be addressed in treatment provision and clinical decision making to reduce the global burden of CUDs. Antipsychotic medication may decrease cannabis use and cannabis craving as well as psychotic symptoms in patients with CUD and psychosis. Targeted treatments for anxiety and depression when comorbid with CUD are feasible.

Motivational Interviewing for Cannabis Use Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is one of the most used drugs worldwide. There is no gold standard treatment for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Motivational interviewing (MI) has shown efficacy in some substance use disorders. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to assess the effectiveness of MI in CUD.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials or open-label studies published until September 2019 from 3 different databases (Pubmed, Scopus, and PsycINFO) were included, following the PRISMA guidelines and a predetermined set of criteria for article selection. Meta-analyses were conducted. The end point was determined as month 3, and 4 outcomes were analysed (abstinence rates, reduction in frequency of use, reduction in quantity of use, and reduction in cannabis use disorder symptoms) in 2 populations (adolescents and adults).

RESULTS

Forty studies were identified, of which 24 were performed in adults and 16 in adolescents. MI showed efficacy in achieving abstinence in both adults (odds ratio [OR] = 3.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.40-6.16, p < 0.0001) and adolescents (OR = 2.02, 95% CI 1.42-2.89, p < 0.0001). MI showed efficacy in reducing frequency and quantity of use in adults but not in adolescents. Those adults who were in the MI group consumed less joints per day than those in the control group (mean difference = -0.69 joints per day, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.53, p < 0.001), and they consumed on less days per month (mean difference = -3.9 days per month, 95% CI -7.47 to -0.34, p = 0.0317) than those in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

MI is an effective intervention to reduce cannabis use and achieve abstinence, especially among adults and patients with no prior history of psychotic disorder. Further investigation is needed to assess the effect on CUD symptoms. MI should be included in guidelines for treating cannabis use disorder as one of the essential psychological interventions.

[The CIMH track concept in the treatment of psychotic disorders]

The treatment of psychotic disorders and illnesses is a challenge for therapists and institutions due to the heterogeneity of the cause and course, refractory symptoms, lack of therapy adherence and high rates of relapse. These circumstances can be effectively counteracted by the flexibility of therapeutic approaches and settings. A useful but rarely used concept is the treatment of psychoses within the so-called track unit. A track unit is defined as a syndrome-oriented, decentralized, modular unit, adjusted to the patient's individual stage-specific needs across both inpatient and outpatient sectors. The track concept offers a fully integrated sector-spanning model of treatment at all stages of psychotic illnesses as well as a continuity of treatment. Another important goal is the early availability of timely treatment for as many psychotic patients as possible so that the symptoms can be alleviated as soon as possible and the quality of life can be sustainably improved or preserved. The track concept not only improves the current situation of treatment for acutely or chronically psychotic patients but also represents a necessary investment in the future. This treatment model aims to ensure that the good but complex and costly treatment options are available to patients even if inpatient treatment is not favored by the patient.

The state of clinical outcome assessments for cannabis use disorder clinical trials: A review and research agenda

There is considerable variability in the use of outcome measures in clinical trials for cannabis use disorder (CUD), and a lack of consensus regarding optimal outcomes may have hindered development and approval of new pharmacotherapies. The goal of this paper is to summarize an evaluation of assessment measures and clinical endpoints for CUD clinical trials, and propose a research agenda and priorities to improve CUD clinical outcome assessments. The primary recommendation is that sustained abstinence from cannabis should not be considered the primary outcome for all CUD clinical trials as it has multiple limitations. However, there are multiple challenges to the development of a reliable and valid indicator of cannabis reduction, including the lack of a standard unit of measure for the various forms of cannabis and products and the limitations of currently available biological and self-report assessments. Development of a core toolkit of assessments is needed to both allow flexibility for study design, while facilitating interpretation of outcomes across trials. Four primary agenda items for future research are identified to expedite development of improved clinical outcome assessments for this toolkit: (1) determine whether minimally invasive biologic assays could identify an acute level of cannabis use associated with psychomotor impairment or other cannabis-related harms; (2) create an indicator of quantity of cannabis use that is consistent across product types; (3) examine the presence of cannabis-specific functional outcomes; and (4) identify an optimal duration to assess changes in CUD diagnostic criteria.

A preliminary test of a brief intervention to lessen young adults' cannabis use: Episode-level smartphone data highlights the role of protective behavioral strategies and exercise

Brief interventions are increasingly being used to help young adults to moderate their cannabis use. We conducted a randomized clinical trial of a brief (4 weekly sessions), in-person intervention that included a smartphone application that reinforced the use of protective behavioral strategies (PBSs) to lessen cannabis use. Young adults (N = 37; 24 men) who regularly used cannabis were randomized to 2 intervention conditions rooted in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and motivational enhancement therapy (MET). Along with learning CBT + MET strategies, participants in 1 of the conditions were instructed to engage in exercise. All participants used smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment to provide episode-level reports about use of cannabis and PBSs. Two multilevel structural equation models were run to test the study hypotheses that (a) cannabis use would be reduced over the course of the 6-month study, (b) reductions would be moderated by intervention condition, and (c) episode-level PBS use would predict episode-level cannabis use. Participants reduced their cannabis use by approximately 1 half of a standard joint per time point. The MET + CBT + Exercise condition reduced cannabis use to a greater degree than did the MET + CBT condition. With episode-level PBS use in the model, reductions in cannabis use were independent of intervention condition. Our findings suggest that young adults will engage with a smartphone app that serves as a component of an in-person intervention to moderate their cannabis use. Intervention content that promotes the use of PBSs and exercise facilitates reductions in cannabis use. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Pharmacotherapy for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a growing concern, and evidence-based data are needed to inform treatment options.

PURPOSE

To review the benefits and risks of pharmacotherapies for the treatment of CUD.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and clinical trial registries from inception through September 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Pharmacotherapy trials of adults or adolescents with CUD that targeted cannabis abstinence or reduction, treatment retention, withdrawal symptoms, and other outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were abstracted by 1 investigator and confirmed by a second. Study quality was dually assessed, and strength of evidence (SOE) was determined by consensus according to standard criteria.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Across 26 trials, the evidence was largely insufficient. Low-strength evidence was found that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) do not reduce cannabis use or improve treatment retention. Low- to moderate-strength evidence was found that buspirone does not improve outcomes and that cannabinoids do not increase abstinence rates (moderate SOE), reduce cannabis use (low SOE), or increase treatment retention (low SOE). Across all drug studies, no consistent evidence of increased harm was found.

LIMITATIONS

Few methodologically rigorous trials have been done. Existing trials are hampered by small sample sizes, high attrition rates, and heterogeneity of concurrent interventions and outcomes assessment.

CONCLUSION

Although data on pharmacologic interventions for CUD are scarce, evidence exists that several drug classes, including cannabinoids and SSRIs, are ineffective. Because of increasing access to and use of cannabis in the general population, along with a high prevalence of CUD among current cannabis users, an urgent need exists for more research to identify effective pharmacologic treatments.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (PROSPERO: CRD42018108064).

Heavy cannabis use, dependence and the brain: a clinical perspective

AIMS

To summarize and evaluate our knowledge of the relationship between heavy cannabis use, cannabis use disorder (CUD) and the brain.

METHODS

Narrative review of relevant literature identified through existing systematic reviews, meta-analyses and a PubMed search. Epidemiology, clinical representations, potential causal mechanisms, assessments, treatment and prognosis are discussed.

RESULTS

Although causality is unclear, heavy and dependent cannabis use is consistently associated with a high prevalence of comorbid psychiatric disorders and learning and memory impairments that seem to recover after a period of abstinence. Evidence regarding other cognitive domains and neurological consequences, including cerebrovascular events, is limited and inconsistent. Abstinence after treatment is only achieved in a minority of cases; treatment targeted at reduction in use appears have some success. Potential moderators of the impact of CUD on the brain include age of onset, heaviness of use, CUD severity, the ratio of ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol to cannabidiol and severity of comorbid disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence of long-term effects of daily cannabis use and cannabis use disorder on brain-related outcomes is suggestive rather than conclusive, but use is associated with psychiatric morbidity and with cognitive impairments that recover after a period of abstinence.

Cannabis for the Treatment of Chronic Pain in the Era of an Opioid Epidemic: A Symposium-Based Review of Sociomedical Science

OBJECTIVE

This manuscript reviews medical literature published pertaining to the management of chronic pain with medical marijuana therapy (MMJ), with an emphasis on the social, medical, and legal aspects of therapy.

DESIGN

Narrative review of peer-reviewed literature.

METHODS

The 3rd Symposium on Controlled Substances and Their Alternatives for the Treatment of Pain was held in Boston on February 27, 2016, with a focus on MMJ for the treatment of chronic pain. Invited speakers had diverse backgrounds, including pain management, addiction psychiatry, neurology, and legal authorities. The purpose of this conference and this subsequent narrative review is to provide a medical, legal, and logistical framework for physicians and other health care providers to refer to when considering the initiation of medical marijuana therapy.

RESULTS

The invited speakers each covered a unique aspect of MMJ therapy for the treatment of chronic pain. These presentations highlighted the current data for and against the use of MMJ as a pain therapy. Optimal patient selection and screening, in addition to policy developments, were discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing interest in MMJ for chronic pain underscores a need for primary care and pain physicians to better understand the indications and evidence for its use free from cultural bias. Given a lack of full conclusive clinical utility, continued research is needed to better understand how to best utilize MMJ therapy for the treatment of chronic pain. Policy initiatives, such as enumerated indications, should follow medical science in order to prevent another abused substance epidemic.

A smartphone app intervention for adult cannabis users wanting to quit or reduce their use: a pilot evaluation

Background

Smartphone applications (apps) offer a promising alternative to face-to-face treatment due to their ease of access and convenience. However, there is a lack of evidence-based apps for cannabis users wishing to reduce their use.

Objectives

The current study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a smartphone app intervention (called Assess, Plan, Track, and Tips [APTT]) for cannabis users wanting to reduce their use.

Method

The current study included 111 cannabis users (68% male, aged 18–50 yrs) who had used cannabis in the past month, were not currently in treatment, and who wanted to reduce/quit their use. Participants were given access to APTT for 1 month. Participants reported on their cannabis use and related problems, confidence in resisting use, severity of dependence, and stage of change at baseline, post-intervention (4 weeks), and at 1-month follow-up. At post-intervention, participants also reported on their usage and satisfaction with the app.

Results

The current study found that APTT was acceptable, with over 40% of participants using the app over 20 times over the course of a month. Participants showed a reduction in dependence and cannabis related problems over the course of the study. Further, participants’ stage of change at baseline predicted changes in cannabis use.

Conclusions/importance

These findings support the feasibility and acceptability of APTT as an engaging app for cannabis users wishing to better manage their use and support the need for future RCTs to assess the efficacy of mobile-based interventions for cannabis users.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s42238-019-0009-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Psychosocial and Pharmacological Interventions for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder

(Reprinted with permission from Sabioni P and Le Foll B. Psychosocial and pharmacological interventions for the treatment of cannabis use disorder [version 1; referees: 3 approved]. F1000Research 2018, 7(F1000 Faculty Rev):173 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11191.1)).

Systematic review of outcome domains and measures used in psychosocial and pharmacological treatment trials for cannabis use disorder

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is prevalent and demand for treatment is increasing, yet few individuals engage in formal treatment and the efficacy of established interventions for CUD is modest. Existing clinical trials evaluating psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for CUD have incorporated a wide variety of measures for assessing cannabis use outcomes, including abstinence, self-reported frequency and quantity used, withdrawal, use/dependence severity, and other psychosocial outcomes. The heterogeneity of measures and outcomes has limited quantitative analyses of the comparative effectiveness of existing interventions. The purpose of this systematic review is to: 1) identify and characterize approaches for measuring cannabis use in existing CUD intervention trials, including abstinence, frequency and quantity of use, and 2) summarize measures used to assess treatment efficacy in other outcome domains (e.g., cannabis use severity, psychosocial functioning, cannabis withdrawal), and provide a platform for future research to evaluate which outcome measures are most likely to reflect treatment efficacy and clinically significant improvement in other outcome domains.

Introduction: Just Say No? New Insights About Change Versus Constancy in Substance Use Behavioral Decisions in Youth With and Without ADHD

Despite enormous social-psychological and economic consequences of substance abuse in youth and young adults, too little is known about effective interventions among substance users, both with and without ADHD. This special issue reports on four linked investigations that employed a novel research strategy when the Multimodal Treatment Children with ADHD Study (MTA) participants were between ages 21.7 and 27.3 years old (14-16 years after initial assessments). Using combination of in-depth qualitative narrative interviews and quantitative analyses ("mixed methods") of 183 participants from four to six original MTA sites, investigators sought to obtain a more complete understanding of factors contributing to youths' substance use (SU) initiation, maintenance, and desistence, (both among youth with ADHD and control participants). The articles in this special issue illuminate important new insights about possible influences contributing to SU, particularly persistent use/abuse. Findings also illustrate the benefits of mixed-methods studies, not only to better understand the linkages between ADHD and SU, but also to understand other areas of child/adult psychopathology.

Cannabis and Mood Disorders

Purpose of review

The present review will provide an overview of the neurobiology, epidemiology, clinical impact, and treatment of cannabis use disorder (CUD) in mood disorders.

Recent findings

Patients with mood disorders including major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) have higher rates of cannabis use, and CUD compared to the general population. Reasons for this association are not clear, nor are the putative therapeutic effects of cannabis use, or its components delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), in these illnesses. The evidence surrounding treatments for patients with this comorbidity is lacking, with more support for psychotherapeutic treatments compared with pharmacological treatments.

Summary

Cannabis use may be associated mood disorders, but more research is needed to increase our understanding of the mechanisms for this association, and to develop more effective treatments for this comorbidity.

[Evidence-based psychotherapy of addictive disorders]

BACKGROUND

Addictive disorders form the group of the most common mental disorders. A wide range of psychotherapeutic treatment interventions exists; however, the proportion of patients receiving evidence-based interventions or psychotherapeutic treatment in outpatient care is very low.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present review was a systematic reassessment of the empirical evidence for the efficacy of the different forms of psychotherapeutic treatment, identification of new effective interventions and derivation of recommendations for treatment practitioners.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search in a multistage method in the relevant national and international data banks was conducted. Subsequent analysis of topical guidelines, systematic reviews and original studies about addictions and therapy was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 3 topical national guidelines, 2 reviews and 16 original studies could be identified. In particular, cognitive behavioral therapy, behavioral interventions and motivational interventions could be identified as evidence-based interventions for the treatment of addictive disorders. Hypnotherapy can be recommended alternatively for patients dependent on tobacco. Also interesting for practitioners could be new treatment methods, such as neurocognitive training and mindfulness-based interventions.

CONCLUSION

At present, although of high quality, results from existing studies are sometimes inconsistent or are numerically insufficient with respect to special treatment options. Future studies are warranted with respect to different substance use disorders and further patient groups.

Psychosocial and pharmacological interventions for the treatment of cannabis use disorder

Cannabis use has been continuously increasing, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) has become a public health issue. Some psychosocial interventions have demonstrated the ability to reduce cannabis use; however, there are no pharmacotherapies approved for the treatment of CUD. Some drugs have shown limited positive effects on use and withdrawal symptoms, but no controlled studies have been able to show strong and persistent effects on clinically meaningful outcomes. The aim of this review is to synthesize the evidence from the available literature regarding the effectiveness of psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for CUD among adults (that is, 18 years old or older). An analysis of the evidence shows that the current best psychosocial intervention to reduce cannabis use is the combination of motivational enhancement therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy, preferably accompanied by a contingency management approach. In regard to pharmacological interventions, there are mostly unclear findings. Some drugs, such as CB1 agonists, gabapentin, and N-acetylcysteine, have been shown to produce improvements in some symptoms of CUD in single studies, but these have not been replicated. Other classes of medications, including antidepressants and antipsychotics, have been unsuccessful in producing such effects. There is an imminent need for more clinical trials to develop more effective treatments for CUD.

Planning research in psychosocial interventions

A number of research designs have been used to study the efficacy of psychosocial interventions in addictive disorders, including open label studies and randomised controlled trials. Only through a rigorously conducted research, evidence base for effectiveness of a psychosocial intervention can be established. However, research on these interventions are fraught with a number of challenges. It is imperative for researchers to ask appropriate research questions based on sound theoretical understanding of psychiatric disorders, psychosocial interventions and research designs. This would help in choosing the less studied, relevant areas for in depth study as well as in using pragmatic, realistic research designs. Defining intervention clearly is as crucial, as is its uniform implementation across various treatment arms. In addition, tapping the mediators, moderators and confounders of treatment using appropriate methods while assessing the factors that directly impact the outcome is important to determine actual effects of psychosocial intervention. Barriers at different stages must be gauged proactively and dealt with, wherever possible.

Is Cannabis Use Treatment Also Indicated for Patients with Low to Moderate Polysubstance Use

BACKGROUND

Polysubstance use (PSU) is common among patients with cannabis use (CU) and is related to more severe CU problems. However, it is unclear how PSU predicts CU treatment outcomes beyond CU patterns. We examined the frequency, amount, and class of additionally used substances as predictors for primary and secondary outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted crude and adjusted regression analyses for PSU variables as predictors of remission, abstinence, -reduction, and secondary outcomes in 166 help-seeking -patients from a randomized clinical trial of CANDIS, a -cognitive behavioral treatment program.

RESULTS

Patients with recent illegal PSU experienced more difficulties in reducing their CU (B = -1.22, p < 0.001). In contrast, remission rates were slightly higher in patients with a wide variety of -last-year-PSU (RD = 0.04, p < 0.001). Amphetamine use -predicted poorer outcomes regarding CU-related problems (B = -4.22, p = 0.019), and the use of opiates, inhalants, and dissociative substances predicted poorer physical health outcomes (B = -0.62, p = 0.009; B = -0.96, p = 0.039; B = -1.18, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

CU treatment is also effective for patients with moderate PSU. However, treatment effects may be enhanced by addressing specific PSU characteristics as part of a modularized program.

[Cannabis-induced disorders]

Use and misuse of cannabis and marihuana are frequent. About 5% of the adult population are current users but only 1.2% are dependent. The medical use of cannabis is controversial but there is some evidence for improvement of chronic pain and spasticity. The somatic toxicity of cannabis is well proven but limited and psychiatric disorders induced by cannabis are of more relevance, e.g. cognitive disorders, amotivational syndrome, psychoses and delusional disorders as well as physical and psychological dependence. The withdrawal symptoms are usually mild and do not require pharmacological interventions. To date there is no established pharmacotherapy for relapse prevention. Psychosocial interventions include psychoeducation, behavioral therapy and motivational enhancement. The CANDIS protocol is the best established German intervention among abstinence-oriented therapies.

Social cognitive predictors of treatment outcome in cannabis dependence

BACKGROUND

Drug-related outcomes expectancies and refusal self-efficacy are core components of Social Cognitive Theory. Both predict treatment outcome in alcohol use disorders. Few studies have reported expectancies and refusal self-efficacy in cannabis dependence. None have examined both, although both constructs are key targets in Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT). This study tests the predictive role of expectancies and refusal self-efficacy in treatment outcome for cannabis dependence.

DESIGN

Outpatients completed a comprehensive assessment when commencing cannabis treatment and predictors of treatment outcome were tested.

SETTING

A university hospital alcohol and drug outpatient clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

221 cannabis-dependent patients participated in a 6-week CBT program where the goal was abstinence.

MEASUREMENTS

Cannabis Expectancy Questionnaire and Cannabis Refusal Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, cannabis dependence severity [Severity of Dependence Scale], psychological distress [General Health Questionnaire] at baseline; the timeline follow-back procedure at baseline and each session.

FINDINGS

Patients reporting lower confidence in their ability to resist cannabis during high negative affect (emotional relief refusal self-efficacy) had a lower likelihood of abstinence (p=0.004), more days of use (p<0.001), and larger amount used (p<0.001). Negative cannabis expectancies predicted greater likelihood of abstinence (p=0.024). Higher positive expectancies were associated with lower emotional relief self-efficacy, mediating its association with outcome (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Emotional relief refusal self-efficacy and negative expectancies are predictive of better treatment outcomes for cannabis dependence. Positive expectancies may indirectly predict poorer outcome because of a negative association with self-efficacy, but this conclusion remains tentative as directionality could not be established.

Evidence-based Treatment Options in Cannabis Dependency

BACKGROUND

Now that the consumption of natural and synthetic cannabinoids is becoming more widespread, the specific treatment of cannabis-related disturbances is an increasingly important matter. There are many therapeutic options, and it is not always clear which ones are evidence-based and appropriate for use in a given clinical situation.

METHODS

This review is based on reports of pertinent randomized and controlled trials (RCTs) that were retrieved by a selective search in the PubMed and Cochrane databases.

RESULTS

Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) combined with other techniques has been found to have a moderate to large effect (Cohen's d = 0.53-0.9) on the amount of cannabis consumed as well as on the level of psychosocial functioning or the dependence syndrome. Systemic multidimensional family therapy (MDFT) has been found beneficial for younger adolescents who consume large amounts of cannabis and have psychiatric comorbidities. Short-term interventions with motivational talk therapy have been found effective for patients with or without an initial desire to achieve cannabis abstinence. All of these psychotherapeutic interventions are effective at evidence level Ia. The administration of gabapentin had a weak effect (d = 0.26) on the quantity consumed and on abstinence (evidence level Ib). Withdrawal symptoms can be alleviated with cannabinoid-receptor antagonists (d = 0.223 and 0.481) (evidence level Ib). On the other hand, there is evidence that serotonergic antidepressants can worsen withdrawal manifestations and increase the likelihood of relapse.

CONCLUSION

Psychotherapeutic techniques remain the foundation of treatment for cannabis dependence. No drug has yet been approved for the treatment of cannabis dependence because of the lack of scientific evidence. The rates of abstinence that are currently achieved, even with psychotherapy, are still only moderate. Further clinical studies are needed for the evaluation of combinations of various treatments that can meet the needs of individual patients.

Substance use during pregnancy

Prenatal substance use is a critical public health concern that is linked with several harmful maternal and fetal consequences. The most frequently used substance in pregnancy is tobacco, followed by alcohol, cannabis and other illicit substances. Unfortunately, polysubstance use in pregnancy is common, as well as psychiatric comorbidity, environmental stressors, and limited and disrupted parental care, all of which can compound deleterious maternal and fetal outcomes. There are few existing treatments for prenatal substance use and these mainly comprise behavioral and psychosocial interventions. Contingency management has been shown to be the most efficacious of these. The purpose of this review is to examine the recent literature on the prenatal use of tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, stimulants, and opioids, including the effects of these on maternal and fetal health and the current therapeutic options.

Psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use disorder is the most commonly reported illegal substance use disorder in the general population; although demand for assistance from health services is increasing internationally, only a minority of those with the disorder seek professional assistance. Treatment studies have been published, but pressure to establish public policy requires an updated systematic review of cannabis-specific treatments for adults.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder (compared with inactive control and/or alternative treatment) delivered to adults in an out-patient or community setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cumulaive Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and reference lists of articles. Searched literature included all articles published before July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled studies examining a psychosocial intervention for cannabis use disorder (without pharmacological intervention) in comparison with a minimal or inactive treatment control or alternative combinations of psychosocial interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 randomised controlled trials involving 4045 participants. A total of 15 studies took place in the United States, two in Australia, two in Germany and one each in Switzerland, Canada, Brazil and Ireland. Investigators delivered treatments over approximately seven sessions (range, one to 14) for approximately 12 weeks (range, one to 56).Overall, risk of bias across studies was moderate, that is, no trial was at high risk of selection bias, attrition bias or reporting bias. Further, trials included a large total number of participants, and each trial ensured the fidelity of treatments provided. In contrast, because of the nature of the interventions provided, participant blinding was not possible, and reports of researcher blinding often were unclear or were not provided. Half of the reviewed studies included collateral verification or urinalysis to confirm self report data, leading to concern about performance and detection bias. Finally, concerns of other bias were based on relatively consistent lack of assessment of non-cannabis substance use or use of additional treatments before or during the trial period.A subset of studies provided sufficient detail for comparison of effects of any intervention versus inactive control on primary outcomes of interest at early follow-up (median, four months). Results showed moderate-quality evidence that approximately seven out of 10 intervention participants completed treatment as intended (effect size (ES) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.78, 11 studies, 1424 participants), and that those receiving psychosocial intervention used cannabis on fewer days compared with those given inactive control (mean difference (MD) 5.67, 95% CI 3.08 to 8.26, six studies, 1144 participants). In addition, low-quality evidence revealed that those receiving intervention were more likely to report point-prevalence abstinence (risk ratio (RR) 2.55, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.83, six studies, 1166 participants) and reported fewer symptoms of dependence (standardised mean difference (SMD) 4.15, 95% CI 1.67 to 6.63, four studies, 889 participants) and cannabis-related problems compared with those given inactive control (SMD 3.34, 95% CI 1.26 to 5.42, six studies, 2202 participants). Finally, very low-quality evidence indicated that those receiving intervention reported using fewer joints per day compared with those given inactive control (SMD 3.55, 95% CI 2.51 to 4.59, eight studies, 1600 participants). Notably, subgroup analyses found that interventions of more than four sessions delivered over longer than one month (high intensity) produced consistently improved outcomes (particularly in terms of cannabis use frequency and severity of dependence) in the short term as compared with low-intensity interventions.The most consistent evidence supports the use of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), motivational enhancement therapy (MET) and particularly their combination for assisting with reduction of cannabis use frequency at early follow-up (MET: MD 4.45, 95% CI 1.90 to 7.00, four studies, 612 participants; CBT: MD 10.94, 95% CI 7.44 to 14.44, one study, 134 participants; MET + CBT: MD 7.38, 95% CI 3.18 to 11.57, three studies, 398 participants) and severity of dependence (MET: SMD 4.07, 95% CI 1.97 to 6.17, two studies, 316 participants; MET + CBT: SMD 7.89, 95% CI 0.93 to 14.85, three studies, 573 participants), although no particular intervention was consistently effective at nine-month follow-up or later. In addition, data from five out of six studies supported the utility of adding voucher-based incentives for cannabis-negative urines to enhance treatment effect on cannabis use frequency. A single study found contrasting results throughout a 12-month follow-up period, as post-treatment outcomes related to overall reduction in cannabis use frequency favoured CBT alone without the addition of abstinence-based or treatment adherence-based contingency management. In contrast, evidence of drug counselling, social support, relapse prevention and mindfulness meditation was weak because identified studies were few, information on treatment outcomes insufficient and rates of treatment adherence low. In line with treatments for other substance use, abstinence rates were relatively low overall, with approximately one-quarter of participants abstinent at final follow-up. Finally, three studies found that intervention was comparable with treatment as usual among participants in psychiatric clinics and reported no between-group differences in any of the included outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Included studies were heterogeneous in many aspects, and important questions regarding the most effective duration, intensity and type of intervention were raised and partially resolved. Generalisability of findings was unclear, most notably because of the limited number of localities and homogeneous samples of treatment seekers. The rate of abstinence was low and unstable although comparable with treatments for other substance use. Psychosocial intervention was shown, in comparison with minimal treatment controls, to reduce frequency of use and severity of dependence in a fairly durable manner, at least in the short term. Among the included intervention types, an intensive intervention provided over more than four sessions based on the combination of MET and CBT with abstinence-based incentives was most consistently supported for treatment of cannabis use disorder.

Psychological and psychosocial interventions for cannabis cessation in adults: a systematic review short report

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is the most commonly used illicit drug worldwide. Cannabis dependence is a recognised psychiatric diagnosis, often diagnosed via the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria and the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision. Cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of medical and psychological problems. This systematic review evaluates the use of a wide variety of psychological and psychosocial interventions, such as motivational interviewing (MI), cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and contingency management.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the clinical effectiveness of psychological and psychosocial interventions for cannabis cessation in adults who use cannabis regularly.

DATA SOURCES

Studies were identified via searches of 11 databases [MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, PsycINFO, Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index, ClinicalTrials.gov and metaRegister of Current Controlled Trials] from inception to February 2014, searching of existing reviews and reference tracking.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing psychological or psychosocial interventions in a community setting were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed using adapted Cochrane criteria and narrative synthesis was undertaken. Outcomes included change in cannabis use, severity of cannabis dependence, motivation to change and intervention adherence.

RESULTS

The review included 33 RCTs conducted in various countries (mostly the USA and Australia). General population studies: 26 studies assessed the general population of cannabis users. Across six studies, CBT (4-14 sessions) significantly improved outcomes (cannabis use, severity of dependence, cannabis problems) compared with wait list post treatment, maintained at 9 months in the one study with later follow-up. Studies of briefer MI or motivational enhancement therapy (MET) (one or two sessions) gave mixed results, with some improvements over wait list, while some comparisons were not significant. Four studies comparing CBT (6-14 sessions) with MI/MET (1-4 sessions) also gave mixed results: longer courses of CBT provided some improvements over MI. In one small study, supportive-expressive dynamic psychotherapy (16 sessions) gave significant improvements over one-session MI. Courses of other types of therapy (social support group, case management) gave similar improvements to CBT based on limited data. Limited data indicated that telephone- or internet-based interventions might be effective. Contingency management (vouchers for abstinence) gave promising results in the short term; however, at later follow-ups, vouchers in combination with CBT gave better results than vouchers or CBT alone. Psychiatric population studies: seven studies assessed psychiatric populations (schizophrenia, psychosis, bipolar disorder or major depression). CBT appeared to have little effect over treatment as usual (TAU) based on four small studies with design limitations (both groups received TAU and patients were referred). Other studies reported no significant difference between types of 10-session therapy.

LIMITATIONS

Included studies were heterogeneous, covering a wide range of interventions, comparators, populations and outcomes. The majority were considered at high risk of bias. Effect sizes were reported in different formats across studies and outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, courses of CBT and (to a lesser extent) one or two sessions of MI improved outcomes in a self-selected population of cannabis users. There was some evidence that contingency management enhanced long-term outcomes in combination with CBT. Results of CBT for cannabis cessation in psychiatric populations were less promising, but may have been affected by provision of TAU in both groups and the referred populations. Future research should focus on the number of CBT/MI sessions required and potential clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of shorter interventions. CBT plus contingency management and mutual aid therapies warrant further study. Studies should consider potential effects of recruitment methods and include inactive control groups and long-term follow-up. TAU arms in psychiatric population studies should aim not to confound the study intervention.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014008952.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research HTA programme.

Risks associated with the non-medicinal use of cannabis

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is the most commonly consumed illicit drug around the world; in Germany, about 4.5% of all adults use it each year. Intense cannabis use is associated with health risks. Evidence-based treatments are available for health problems caused by cannabis use.

METHODS

Selective literature review based on a search of the PubMed database, with special emphasis on systematic reviews, meta-analyses, cohort studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), case-control studies, and treatment guidelines.

RESULTS

The delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol content of cannabis products is rising around the world as a result of plant breeding, while cannabidiol, in contrast, is often no longer detectable. Various medical conditions can arise acutely after cannabis use, depending on the user's age, dose, frequency, mode and situation of use, and individual disposition; these include panic attacks, psychotic symptoms, deficient attention, impaired concentration, motor incoordination, and nausea. In particular, intense use of high doses of cannabis over many years, and the initiation of cannabis use in adolescence, can be associated with substance dependence (DSM-5; ICD-10), specific withdrawal symptoms, cognitive impairment, affective disorders, psychosis, anxiety disorders, and physical disease outside the brain (mainly respiratory and cardiovascular conditions). At present, the most effective way to treat cannabis dependence involves a combination of motivational encouragement, cognitive behavioral therapy, and contingency management (level 1a evidence). For adolescents, family therapy is also recommended (level 1a evidence). No pharmacological treatments can be recommended to date, as evidence for their efficacy is lacking.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed to elucidate the causal relationships between intense cannabis use and potential damage to physical and mental health. Health problems due to cannabis use can be effectively treated.

Substance Use in the Perinatal Period

Perinatal substance use remains a major public health problem and is associated with a number of deleterious maternal and fetal effects. Polysubstance use in pregnancy is common and can potentiate adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Tobacco is the most commonly used substance in pregnancy, followed by alcohol and illicit substances. The treatments for perinatal substance use are limited and consist mostly of behavioral and psychosocial interventions. Of these, contingency management has shown the most efficacy. More recently, novel interventions such as progesterone for postpartum cocaine use have shown promise. The purpose of this review is to examine the recent literature on the use of tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, stimulants, and opioids in the perinatal period, their effects on maternal and fetal health, and current treatments.

Systematic analysis of changes in cannabis use among participants in control conditions of randomised controlled trials

Introduction

Cannabis remains the most used illegal substance across the globe, and negative outcomes and disorders are common. A spotlight therefore falls on reductions in cannabis use in people with cannabis use disorder. Current estimates of unassisted cessation or reduction in cannabis use rely on community surveys, and few studies focus on individuals with disorder. A key interest of services and researchers is to estimate effect size of reductions in consumption among treatment seekers who do not obtain treatment. Effects within waiting list or information-only control conditions of randomised controlled trials offer an opportunity to study this question.

Method

This paper examines the extent of reductions in days of cannabis use in the control groups of randomised controlled trials on treatment of cannabis use disorders. A systematic literature search was performed to identify trials that reported days of cannabis use in the previous 30 (or equivalent).

Results

Since all but one of the eight identified studies had delayed treatment controls, results could only be summarised across 2-4 months. Average weighted days of use in the previous 30 days fell from 24.5 to 19.9, and a meta-analysis using a random effects model showed an average reduction of 0.442 SD. However, every study had at least one significant methodological issue.

Conclusions

While further high-quality data is needed to confirm the observed effects, these results provide a baseline from which researchers and practitioners can estimate the extent of change required to detect effects of cannabis treatments in services or treatment trials.

Internal consistency and measurement equivalence of the cannabis screening questions on the paper-and-pencil face-to-face ASSIST versus the online instrument

Background

Validated Internet-based screening tools for cannabis use and abuse are needed. The present study aimed to establish equivalence between the previously validated Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) as a paper-and-pencil (PaP)-administered questionnaire and its online use.

Methods

Two groups of cannabis users took part in this study and the results were analyzed using structural equation modeling. One group consisted of 150 participants and was assessed with the ASSIST PaP questionnaire in a face-to-face interview (the PaP group). They were recruited from three settings: a primary health care outpatient clinic, a general psychiatric facility, and an ambulatory specialized addiction treatment facility. The other group (the Web group) comprised 1382 persons who answered the online version of the same questionnaire. This sample was drawn from people who naturalistically visited a website dedicated to helping people with cannabis addiction.

Results

The internal consistency was good for the online questionnaire (0.74) and high for the already validated PaP questionnaire (0.91). The Web group, however, had higher scores on cannabis use than did the PaP group. The results show support for configural invariance, meaning that the one-factor structure was preserved across groups, although measurement equivalence between these two survey modes was not achieved. However, when the Web group was split into two random subsamples, measurement invariance was demonstrated between them by cross-validation.

Conclusions

Measurement equivalence was not achieved between the two survey modes. Nonetheless, subanalyses of the Web group demonstrated that the cannabis screening questions of the ASSIST can be used for online screening. Differences in ASSIST scores between samples may be due to the sensitive nature of the information surveyed, with possible underreporting in face-to-face interviews, or to the different characteristics of the Web group because of the specialized nature of the website.

Youth marijuana use: state of the science for the practicing clinician

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite widespread marijuana use among adolescents, accurate information on known health effects is poorly disseminated to clinicians and their patients. Amidst rapidly evolving drug policy in the United States and elsewhere, it is imperative that providers understand the short-term and long-term consequences of marijuana use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research on regular marijuana use highlights a unique susceptibility of the developing adolescent brain to adverse neurocognitive and psychiatric outcomes. Although studies have not firmly established causality, onset of regular marijuana use in adolescence is associated with later decline in cognitive function, as well as with adult onset of psychosis and anxiety. Educational and employment outcomes may be poorer among regular marijuana-using adolescents. A number of other adverse respiratory, cardiovascular, endocrine and gastrointestinal associations with regular marijuana use have also been established. Good screening tools and promising brief intervention and behavioral treatment programs are available to clinicians, who are in a position to identify problematic marijuana use among adolescents.

SUMMARY

A common misperception among youth is that marijuana use is without harm. However, adolescent marijuana use may have measurable, durable, and potentially irreversible effects on later cognitive function and mental health.