-
Human Psychopharmacology Sep 2017To evaluate new research conducted over the past few years (2009-2016) assessing the effectiveness of potentially curative and/or preventive methods of alcohol hangover. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate new research conducted over the past few years (2009-2016) assessing the effectiveness of potentially curative and/or preventive methods of alcohol hangover.
METHODS
Data were retrieved by a 4-stage systematic search process. A search of the online Pubmed and Scopus databases were performed, using a combination of keywords: "Alcohol," "Ethanol," and "C H OH," in combination with the terms "Hangover," "Treatment," and "Prevention." The search comprised studies listed between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2016. Findings were synthesized using a systematic approach. Quantitative analysis was not done because of the heterogeneity of the included studies.
RESULTS
Six controlled human studies were identified (placebo controlled-3, controlled studies with a comparator intervention-3). Of the interventions, the use of polysaccharide rich extract of Acanthopanax senticosus, red ginseng antihangover drink, Korean pear juice, KSS formula, and the After-Effect© were associated with a significant improvement of hangover symptoms (p < .05). The highest improvement was observed for the following symptoms: tiredness, nausea/vomiting, and stomachache. None of the methods were effective for all the symptoms.
CONCLUSION
The available evidence suggests that several products are capable of significantly improving some, but not all, of the symptoms related to alcohol hangover. Therefore, further research is necessary to develop clinically effective hangover treatments.
Topics: Alcohol-Related Disorders; Humans; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 28568743
DOI: 10.1002/hup.2600 -
Journal of General Internal Medicine Dec 2019Currently, there are no accepted FDA-approved pharmacotherapies for cocaine use disorder, though numerous medications have been tested in clinical trials. We conducted a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Currently, there are no accepted FDA-approved pharmacotherapies for cocaine use disorder, though numerous medications have been tested in clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to better understand the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for cocaine use disorder.
METHODS
We searched multiple data sources (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library) through November 2017 for systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacological interventions in adults with cocaine use disorder. When possible, we combined the findings of trials with comparable interventions and outcome measures in random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed the risk of bias of individual trials and the strength of evidence for each outcome using standardized criteria. Outcomes included continuous abstinence (3+ consecutive weeks); cocaine use; harms; and study retention. For relapse prevention studies (participants abstinent at baseline), we examined lapse (first cocaine positive or missing UDS) and relapse (two consecutive cocaine positive or missed UDS').
RESULTS
Sixty-six different drugs or drug combinations were studied in seven systematic reviews and 48 RCTs that met inclusion criteria. Antidepressants were the most widely studied drug class (38 RCTs) but appear to have no effect on cocaine use or treatment retention. Increased abstinence was found with bupropion (2 RCTs: RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.59), topiramate (2 RCTs: RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.39 to 4.73), and psychostimulants (14 RCTs: RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.77), though the strength of evidence for these findings was low. We found moderate strength of evidence that antipsychotics improved treatment retention (8 RCTs: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.75).
DISCUSSION
Most of the pharmacotherapies studied were not effective for treating cocaine use disorder. Bupropion, psychostimulants, and topiramate may improve abstinence, and antipsychotics may improve retention. Contingency management and behavioral interventions along with pharmacotherapy should continue to be explored.
SR REGISTRATION
Prospero CRD42018085667.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Central Nervous System Agents; Cocaine; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Drug Therapy; Humans
PubMed: 31183685
DOI: 10.1007/s11606-019-05074-8 -
European Review For Medical and... Apr 2015Ginger (Zingiber officinale) is a spice traditionally used to treat indigestion, nausea and vomiting. Ginger extracts accelerate gastric emptying and stimulate gastric... (Review)
Review
Ginger (Zingiber officinale) is a spice traditionally used to treat indigestion, nausea and vomiting. Ginger extracts accelerate gastric emptying and stimulate gastric antral contractions. These effects are mainly due to the presence of gingerols and shogaols and their activity on cholinergic M receptors and serotonergic 5-HT and 5-HT receptors. Various researches on this subject have led to controversial results, due to the chemical instability of ginger extracts and particularly of gingerols, which are readily-oxidizable substances. A systematic review of double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized studies highlighted the potential efficacy of ginger on the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting of various origins, even though additional controlled studies are needed. This review focuses on pregnancy-induced nausea and vomiting and on chemotherapy induced nausea, and hypothesizes a therapeutic role for ginger extracts in case of side effects, as an alternative to traditional prokinetic drugs such as domperidone, levosulpiride or metoclopramide.
Topics: Animals; Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Catechols; Fatty Alcohols; Female; Gastric Emptying; Zingiber officinale; Humans; Nausea; Plant Extracts; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Vomiting
PubMed: 25912592
DOI: No ID Found -
International Journal of Sport... Jul 2022There is some controversy regarding the interactions between creatine (CRE) and caffeine (CAF) supplements. The aim of this systematic review was to study whether such...
There is some controversy regarding the interactions between creatine (CRE) and caffeine (CAF) supplements. The aim of this systematic review was to study whether such ergogenic interaction occurs and to analyze the protocol to optimize their synchronous use. The PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched until November 2021 following the PRISMA guidelines. Ten studies were included. Three studies observed that CRE loading before an acute dose of CAF before exercise did not interfere in the beneficial effect of CAF, whereas one study reported that only an acute supplementation (SUP) of CAF was beneficial but not the acute SUP of both. When chronic SUP with CRE + CAF was used, two studies reported that CAF interfered in the beneficial effect of CRE, whereas three studies did not report interaction between concurrent SUP, and one study reported synergy. Possible mechanisms of interaction are opposite effects on relaxation time and gastrointestinal distress derived from concurrent SUP. CRE loading does not seem to interfere in the acute effect of CAF. However, chronic SUP of CAF during CRE loading could interfere in the beneficial effect of CRE.
Topics: Athletic Performance; Caffeine; Creatine; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Performance-Enhancing Substances
PubMed: 35016154
DOI: 10.1123/ijsnem.2021-0262 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly prevalent and associated with a substantial public health burden. Although evidence-based interventions exist for treating... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly prevalent and associated with a substantial public health burden. Although evidence-based interventions exist for treating SUDs, many individuals remain symptomatic despite treatment, and relapse is common.Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have been examined for the treatment of SUDs, but available evidence is mixed.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of MBIs for SUDs in terms of substance use outcomes, craving and adverse events compared to standard care, further psychotherapeutic, psychosocial or pharmacological interventions, or instructions, waiting list and no treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to April 2021: Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We searched two trial registries and checked the reference lists of included studies for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs testing a MBI versus no treatment or another treatment in individuals with SUDs. SUDs included alcohol and/or drug use disorders but excluded tobacco use disorders. MBIs were defined as interventions including training in mindfulness meditation with repeated meditation practice. Studies in which SUDs were formally diagnosed as well as those merely demonstrating elevated SUD risk were eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
Forty RCTs met our inclusion criteria, with 35 RCTs involving 2825 participants eligible for meta-analysis. All studies were at high risk of performance bias and most were at high risk of detection bias. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) versus no treatment Twenty-four RCTs included a comparison between MBI and no treatment. The evidence was uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to no treatment on all primary outcomes: continuous abstinence rate (post: risk ratio (RR) = 0.96, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.14, 1 RCT, 112 participants; follow-up: RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.01, 1 RCT, 112 participants); percentage of days with substance use (post-treatment: standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.05, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.47, 4 RCTs, 248 participants; follow-up: SMD = 0.21, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.54, 3 RCTs, 167 participants); and consumed amount (post-treatment: SMD = 0.10, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.52, 3 RCTs, 221 participants; follow-up: SMD = 0.33, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.66, 2 RCTs, 142 participants). Evidence was uncertain for craving intensity and serious adverse events. Analysis of treatment acceptability indicated MBIs result in little to no increase in study attrition relative to no treatment (RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, 21 RCTs, 1087 participants). Certainty of evidence for all other outcomes was very low due to imprecision, risk of bias, and/or inconsistency. Data were unavailable to evaluate adverse events. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) versus other treatments (standard of care, cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, support group, physical exercise, medication) Nineteen RCTs included a comparison between MBI and another treatment. The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to other treatments on continuous abstinence rate at post-treatment (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.44, 1 RCT, 286 participants) and follow-up (RR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.16, 1 RCT, 286 participants), and on consumed amount at post-treatment (SMD = -0.42, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.39, 1 RCT, 25 participants) due to imprecision and risk of bias. The evidence suggests that MBIs reduce percentage of days with substance use slightly relative to other treatments at post-treatment (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.03, 5 RCTs, 523 participants) and follow-up (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.17, 3 RCTs, 409 participants). The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to other treatments on craving intensity due to imprecision and inconsistency. Analysis of treatment acceptability indicated MBIs result in little to no increase in attrition relative to other treatments (RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.26, 14 RCTs, 1531 participants). Data were unavailable to evaluate adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In comparison with no treatment, the evidence is uncertain regarding the impact of MBIs on SUD-related outcomes. MBIs result in little to no higher attrition than no treatment. In comparison with other treatments, MBIs may slightly reduce days with substance use at post-treatment and follow-up (4 to 10 months). The evidence is uncertain regarding the impact of MBIs relative to other treatments on abstinence, consumed substance amount, or craving. MBIs result in little to no higher attrition than other treatments. Few studies reported adverse events.
Topics: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Craving; Humans; Mindfulness; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 34668188
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011723.pub2 -
Nutrients Mar 2021Cognitive functions are essential in any form of exercise. Recently, interest has mounted in addressing the relationship between caffeine intake and cognitive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Cognitive functions are essential in any form of exercise. Recently, interest has mounted in addressing the relationship between caffeine intake and cognitive performance during sports practice. This review examines this relationship through a structured search of the databases Medline/PubMed and Web of Science for relevant articles published in English from August 1999 to March 2020. The study followed PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were defined according to the PICOS model. The identified records reported on randomized cross-over studies in which caffeine intake (as drinks, capsules, energy bars, or gum) was compared to an identical placebo situation. There were no filters on participants' training level, gender, or age. For the systematic review, 13 studies examining the impacts of caffeine on objective measures of cognitive performance or self-reported cognitive performance were selected. Five of these studies were also subjected to meta-analysis. After pooling data in the meta-analysis, the significant impacts of caffeine only emerged on attention, accuracy, and speed. The results of the 13 studies, nevertheless, suggest that the intake of a low/moderate dose of caffeine before and/or during exercise can improve self-reported energy, mood, and cognitive functions, such as attention; it may also improve simple reaction time, choice reaction time, memory, or fatigue, however, this may depend on the research protocols.
Topics: Adult; Athletes; Athletic Performance; Caffeine; Cognition; Female; Humans; Male; Performance-Enhancing Substances; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33800853
DOI: 10.3390/nu13030868 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021Varicose veins are enlarged and tortuous veins, affecting up to one-third of the world's population. They can be a cause of chronic venous insufficiency, which is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Varicose veins are enlarged and tortuous veins, affecting up to one-third of the world's population. They can be a cause of chronic venous insufficiency, which is characterised by oedema, pigmentation, eczema, lipodermatosclerosis, atrophie blanche, and healed or active venous ulcers. Injection sclerotherapy (liquid or foam) is widely used for treatment of varicose veins aiming to transform the varicose veins into a fibrous cord. However, there is limited evidence regarding its effectiveness and safety, especially in patients with more severe disease. This is the second update of the review first published in 2002.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of injection sclerotherapy for the treatment of varicose veins.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, and LILACS databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registries, on 20 July 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (including cluster-randomised trials and first phase cross-over studies) that used injection sclerotherapy for the treatment of varicose veins.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed, selected and extracted data. Disagreements were cross-checked by a third review author. We used Cochrane's Risk of bias tool to assess the risk of bias. The outcomes of interest were cosmetic appearance, complications, residual varicose veins, quality of life (QoL), persistence of symptoms, and recurrent varicose veins. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the worst-case-scenario for dichotomous data imputation for intention-to-treat analyses. For continuous outcomes, we used the 'last-observation-carried-forward' for data imputation if there was balanced loss to follow-up. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 new RCTs for this update, bringing the total to 28 studies involving 4278 participants. The studies differed in their design, and in which sclerotherapy method, agent or concentration was used. None of the included RCTs compared sclerotherapy to no intervention or to any pharmacological therapy. The certainty of the evidence was downgraded for risk of bias, low number of studies providing information for each outcome, low number of participants, clinical differences between the study participants, and wide CIs. Sclerotherapy versus placebo Foam sclerotherapy may improve cosmetic appearance as measured by IPR-V (independent photography review - visible varicose veins scores) compared to placebo (polidocanol 1%: mean difference (MD) -0.76, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.60; 2 studies, 223 participants; very low-certainty evidence); however, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) rates may be slightly increased in this intervention group (RR 5.10, 95% CI 1.30 to 20.01; 3 studies, 302 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Residual varicose vein rates may be decreased following polidocanol 1% compared to placebo (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.29; 2 studies, 225 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Following polidocanol 1% use, there may be a possible improvement in QoL as assessed using the VEINES-QOL/Sym questionnaire (MD 12.41, 95% CI 9.56 to 15.26; 3 studies, 299 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and possible improvement in varicose vein symptoms as assessed using the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) (MD -3.25, 95% CI -3.90 to -2.60; 2 studies, 223 participants; low-certainty evidence). Recurrent varicose veins were not reported for this comparison. Foam sclerotherapy versus foam sclerotherapy with different concentrations Three individual RCTs reported no evidence of a difference in cosmetic appearance after comparing different concentrations of the intervention; data could not be pooled for two of the three studies (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.47; 1 study, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, there was no clear difference in rates of thromboembolic complications when comparing one foam concentration with another (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.41 to 5.33; 3 studies, 371 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Three RCTs investigating higher concentrations of polidocanol foam indicated the rate of residual varicose veins may be slightly decreased in the polidocanol 3% foam group compared to 1% (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.04; 3 studies, 371 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No clear improvement in QoL was detected. Two RCTs reported improved VCSS scores with increasing concentrations of foam. Persistence of symptoms were not reported for this comparison. There was no clear difference in recurrent varicose vein rates (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.32; 1 study, 148 participants; low-certainty evidence). Foam sclerotherapy versus liquid sclerotherapy One RCT reported on cosmetic appearance with no evidence of a difference between foam or liquid sclerotherapy (patient satisfaction scale MD 0.2, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.67; 1 study, 126 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the RCTs investigated thromboembolic complications, QoL or persistence of symptoms. Six studies individually showed there may be a benefit to polidocanol 3% foam over liquid sclerotherapy in reducing residual varicose vein rate; pooling data from two studies showed a RR of 0.51, with 95% CI 0.41 to 0.65; 203 participants; very low-certainty evidence. One study reported no clear difference in recurrent varicose vein rates when comparing sodium tetradecyl sulphate (STS) foam or liquid (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.42; 1 study, 286 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Sclerotherapy versus sclerotherapy with different substances Four RCTs compared sclerotherapy versus sclerotherapy with any other substance. We were unable to combine the data due to heterogeneity or assess the certainty of the evidence due to insufficient data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is a very low to low-certainty evidence that, compared to placebo, sclerotherapy is an effective and safe treatment for varicose veins concerning cosmetic appearance, residual varicose veins, QoL, and persistence of symptoms. Rates of DVT may be slightly increased and there were no data concerning recurrent varicose veins. There was limited or no evidence for one concentration of foam compared to another; foam compared to liquid sclerotherapy; foam compared to any other substance; or one technique compared to another. There is a need for high-quality trials using standardised sclerosant doses, with clearly defined core outcome sets, and measurement time points to increase the certainty of the evidence.
Topics: Humans; Sclerotherapy; Varicose Ulcer; Varicose Veins; Veins; Venous Insufficiency
PubMed: 34883526
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001732.pub3 -
Neuropsychopharmacology : Official... Mar 2024While pharmacological, behavioral and psychosocial treatments are available for substance use disorders (SUDs), they are not always effective or well-tolerated.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
While pharmacological, behavioral and psychosocial treatments are available for substance use disorders (SUDs), they are not always effective or well-tolerated. Neuromodulation (NM) methods, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) may address SUDs by targeting addiction neurocircuitry. We evaluated the efficacy of NM to improve behavioral outcomes in SUDs. A systematic literature search was performed on MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and PubMed databases and a list of search terms for four key concepts (SUD, rTMS, tDCS, DBS) was applied. Ninety-four studies were identified that examined the effects of rTMS, tDCS, and DBS on substance use outcomes (e.g., craving, consumption, and relapse) amongst individuals with SUDs including alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, stimulants, and opioids. Meta-analyses were performed for alcohol and tobacco studies using rTMS and tDCS. We found that rTMS reduced substance use and craving, as indicated by medium to large effect sizes (Hedge's g > 0.5). Results were most encouraging when multiple stimulation sessions were applied, and the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) was targeted. tDCS also produced medium effect sizes for drug use and craving, though they were highly variable and less robust than rTMS; right anodal DLPFC stimulation appeared to be most efficacious. DBS studies were typically small, uncontrolled studies, but showed promise in reducing misuse of multiple substances. NM may be promising for the treatment of SUDs. Future studies should determine underlying neural mechanisms of NM, and further evaluate extended treatment durations, accelerated administration protocols and long-term outcomes with biochemical verification of substance use.
Topics: Humans; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Substance-Related Disorders; Behavior, Addictive; Craving; Prefrontal Cortex
PubMed: 38086901
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-023-01776-0 -
Nutrients Aug 2021Caffeine (1,3,7-trimethylxanthine) is one of the most common substances used by athletes to enhance their performance during competition. Evidence suggests that the...
Caffeine (1,3,7-trimethylxanthine) is one of the most common substances used by athletes to enhance their performance during competition. Evidence suggests that the performance-enhancing properties of caffeine can be obtained by employing several forms of administration, namely, capsules/tablets, caffeinated drinks (energy drinks and sports drinks), beverages (coffee), and chewing gum. However, caffeinated drinks have become the main form of caffeine administration in sport due to the wide presence of these products in the market. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the different effects of caffeinated drinks on physical performance in various sports categories such as endurance, power-based sports, team sports, and skill-based sports. A systematic review of published studies was performed on scientific databases for studies published from 2000 to 2020. All studies included had blinded and cross-over experimental designs, in which the ingestion of a caffeinated drink was compared to a placebo/control trial. The total number of studies included in this review was 37. The analysis of the included studies revealed that both sports drinks with caffeine and energy drinks were effective in increasing several aspects of sports performance when the amount of drink provides at least 3 mg of caffeine per kg of body mass. Due to their composition, caffeinated sports drinks seem to be more beneficial to consume during long-duration exercise, when the drinks are used for both rehydration and caffeine supplementation. Energy drinks may be more appropriate for providing caffeine before exercise. Lastly, the magnitude of the ergogenic benefits obtained with caffeinated drinks seems similar in women and men athletes. Overall, the current systematic review provides evidence of the efficacy of caffeinated drinks as a valid form for caffeine supplementation in sport.
Topics: Athletes; Athletic Performance; Caffeine; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Energy Drinks; Female; Humans; Male; Performance-Enhancing Substances
PubMed: 34578821
DOI: 10.3390/nu13092944 -
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy Oct 2023The objective of this systematic review is to determine the tolerability and safety of psilocybin in a variety of psychiatric and substance-dependence conditions. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this systematic review is to determine the tolerability and safety of psilocybin in a variety of psychiatric and substance-dependence conditions.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review was conducted using Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science through September 2023 using the following terminology: "psilocybin" AND "mental-disease" OR "substance-dependence" AND "disease-therapy," in addition to other synonymous key words.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Literature reporting acute effects and safety data following the use of psilocybin as the pharmacologic intervention in a clinical trial in adult patients with a psychiatric or substance-dependence condition were included. Following the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 16 studies were ultimately included in this review.
DATA SYNTHESIS
The most common treatment-emergent adverse effects reported were transient nausea and headache. Transient anxiety was reported as a frequent psychiatric effect, and 3 participants received a benzodiazepine for refractory anxiety during the psilocybin session. Psilocybin demonstrated modest increases in blood pressure and heart rate, and 1 participant received an antihypertensive for sustained hypertension during the psilocybin session. No cases of psilocybin-induced psychosis or Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder were reported.
RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
Treatment resistance remains a concern for psychiatric patients and novel therapies are needed to help alleviate the burden of morbidity and mortality. Psilocybin demonstrates promising acute and long-term safety that may allow for its use in psychiatric or substance-dependence conditions as an alternative to standards of care or in treatment-resistant patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Psilocybin has demonstrated tolerability and safety in recent literature that has investigated its therapeutic potential in a variety of psychiatric or substance-dependence conditions.
PubMed: 37902038
DOI: 10.1177/10600280231205645