-
Drugs in R&D Mar 2017Medication-induced salivary gland dysfunction (MISGD), xerostomia (sensation of oral dryness), and subjective sialorrhea cause significant morbidity and impair quality... (Review)
Review
A Guide to Medications Inducing Salivary Gland Dysfunction, Xerostomia, and Subjective Sialorrhea: A Systematic Review Sponsored by the World Workshop on Oral Medicine VI.
BACKGROUND
Medication-induced salivary gland dysfunction (MISGD), xerostomia (sensation of oral dryness), and subjective sialorrhea cause significant morbidity and impair quality of life. However, no evidence-based lists of the medications that cause these disorders exist.
OBJECTIVE
Our objective was to compile a list of medications affecting salivary gland function and inducing xerostomia or subjective sialorrhea.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles published until June 2013. Of 3867 screened records, 269 had an acceptable degree of relevance, quality of methodology, and strength of evidence. We found 56 chemical substances with a higher level of evidence and 50 with a moderate level of evidence of causing the above-mentioned disorders. At the first level of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system, 9 of 14 anatomical groups were represented, mainly the alimentary, cardiovascular, genitourinary, nervous, and respiratory systems. Management strategies include substitution or discontinuation of medications whenever possible, oral or systemic therapy with sialogogues, administration of saliva substitutes, and use of electro-stimulating devices.
LIMITATIONS
While xerostomia was a commonly reported outcome, objectively measured salivary flow rate was rarely reported. Moreover, xerostomia was mostly assessed as an adverse effect rather than the primary outcome of medication use. This study may not include some medications that could cause xerostomia when administered in conjunction with others or for which xerostomia as an adverse reaction has not been reported in the literature or was not detected in our search.
CONCLUSIONS
We compiled a comprehensive list of medications with documented effects on salivary gland function or symptoms that may assist practitioners in assessing patients who complain of dry mouth while taking medications. The list may also prove useful in helping practitioners anticipate adverse effects and consider alternative medications.
Topics: Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Oral Medicine; Salivary Glands; Sialorrhea; Xerostomia
PubMed: 27853957
DOI: 10.1007/s40268-016-0153-9 -
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 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Nov 2020To determine the most effective interventions in recently detoxified, alcohol dependent patients for implementation in primary care. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine the most effective interventions in recently detoxified, alcohol dependent patients for implementation in primary care.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomised controlled trials comparing two or more interventions that could be used in primary care. The population was patients with alcohol dependency diagnosed by standardised clinical tools and who became detoxified within four weeks.
DATA EXTRACTION
Outcomes of interest were continuous abstinence from alcohol (effectiveness) and all cause dropouts (as a proxy for acceptability) at least 12 weeks after start of intervention.
RESULTS
64 trials (43 interventions) were included. The median probability of abstinence across placebo arms was 25%. Compared with placebo, the only intervention associated with increased probability of abstinence and moderate certainty evidence was acamprosate (odds ratio 1.86, 95% confidence interval 1.49 to 2.33, corresponding to an absolute probability of 38%). Of the 62 included trials that reported all cause dropouts, interventions associated with a reduced number of dropouts compared with placebo (probability 50%) and moderate certainty of evidence were acamprosate (0.73, 0.62 to 0.86; 42%), naltrexone (0.70, 0.50 to 0.98; 41%), and acamprosate-naltrexone (0.30, 0.13 to 0.67; 17%). Acamprosate was the only intervention associated with moderate confidence in the evidence of effectiveness and acceptability up to 12 months. It is uncertain whether other interventions can help maintain abstinence and reduce dropouts because of low confidence in the evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence is lacking for benefit from interventions that could be implemented in primary care settings for alcohol abstinence, other than for acamprosate. More evidence from high quality randomised controlled trials is needed, as are strategies using combined interventions (combinations of drug interventions or drug and psychosocial interventions) to improve treatment of alcohol dependency in primary care.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42016049779.
Topics: Adult; Alcohol Abstinence; Alcoholism; Behavior Therapy; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Primary Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33239318
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m3934 -
Nutrients Nov 2020A number of previous investigations have been designed to determine the effect of acute caffeine intake on the rate of fat oxidation during exercise. However, these... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A number of previous investigations have been designed to determine the effect of acute caffeine intake on the rate of fat oxidation during exercise. However, these investigations have shown contradictory results due to the differences in the exercise protocols used or the co-ingestion of caffeine with other substances. Hence, to date, there is no consensus about the effect of caffeine on fat oxidation during exercise. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review followed by a meta-analysis to establish the effect of acute intake of caffeine (ranging from 2 to 7 mg/kg of body mass) on the rate of fat oxidation during exercise. A total of 19 studies published between 1978 and 2020 were included, all of which employed crossover experimental designs in which the ingestion of caffeine was compared to a placebo. Studies were selected if the exercise intensity was consistent in the caffeine and placebo trials and if these were preceded by a fasting protocol. A subsequent meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD). The meta-analysis revealed that caffeine significantly ( = 0.008) increased the fat oxidation rate (SMD = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.19 to 1.27). This increment was consistent with a significant ( = 0.04) reduction of the respiratory exchange ratio (SMD = -0.33; 95% CI = -0.65 to -0.01) and a significant ( = 0.049) increase in the oxygen uptake (SMD = 0.23; 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.44). The results also showed that there was a dose-response effect of caffeine on the fat oxidation rate, indicating that more than 3.0 mg/kg is necessary to obtain a statistically significant effect of this stimulant on fat oxidation during exercise. Additionally, the ability of caffeine to enhance fat oxidation during exercise was higher in sedentary or untrained individuals than in trained and recreational athletes. In conclusion, pre-exercise intake of a moderate dose of caffeine may effectively increase fat utilization during aerobic exercise of submaximal intensity performed after a fasting period. However, the fitness level of the participant may modulate the magnitude of the effect of caffeine on fat oxidation during exercise.
Topics: Adipose Tissue; Caffeine; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Exercise; Humans; Lipid Metabolism
PubMed: 33255240
DOI: 10.3390/nu12123603 -
Acta Medica Portuguesa 2011Club drugs are the following substances: Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA); Methamphetamine; Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD); Ketamine; Gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB)... (Review)
Review
Club drugs are the following substances: Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA); Methamphetamine; Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD); Ketamine; Gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and Flunitrazepam. These substances are mainly used by adolescents and young adults, mostly in recreational settings like dance clubs and rave parties. These drugs have diverse psychotropic effects, are associated with several degrees of toxicity, dependence and long term adverse effects. Some have been used for several decades, while others are relatively recent substances of abuse. They have distinct pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, are not easy to detect and, many times, the use of club drugs is under diagnosed. Although the use of these drugs is increasingly common, few health professionals feel comfortable with the diagnosis and treatment. The authors performed a systematic literature review, with the goal of synthesising the existing knowledge about club drugs, namely epidemiology, mechanism of action, detection, adverse reactions and treatment. The purpose of this article is creating in Portuguese language a knowledge data base on club drugs, that health professionals of various specialties can use as a reference when dealing with individual with this kind of drug abuse.
Topics: Adolescent; Flunitrazepam; Humans; Illicit Drugs; Ketamine; Lysergic Acid Diethylamide; Methamphetamine; N-Methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine; Sodium Oxybate; Substance-Related Disorders; Young Adult
PubMed: 22525626
DOI: No ID Found -
Translational Psychiatry May 2016Ibogaine is a naturally occurring substance which has been increasingly used in the lay-scene to reduce craving and relapse in patients with substance use disorders... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Ibogaine is a naturally occurring substance which has been increasingly used in the lay-scene to reduce craving and relapse in patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). Although human clinical trials on the safety and efficacy of ibogaine are lacking, animal studies do support the efficacy of ibogaine. In this systematic review and meta-analysis (MA), we summarise these animal findings, addressing three questions: (1) does ibogaine reduce addictive behaviour in animal models of SUDs?; (2) what are the toxic effects of ibogaine on motor functioning, cerebellum and heart rhythm?; (3) what are neuropharmacological working mechanisms of ibogaine treatment in animal models of SUDs? MA of 27 studies showed that ibogaine reduced drug self-administration, particularly during the first 24 h after administration. Ibogaine had no effect on drug-induced conditioned place preference. Ibogaine administration resulted in motor impairment in the first 24 h after supplementation, and cerebral cell loss even weeks after administration. Data on ibogaines effect on cardiac rhythm, as well as on its neuropharmacological working mechanisms are limited. Our results warrant further studies into the clinical efficacy of ibogaine in SUD patients in reducing craving and substance use, but close monitoring of the patients is recommended because of the possible toxic effects. In addition, more work is needed to unravel the neuropharmacological working mechanisms of ibogaine and to investigate its effects on heart rhythm.
Topics: Animals; Cerebellum; Disease Models, Animal; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Female; Ibogaine; Illicit Drugs; Male; Motor Activity; Neurons; Self Administration; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 27244235
DOI: 10.1038/tp.2016.71 -
Cureus Jul 2021Individuals with schizophrenia are particularly vulnerable to substance abuse problems. Comorbidity with substance use disorders (SUDs) frequently results in early death... (Review)
Review
Individuals with schizophrenia are particularly vulnerable to substance abuse problems. Comorbidity with substance use disorders (SUDs) frequently results in early death and increased dysfunction observed in schizophrenia. This dual diagnosis can be explained through multiple general mechanisms. Tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine are substances widely used by individuals with schizophrenia. This study highlights the predictors, mechanisms responsible for the relationship between substance use disorder and schizophrenia and how it can help with the treatment of both disorders. The publications were rigorously reviewed after being found in multiple databases. The study's inclusion criteria were research published within the last five years, publications written in English, full-text availability, and human studies. A total of ten papers were selected for examination from a total of 9,106 articles found using the search method across several databases. This study follows the rules listed within the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist 2009. The information gathered from these published studies was used to investigate the elements that contribute to the link between schizophrenia and substance abuse. Here, we evaluate a close relationship between schizophrenia and substance use disorders. The articles studied exhibit a bidirectional association between the two disorders in most individuals. From our analysis, the comorbidity between the two disorders is partially due to shared polygenic liability. Individuals with schizophrenia have dysfunctional Mesocorticolimbic brain reward circuits indicating a history of substance use. An underlying genetic vulnerability to schizophrenia may be triggered by extensive cannabis usage at a young age. A combination of psychological and pharmacological interventions for both disorders can significantly improve the outcome.
PubMed: 34513357
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.16722 -
Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine May 2022The prevalence of mental and substance use disorders is three to five times higher than that of the general population. Psychosocial interventions are effective in...
PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW
The prevalence of mental and substance use disorders is three to five times higher than that of the general population. Psychosocial interventions are effective in identifying and managing mental health and substance use disorders. This article aims to review the randomized control studies which have used nonpharmacological interventions alone or in combination with pharmacological interventions for managing mental and substance use disorders in prison/correctional settings.
COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
Studies included were randomized control trials and pilot randomized studies that assessed the impact of psychosocial interventions for prisoners with mental disorders and substance use disorders. A comprehensive search for articles was done by the primary author (Sreekanth Nair Thekkumkara) in the following databases: PubMed, ProQuest, PsychArticles, and Google Scholar (search engine), for the period June 1, 2000, to December 31, 2020.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The 21 studies included in the review had a sample size of 34 to 759. The settings of all the interventions were the prison and different types of psychosocial interventions were provided across the studies. The average duration of intervention ranged between 10 min and 120 min with the frequency of one to six sessions per week for 1 to 36 months. All the 21 Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) were nonIndian studies. Overall, the results of the included studies showed significant improvement postintervention (motivational intervention, interpersonal therapy, cognitive behavior therapy, positive psychology intervention, music therapy, and acceptance and commitment therapy) on primary outcome measures such as symptom severity of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse prisoners. Positive effects were observed on secondary outcome measures such as motivation, aggression, follow up rates, and recidivism. A limited number of studies have focused on evaluating psychosocial interventions in prison settings. Most of the interventions were tested in prisoners with substance use disorder alone or in those with dual diagnoses and in high-income countries.
PubMed: 35656427
DOI: 10.1177/02537176211061655 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Aug 2021Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for the development of substance abuse and substance use disorders (SUD) in adolescence and... (Review)
Review
Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for the development of substance abuse and substance use disorders (SUD) in adolescence and (early) adulthood. ADHD and SUD also frequently co-occur in treatment-seeking adolescents, which complicates diagnosis and treatment, and is associated with poor treatment outcomes. In this study, we provide a systematic review of controlled studies on the effectiveness of pharmacological, psychosocial, and complementary treatments of ADHD in adolescents with and without comorbid SUD. In addition, we review the longitudinal association between pharmacotherapy for childhood ADHD and the development of SUD in adolescence and early adulthood. We conducted a systematic review of the research literature published since 2000 using Medline, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases to select randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses. The quality of the evidence from each study was rated using the SIGN grading system. Based on the limited evidence available, strong clinical recommendations are not justified, but provisionally, we conclude that stimulant treatment in children with ADHD may prevent the development of SUD in adolescence or young adulthood, that high-dose stimulant treatment could be an effective treatment for adolescents with ADHD and SUD comorbidity, that cognitive behavior therapy might have a small beneficial effect in these patients, and that alternative treatments are probably not effective. More studies are needed to draw definitive conclusions that will allow for strong clinical recommendations.
PubMed: 34501355
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10173908 -
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and... Apr 2021Drug-related problems (DRPs) can occur at any stages of medication use processes, and a single drug could be associated with multiple DRPs. Once happened, it adversely... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Drug-related problems (DRPs) can occur at any stages of medication use processes, and a single drug could be associated with multiple DRPs. Once happened, it adversely affects health outcomes. In Ethiopia, evaluation of the magnitude and factors associated with DRPs had not been attempted at the national level.
METHOD
The literature search was conducted in the following databases; PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Google Scholar. The quality of the included studies was checked using Joanna Brigg's Institute (JBI's) checklist, and data were analyzed using Stata software (version 14.0). The pooled estimate of DRPs was computed by a Random effect model (DerSimonian-Laird method). Cochran's Q test (I) statistic)), and Begg's correlation and Egger's regression test were assessed for heterogeneity and publication bias, respectively.
RESULT
Overall, 32 studies with a total sample size of 7,129 were included in the review. The estimated pooled prevalence of DRPs was 70% [0.70 (95% CI 0.64-0.76; I = 97.6% p = 0.000)]. Polypharmacy (taking ≥ 5 drugs) [RR = 1.3], medical comorbidity [RR = 1.3], poor medication adherence [RR = 1.7], uncontrolled blood pressure [RR = 1.4], substance use [RR = 1.2], type 2 diabetes [RR = 1.8], significant drug interaction [RR = 1.33], and a negative medication belief [RR = 3.72] significantly influenced the occurrence of DRPs.
CONCLUSION
The estimated national prevalence of DRPs in Ethiopia was high. Presence of medical comorbidity, using multiple drugs, significant drug interaction, poor medication adherence, uncontrolled blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, substance use and a negative belief about medication significantly influenced the occurrence of DRPs. Initiating and/or strengthening pharmaceutical care services at the health care facilities could lower the occurrence of DRPs. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020162329.
PubMed: 33902729
DOI: 10.1186/s40545-021-00312-z