-
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Jul 2020Methamphetamine (METH) use is on the rise globally, with the number of treatment seekers increasing exponentially across the globe. Evidence-based therapies are needed...
BACKGROUND
Methamphetamine (METH) use is on the rise globally, with the number of treatment seekers increasing exponentially across the globe. Evidence-based therapies are needed to meet rising treatment needs. This systematic review intends to appraise the existing evidence to identify effective non-pharmaceutical approaches for the treatment of METH use disorder.
METHODS
Five electronic bibliographic databases-Ovid (Medline), Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science and PsycINFO- were searched to identify relevant studies that were published between January 1995 to February 2020. Studies were selected and assessed by two independent reviewers. A systematic review of data from both randomised control trials (RCT) and non-RCTs was conducted to appraise the evidence.
RESULTS
A total of 44 studies were included in the review. Behavioural interventions, i.e. cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), contingency management (CM), exercise, residential rehabilitation based therapies, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and matrix model demonstrated treatment efficacy in promoting abstinence, reducing methamphetamine use or craving in the participants. While CM interventions showed the strongest evidence favouring the outcomes assessed, tailored CBT alone or with CM was also effective in the target population.
CONCLUSIONS
Behavioural interventions should be considered as the first line of treatment for methamphetamine use disorder. Future studies should address the longevity of the effects, and limitations due to smaller sample sizes and high dropout rates to enable better assessment of evidence.
Topics: Amphetamine-Related Disorders; Behavior Therapy; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Exercise; Humans; Methamphetamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32445927
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108060 -
BMC Medical Research Methodology May 2020Synthesis of psychometric properties of substance use measures to identify patterns of use and substance use disorders remains limited. To address this gap, we sought to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Synthesis of psychometric properties of substance use measures to identify patterns of use and substance use disorders remains limited. To address this gap, we sought to systematically evaluate the psychometric properties of measures to detect substance use and misuse.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature on measures of substance classes associated with HIV risk (heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, ecstasy, alcohol) that were published in English before June 2016 that reported at least one of the following psychometric outcomes of interest: internal consistency (alpha), test-retest/inter-rater reliability (kappa), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. We used meta-analytic techniques to generate pooled summary estimates for these outcomes using random effects and hierarchical logistic regression models.
RESULTS
Findings across 387 paper revealed that overall, 65% of pooled estimates for alpha were in the range of fair-to-excellent; 44% of estimates for kappa were in the range of fair-to-excellent. In addition, 69, 97, 37 and 96% of pooled estimates for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value, respectively, were in the range of moderate-to-excellent.
CONCLUSION
We conclude that many substance use measures had pooled summary estimates that were at the fair/moderate-to-excellent range across different psychometric outcomes. Most scales were conducted in English, within the United States, highlighting the need to test and validate these measures in more diverse settings. Additionally, the majority of studies had high risk of bias, indicating a need for more studies with higher methodological quality.
Topics: Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Humans; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 32380951
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-020-00963-7 -
Environment International May 2020The rate of drug excretion (excretion factor) is a critical parameter for monitoring drug consumption in the population by wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE). Previous...
The rate of drug excretion (excretion factor) is a critical parameter for monitoring drug consumption in the population by wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE). Previous studies have refined excretion factors for common illicit drugs, such as cocaine, amphetamine, methamphetamine, heroin, to improve the accuracy and reduce uncertainty in back-calculating consumption. Nevertheless, for ketamine, one of the most prevalent psychoactive substances, a careful review of its excretion factors has not been performed due to limited pharmacokinetic data. Here we review WBE studies and seizure data to refine and validate the excretion factors for ketamine and norketamine. The average ketamine/norketamine ratio in wastewater (5.36) was much higher than that found in urine (0.64), which means that the excretion factors derived only from pharmacokinetics data are not appropriate. Based on the comparison of the ratio between estimated consumptions of ketamine and methamphetamine by WBE with their corresponding ratio in official seizure data, a revised WBE excretion factor of 20% was proposed for ketamine following this review and applied to estimate the ketamine consumption in China. The revised estimates of ketamine consumption corresponded well with drug statistics. This suggests that the revised ketamine excretion factor is appropriate for estimating ketamine consumption by WBE. Systematic review of WBE studies is a suitable approach to refine the excretion factors for substances with inadequate pharmacokinetic data.
Topics: China; Humans; Ketamine; Seizures; Wastewater; Wastewater-Based Epidemiological Monitoring; Water Pollutants, Chemical
PubMed: 32203805
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105645 -
CNS Drugs Apr 2020Stimulant drugs are second only to cannabis as the most widely used class of illicit drug globally, accounting for 68 million past-year consumers. Dependence on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Stimulant drugs are second only to cannabis as the most widely used class of illicit drug globally, accounting for 68 million past-year consumers. Dependence on amphetamines (AMPH) or methamphetamine (MA) is a growing global concern. Yet, there is no established pharmacotherapy for AMPH/MA dependence. A comprehensive assessment of the research literature on pharmacotherapy for AMPH/MA dependence may inform treatment guidelines and future research directions.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed the peer-reviewed literature via the electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and SCOPUS for randomised controlled trials reported in the English language examining a pharmacological treatment for AMPH/MA dependence or use disorder. We included all studies published to 19 June 2019. The selected studies were evaluated for design; methodology; inclusion and exclusion criteria; sample size; pharmacological and (if included) psychosocial interventions; length of follow-up and follow-up schedules; outcome variables and measures; results; overall conclusions and risk of bias. Outcome measures were any reported impact of treatment related to AMPH/MA use.
RESULTS
Our search returned 43 studies that met our criteria, collectively enrolling 4065 participants and reporting on 23 individual pharmacotherapies, alone or in combination. Disparate outcomes and measures (n = 55 for the primary outcomes) across studies did not allow for meta-analyses. Some studies demonstrated mixed or weak positive signals (often in defined populations, e.g. men who have sex with men), with some variation in efficacy signals dependent on baseline frequency of AMPH/MA use. The most consistent positive findings have been demonstrated with stimulant agonist treatment (dexamphetamine and methylphenidate), naltrexone and topiramate. Less consistent benefits have been shown with the antidepressants bupropion and mirtazapine, the glutamatergic agent riluzole and the corticotropin releasing factor (CRF-1) antagonist pexacerfont; whilst in general, antidepressant medications (e.g. selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs], tricyclic antidepressants [TCAs]) have not been effective in reducing AMPH/MA use.
CONCLUSIONS
No pharmacotherapy yielded convincing results for the treatment of AMPH/MA dependence; mostly studies were underpowered and had low treatment completion rates. However, there were positive signals from several agents that warrant further investigation in larger scale studies; agonist therapies show promise. Common outcome measures should include change in use days. Future research must address the heterogeneity of AMPH/MA dependence (e.g. coexisting conditions, severity of disorder, differences between MA and AMPH dependence) and the role of psychosocial intervention.
Topics: Amphetamine; Amphetamine-Related Disorders; Animals; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Humans; Methamphetamine; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 32185696
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-020-00711-x -
BMC Oral Health Feb 2020The aim of our study was to perform a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis in order to investigate relationship between drug use and oral health. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The aim of our study was to perform a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis in order to investigate relationship between drug use and oral health.
METHODS
We searched for studies in English published before July 1, 2019 on PsycINFO, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus, and Web of Science. We assessed the relationship between drug use (methamphetamines, heroin; opiates; crack, cocaine and cannabis as dependent variables) and reported tooth loss, periodontal disease, or decayed, missing, and filled teeth index as an independent variable. The data were analyzed using Stata 12.0 software.
RESULTS
We initially identified 1836 potential articles (with 1100 duplicates) and screened the remaining 736 titles and abstracts, comprising 54 studies. In the next step, we evaluated the full-texts; 44 studies were excluded, accordingly. In total, we included 10 publications in the meta-analysis. Drug type was associated with periodontal disease (OR 1.44; 95% CI 0.8-2.6) and pooled estimates showed that type of drug used increased the odds of the number of decayed, missed and filled teeth (DMFT) (OR 4.11; 95% CI 2.07-8.15) respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The analytical challenges of segregating the impact of individual drug types on oral health diseases mean that investigations on the direct relationship between oral health status and drug use are limited. Developing programs to improve potential confounding with various substances and addressing the dental health needs of people who use drugs is vital if we are to improve their overall quality of life.
Topics: Dental Caries; Drug Users; Humans; Oral Health; Periodontal Diseases; Quality of Life; Substance-Related Disorders; Tooth Loss
PubMed: 32041585
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-1010-3 -
Frontiers in Neuroscience 2019Substance Use Disorder (SUD) and behavioral addictions are common and require a multidisciplinary approach. New technologies like Virtual Reality could have the...
Substance Use Disorder (SUD) and behavioral addictions are common and require a multidisciplinary approach. New technologies like Virtual Reality could have the potential to improve assessment and treatment of these disorders. In the present paper, we therefore present an overview of Virtual Reality (Head Mounted Devices) in the field of addiction medicine for craving assessment and treatment. We conducted a systematic review by querying PubMed database for the titles of articles published up to March 2019 with the terms [virtual] AND [addictive] OR [addiction] OR [substance] OR [alcohol] OR [cocaine] OR [cannabis] OR [opioid] OR [tobacco] OR [nicotine] OR [methamphetamine] OR [gaming] OR [gambling]. We screened 319 abstracts and analyzed 37 articles, dividing them into two categories, the first for assessment of cue reactivity (craving, psychophysiological response and attention to cue) and the second for intervention, each drug (nicotine, cocaine, alcohol, cannabis, gambling) being detailed within each category. This overview suggest that VR provide benefits in the assessment and treatment of substance use disorders and behavior addictions and achieve high levels of ecological validity. While, craving provocation in VR is effective across addiction disorders, treatments based exclusively on virtual exposure to drug related cues as shown heterogenous results.
PubMed: 31998066
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2019.01409 -
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment Feb 2020Regular methamphetamine use is associated with increased rates of psychiatric symptoms. Although there has been a substantial body of research reporting on the...
BACKGROUND
Regular methamphetamine use is associated with increased rates of psychiatric symptoms. Although there has been a substantial body of research reporting on the effectiveness of psychological treatments for reducing methamphetamine use, there is a paucity of research examining the effects of these treatments on co-occurring psychiatric symptoms. We addressed this gap by undertaking a systematic review of the evidence of the effectiveness of psychological treatments for methamphetamine use on psychiatric symptom outcomes in randomized controlled trials.
METHODS
A narrative synthesis of studies was conducted following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement to inform methodology. Eight electronic peer-reviewed databases were searched. Ten eligible studies were assessed.
RESULTS
Most studies found an overall reduction in levels of methamphetamine use and psychiatric symptoms among samples as a whole. Although brief interventions were effective, there is evidence that more intensive interventions have greater impact on methamphetamine use and/or psychiatric symptomatology. Intervention attendance was variable.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence suggests that a variety of psychological treatments are effective in reducing levels of methamphetamine use and improving psychiatric symptoms. Future research should consider how psychological treatments could maximize outcomes in the co-occurring domains of methamphetamine use and psychiatric symptoms, with increasing treatment attendance as a focus. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016043657.
Topics: Humans; Methamphetamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Substance-Related Disorders; Symptom Assessment
PubMed: 31856953
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2019.09.005 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019This review represents one in a family of three reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This review represents one in a family of three reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity, or drug use, or both.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched 12 electronic bibliographic databases up to February 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 trials with 2560 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (7/13 studies, 53%) and community (6/13 studies, 47%) settings. The rating of bias was affected by the lack of clear reporting by authors, and we rated many items as 'unclear'. In two studies (190 participants) collaborative case management in comparison to treatment as usual did not reduce drug use (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 2.12; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), reincarceration at nine months (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.57; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), and number of subsequent arrests at 12 months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.49; 1 study, 113 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study (36 participants) comparing buprenorphine to placebo showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at end of treatment (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.20) and three months (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35); very low-certainty evidence. No adverse events were reported. One study (38 participants) comparing interpersonal psychotherapy to a psychoeducational intervention did not find reduction in drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50; low-certainty evidence). One study (31 participants) comparing acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) to a waiting list showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use using the Addiction Severity Index (mean difference (MD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and abstinence from drug use at six months (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43); low-certainty evidence. One study (314 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills to a therapeutic community programme and aftercare showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.27), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03); criminal activity (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03), or drug-related crime (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.32). A significant reduction for arrested (not for parole) violations at six months follow-up was significantly in favour of cognitive behavioural skills (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.77; very low-certainty evidence). A second study with 115 participants comparing cognitive behavioural skills to an alternative substance abuse treatment showed no significant reduction in reincarceration at 12 months (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.12; low certainty-evidence. One study (44 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills and standard therapy versus treatment as usual showed no significant reduction in Addiction Severity Index (ASI) drug score at three months (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09) and six months (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.05), and incarceration at three months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.68) and six months (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.27); very low-certainty evidence. One study (171 participants) comparing a single computerised intervention versus case management showed no significant reduction in the number of days not using drugs at three months (MD -0.89, 95% CI -4.83 to 3.05; low certainty-evidence). One study (116 participants) comparing dialectic behavioural therapy and case management (DBT-CM) versus a health promotion intervention showed no significant reduction at six months follow-up in positive drug testing (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.03), number of people not using marijuana (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.59), crack (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.14), cocaine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12), heroin (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.13), methamphetamine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20), and self-reported drug use for any drug (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.56); very low-certainty evidence. One study (211 participants) comparing a therapeutic community programme versus work release showed no significant reduction in marijuana use at six months (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.19 to 5.65), nor 18 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.45), heroin use at six months (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14), nor 18 months (RR 1.92, 95% CI 0.24 to 15.37), crack use at six months (RR 2.07, 95% CI 0.41 to 10.41), nor 18 months (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.19 to 14.06), cocaine use at six months (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.50), nor 18 months (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.35). It also showed no significant reduction in incarceration for drug offences at 18 months (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.42); with overall very low- to low-certainty evidence. One study (511 participants) comparing intensive discharge planning and case management versus prison only showed no significant reduction in use of marijuana (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.16), hard drugs (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.43), crack cocaine (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.54), nor positive hair testing for marijuana (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.03); it found a significant reduction in arrests (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.87), but no significant reduction in drug charges (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.53) nor incarceration (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.39); moderate-certainty evidence. One narrative study summary (211 participants) comparing buprenorphine pre- and post-release from prison showed no significant reduction in drug use at 12 months post-release; low certainty-evidence. No adverse effects were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The studies showed a high degree of heterogeneity for types of comparisons, outcome measures and small samples. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required. On one outcome of arrest (no parole violations), we identified a significant reduction when cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was compared to a therapeutic community programme. But for all other outcomes, none of the interventions were effective. Larger trials are required to increase the precision of confidence about the certainty of evidence.
Topics: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy; Buprenorphine; Case Management; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Criminals; Female; Humans; Law Enforcement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 31834635
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010910.pub3 -
EClinicalMedicine Nov 2019The use of amphetamines is a global public health concern. We summarise global data on use of amphetamines and mental health outcomes.
BACKGROUND
The use of amphetamines is a global public health concern. We summarise global data on use of amphetamines and mental health outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD 42017081893). We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo for methamphetamine or amphetamine combined with psychosis, violence, suicidality, depression or anxiety. Included studies were human empirical cross-sectional surveys, case-control studies, cohort studies and randomised controlled trials that assessed the association between methamphetamine and one of the mental health outcomes. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool results for any use of amphetamines and amphetamine use disorders.
FINDINGS
149 studies were eligible and 59 were included in meta-analyses. There was significant heterogeneity in effects. Evidence came mostly from cross-sectional studies. Any use of amphetamines was associated with higher odds of psychosis (odds ratio [OR] = 2.0, 95%CI 1.3-3.3), violence (OR = 2.2, 95%CI 1.2-4.1; adjusted OR [AOR] = 1.4, 95%CI 0.8-2.4), suicidality OR = 4.4, 95%CI 2.4-8.2; AOR = 1.7, 95%CI 1.0-2.9) and depression (OR = 1.6, 95%CI 1.1-2.2; AOR = 1.3, 95%CI 1.2-1.4). Having an amphetamine use disorder was associated with higher odds of psychosis (OR = 3.0, 95%CI 1.9-4.8; AOR = 2.4, 95%CI 1.6-3.5), violence (OR = 6.2, 95%CI 3.1-12.3), and suicidality (OR = 2.3, 95%CI 1.8-2.9; AOR = 1.5, 95%CI 1.3-1.8).
INTERPRETATION
Methamphetamine use is an important risk factor for poor mental health. High quality population-level studies are needed to more accurately quantify this risk. Clinical responses to methamphetamine use need to address mental health harms.
PubMed: 31832623
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.09.014 -
Addiction (Abingdon, England) Jun 2020To summarize evidence on the frequency and predictors of health-care utilization among people who use illicit drugs. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
To summarize evidence on the frequency and predictors of health-care utilization among people who use illicit drugs.
DESIGN
Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsychINFO for observational studies reporting health-care utilization published between 1 January 2000 and 3 December 2018. We conducted narrative synthesis and meta-analysis following a registered protocol (identifier: CRD42017076525).
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
People who use heroin, powder cocaine, crack cocaine, methamphetamine, amphetamine, ecstasy/3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), cannabis, hallucinogens or novel psychoactive substances; have a diagnosis of 'substance use disorder'; or use drug treatment services.
MEASUREMENTS
Primary outcomes were the cumulative incidence (risk) and rate of care episodes in three settings: primary care, hospital admissions (in-patient) and emergency department (ED).
FINDINGS
Ninety-two studies were included, 84% from North America and Australia. Most studies focused on people using heroin, methamphetamine or crack cocaine, or who had a diagnosis of drug dependence. We were able to conduct a meta-analysis of rates across 25 studies reporting ED episodes and 25 reporting hospital admissions, finding pooled rates of 151 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 114-201] and 41 (95% CI = 30-57) per 100 person-years, respectively; on average 4.8 and 7.1 times more often than the general population. Heterogeneity was very high and was not explained by drugs used, country of study, recruitment setting or demographic characteristics. Predictors of health-care utilization were consistent across studies and included unstable housing, drug injection and mental health problems. Opioid substitution therapy was consistently associated with reduced ED presentation and hospital admission. There was minimal research on health-care utilization by people using ecstasy/MDMA, powder cocaine, hallucinogens or novel psychoactive substances.
CONCLUSIONS
People who use illicit drugs are admitted to emergency department or hospital several times more often than the general population.
Topics: Adult; Amphetamines; Australia; Crack Cocaine; Drug Users; Emergency Service, Hospital; Female; Heroin; Hospitalization; Humans; Illicit Drugs; Male; North America; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 31705770
DOI: 10.1111/add.14892