Meta-analysis of the effects of adjuvant drugs in co-occurring bipolar and substance use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) often have co-occurring substance use disorders (SUDs), which substantially impoverish the course of illness. Despite the importance of this dual diagnosis, the evidence of the efficacy and safety of adjuvant treatments is mostly unknown. OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs in patients with co-occurring BD and SUD. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge until 30th April 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCT) evaluating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs compared to placebo in patients with a dual diagnosis of BD and SUD. We meta-analyzed the effect of adjuvant drugs on general outcomes (illness severity, mania, depression, anxiety, abstinence, substance craving, substance use, gamma-GT, adherence, and adverse events) and used the results to objectively assess the quality of the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. For completeness, we also report the specific effects of specific adjuvant drugs in patients with specific substance disorders. RESULTS: We included 15 RCT studies (9 alcohol, 3 cocaine, 2 nicotine, and 1 cannabis) comprising 628 patients allocated to treatment and 622 to placebo. There was low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may reduce illness severity (g=-0.25, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.06), and very-low quality evidence that they may decrease substance use (g=-0.23, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.02) and increase substance abstinence (g=0.21, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.38). DISCUSSION: There is low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may help reduce illness severity, probably via facilitating abstinence and lower substance use. However, the evidence is weak; thus, these results should be considered cautiously until better evidence exists.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with depression and a comorbid substance use disorder. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con depresión y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

Co-occurrence of depression and a substance use disorder (SUD) in patients who present dual diagnoses has been long recognized as an important consideration in clinical practice. This review synthesizes the evidence of pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for comorbid depressive disorders and SUDs while providing clinical recommendations about the best interventions to address these patients. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest that 1) In patients with depression and alcohol consumption, the administration of non-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants instead of SSRI is recommended for improvement of depressive symptoms (strong recommendation). Neither SSRI (strong recommendation) nor non-SSRI (weak recommendation) antidepressants are recommended for reduction in alcohol consumption. 2) In patients with depression and cannabis use, the use of venlafaxine is not recommended (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with depression and cocaine consumption, the use of SSRI antidepressants for improving depressive symptoms (weak recommendation) or to reduce cocaine use is not recommended (strong recommendation). The use of non-SSRI antidepressants is only recommended for improving depressive symptoms (strong recommendation). 4) The administration of bupropion to reduce nicotine consumption is not recommended (strong recommendation). 5) Regarding psychological treatment, in patients with depression and co-occurring alcohol disorder, both pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioural therapy have positive effects on internalizing symptoms and in reducing alcohol consumption (weak recommendation). Our review suggests the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite, randomized studies to provide more definite evidence.

La concurrencia de depresión y un trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) en pacientes que presentan patología dual ha sido reconocida desde hace mucho tiempo como una consideración importante en la práctica clínica. Esta revisión sintetiza la evidencia de intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales para trastornos comórbidos de depresión y uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de las mejores intervenciones para tratar a estos pacientes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren que: 1) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de alcohol, se recomienda la administración de antidepresivos inhibidores de la recaptación de serotonina (ISRS) no selectivos en lugar de los ISRS para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación fuerte). No se recomiendan antidepresivos ISRS (recomendación fuerte) ni antidepresivos no ISRS (recomendación débil) para reducir el consumo de alcohol; 2) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de cannabis, no se recomienda el uso de venlafaxina (recomendación débil); 3) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de cocaína, no se recomienda el uso de antidepresivos ISRS para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación débil) o para reducir el consumo de cocaína (recomendación fuerte). El uso de antidepresivos no ISRS solo se recomienda para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación fuerte); 4) no se recomienda la administración de bupropión para reducir el consumo de nicotina (recomendación fuerte), y 5) en cuanto al tratamiento psicológico, en pacientes con depresión y trastorno de alcohol concurrente, tanto la farmacoterapia como la terapia cognitivo-conductual tienen efectos positivos en la internalización de los síntomas y en la reducción del consumo de alcohol (recomendación débil). Nuestra revisión sugiere la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios aleatorizados, multisitio y más grandes para proporcionar más evidencia definitiva.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with bipolar disorder and comorbid substance use. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con trastorno bipolar y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid bipolar disorder (BD) and substance use disorders (SUDs) while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus mood symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Very few of the randomized trials performed so far have provided consistent evidence for the management of both mood symptoms and substance use in patients with a BD. No clinical trials are available for bipolar patients using cannabis. Some treatments have shown benefit for mood symptoms without benefits for alcohol or illicit substance use. Our results suggest that 1) we can (weakly) recommend the use of adjuvant valproate or naltrexone to improve symptoms of alcohol use disorder; 2) Lamotrigine add-on therapy seems to reduce cocaine-related symptoms and is therefore recommended (moderate strength); and 3) Varenicline is (weakly) recommended to improve nicotine abstinence. Integrated group therapy is the most-well validated and efficacious approach on substance use outcomes if substance use is targeted in an initial treatment phase.

Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que se han realizado en trastorno bipolar (TB) y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias versus los síntomas de estado de ánimo en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Muy pocos de los ensayos aleatorizados realizados hasta la fecha han proporcionado evidencia consistente para el manejo tanto de los síntomas de estado de ánimo como del uso de sustancias en pacientes con TB. No hay disponibilidad de ensayos clínicos para pacientes con TB que utilizan el cannabis. Algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de estado de ánimo sin beneficios para el uso de alcohol o sustancias ilícitas. Nuestros resultados sugieren que 1) podemos (débilmente) recomendar el uso de ácido valproico o naltrexona adyuvante para aliviar los síntomas del trastorno por consumo de alcohol; 2) el tratamiento complementario con lamotrigina parece reducir los síntomas relacionados con la cocaína y, por tanto, es recomendable (fuerza moderada); y 3) la vareniclina es recomendable (débilmente) para mejorar la abstinencia de la nicotina. La terapia grupal integrada es el enfoque con más validación y eficacia sobre los resultados en el uso de sustancias cuando este uso es abordado durante la fase inicial de tratamiento.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with an anxiety disorder and comorbid substance use. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con un trastorno de ansiedad y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid anxiety disorders and SUDs while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus anxiety symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Clinical trials are only available for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and for social anxiety. Concerning the comorbid substance use, all the studies have included patients with alcohol use, none of them have dealt with cocaine, cannabis or nicotine use. Although some treatments have shown benefit for anxiety symptoms without benefits for alcohol or other substance use, only limited pharmacological approaches have been assayed (sertraline, desipramine, paroxetine, buspirone, naltrexone and disulfiram). Our results suggest that 1) we can (weakly) recommend the use of desipramine over paroxetine to alleviate symptoms of anxiety in patients with a PTSD and alcohol use; 2) In these patients, the use of naltrexone to reduce symptoms of anxiety is also recommended (weak strength); and 3) SSRI antidepressants vs placebo can be recommended to reduce alcohol use (weak recommendation). Our review highlights the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite studies with generalizable samples to provide more definite guidance for clinical practice.

Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que han sido llevadas a cabo en trastornos de ansiedad con un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias y los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Hay ensayos clínicos disponibles únicamente para el trastorno por estrés postraumático (TEPT) y para el trastorno de ansiedad. En cuanto al diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias, todos los estudios han incluido pacientes con consumo de alcohol, ninguno de ellos ha abordado el consumo de cocaína, cannabis o nicotina. Aunque algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de ansiedad sin beneficios para el consumo de alcohol u otras sustancias, solo se han ensayado enfoques farmacológicos limitados (sertralina, desipramina, paroxetina, buspirona, naltrexona y disulfiram). Nuestros resultados sugieren que 1) podemos (débilmente) recomendar el uso de desipramina sobre la paroxetina para aliviar los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con un TEPT y consumo de alcohol; 2) en estos pacientes, el uso de naltrexona para reducir los síntomas de ansiedad es también recomendable (fuerza débil); y 3) se pueden recomendar antidepresivos ISRS frente a placebo para reducir el consumo de alcohol (recomendación débil). Nuestra revisión pone de relieve la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios más grandes, multisitio con muestras generalizables para proporcionar evidencia más definitiva para la práctica clínica.

Clinical practice guideline on pharmacological and psychological management of adult patients with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and comorbid substance use. / Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento farmacológico y psicológico de los pacientes adultos con trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias.

Substantial evidence has confirmed the high comorbidity between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and a substance use disorder (SUD). This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions conducted in ADHD and SUDs, and provides clinical recommendations using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with ADHD and alcohol use, atomoxetine is recommended to reduce ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation) and alcohol craving (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with ADHD and cannabis use disorder, atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with ADHD and cocaine use disorder, methylphenidate is not recommended to improve ADHD symptoms or to reduce cocaine use (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with ADHD and comorbid nicotine use disorder, methylphenidate is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation). Psychoestimulants, such as methylphenidate or lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, are not recommended to reduce nicotine use (weak recommendation). 5) Regarding patients with ADHD and any SUD, the use of psychostimulants is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation). In these patients, the use of atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to decrease substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation). Atomoxetine and psychostimulants appear to be safe in patients with any SUD (strong recommendation). Our review suggests the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite, randomized studies to provide more definite and conclusive evidence.

La evidencia actual confirma la alta comorbilidad entre el trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) y trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS). Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales que se han evaluado en pacientes con TDAH y TUS, y ofrece recomendaciones mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de alcohol, la atomoxetina es recomendable para reducir los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil) y el craving de alcohol (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cannabis, la atomoxetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de cannabis (recomendación débil). 3) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cocaína, el metilfenidato no es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH o para reducir el uso de cocaína (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de nicotina, es recomendable el metilfenidato para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil). Los psicoestimulantes, como metilfenidato o lisdexanfetamina, no son recomendables para reducir el uso de nicotina (recomendación débil). 5) Respecto de los pacientes con TDAH y cualquier TUS, el uso de los psicoestimulantes es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte). En estos pacientes, el uso de atomexetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte). La atomoxetina y los psicoestimulantes parecen ser seguros en pacientes con cualquier TUS (recomendación fuerte). Nuestra revisión sugiere la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios aleatorizados, multicéntricos y de mayor tamaño muestral para proporcionar más evidencia definitiva y concluyente.

A Gender Perspective of Addictive Disorders.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Substance use disorders (SUD) affect differentially women and men. Although the prevalence has been reported higher in men, those women with addictive disorders present a more vulnerable profile and are less likely to enter treatment than men. The aim of this paper is to present an overview of how sex and gender may influence epidemiology, clinical manifestations, social impact, and the neurobiological basis of these differences of women with SUD, based on human research. RECENT FINDINGS: The differences in prevalence rates between genders are getting narrower; also, women tend to increase the amount of consumption more rapidly than men, showing an accelerated onset of the SUD (telescoping effect). In respect to clinical features, the most important differences are related to the risk of experience psychiatric comorbidity, the exposure to intimate partner violence, and the associated high risks in sexual and reproductive health; and those who are mothers and addicted to substances are at risk of losing the custody of children accumulating more adverse life events. Some of these differences can be based on neurobiological differences: pharmacokinetic response to substances, sensitivity to gonadal hormones, differences in neurobiological systems as glutamate, endocannabinoids, and genetic differences. SUMMARY: Specific research in women who use drugs is very scarce and treatments are not gender-sensitive oriented. For these reasons, it is important to guarantee access to the appropriate treatment of women who use drugs and a need for a gender perspective in the treatment and research of substance use disorders.

Psychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is prevalent and strongly associated with mental health problems. Women experiencing IPV attend health services frequently for mental health problems. The World Health Organization recommends that women who have experienced IPV and have a mental health diagnosis should receive evidence-based mental health treatments. However, it is not known if psychological therapies work for women in the context of IPV and whether they cause harm. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of psychological therapies for women who experience IPV on the primary outcomes of depression, self-efficacy and an indicator of harm (dropouts) at six- to 12-months' follow-up, and on secondary outcomes of other mental health symptoms, anxiety, quality of life, re-exposure to IPV, safety planning and behaviours, use of healthcare and IPV services, and social support. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and three other databases, to the end of October 2019. We also searched international trials registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials and handsearched selected journals, reference lists of included trials and grey literature. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs and cross-over trials of psychological therapies with women aged 16 years and older who self-reported recent or lifetime experience of IPV. We included trials if women also experienced co-existing mental health diagnoses or substance abuse issues, or both. Psychological therapies included a wide range of interventions that targeted cognition, motivation and behaviour compared with usual care, no treatment, delayed or minimal interventions. We classified psychological therapies according to Cochrane Common Mental Disorders's psychological therapies list. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted data and undertook 'Risk of Bias' assessment. Treatment effects were compared between experimental and comparator interventions at short-term (up to six months post-baseline), medium-term (six to under 12 months, primary outcome time point), and long-term follow-up (12 months and above). We used standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous and odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes, and used random-effects meta-analysis, due to high heterogeneity across trials. MAIN RESULTS: We included 33 psychological trials involving 5517 women randomly assigned to experimental (2798 women, 51%) and comparator interventions (2719 women, 49%). Psychological therapies included 11 integrative therapies, nine humanistic therapies, six cognitive behavioural therapy, four third-wave cognitive behavioural therapies and three other psychologically-orientated interventions. There were no trials classified as psychodynamic therapies. Most trials were from high-income countries (19 in USA, three in Iran, two each in Australia and Greece, and one trial each in China, India, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Spain and UK), among women recruited from healthcare, community, shelter or refuge settings, or a combination of any or all of these. Psychological therapies were mostly delivered face-to-face (28 trials), but varied by length of treatment (two to 50 sessions) and staff delivering therapies (social workers, nurses, psychologists, community health workers, family doctors, researchers). The average sample size was 82 women (14 to 479), aged 37 years on average, and 66% were unemployed. Half of the women were married or living with a partner and just over half of the participants had experienced IPV in the last 12 months (17 trials), 6% in the past two years (two trials) and 42% during their lifetime (14 trials). Whilst 20 trials (61%) described reliable low-risk random-sampling strategies, only 12 trials (36%) described reliable procedures to conceal the allocation of participant status. While 19 trials measured women's depression, only four trials measured depression as a continuous outcome at medium-term follow-up. These showed a probable beneficial effect of psychological therapies in reducing depression (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.01; four trials, 600 women; moderate-certainty evidence). However, for self-efficacy, there may be no evidence of a difference between groups (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.09; one trial with medium-term follow-up data, 346 women; low-certainty evidence). Further, there may be no difference between the number of women who dropped out from the experimental or comparator intervention groups, an indicator of no harm (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.44; five trials with medium-term follow-up data, 840 women; low-certainty evidence). Although no trials reported adverse events from psychological therapies or participation in the trial, only one trial measured harm outcomes using a validated scale. For secondary outcomes, trials measured anxiety only at short-term follow-up, showing that psychological therapies may reduce anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.96, 95% CI -1.29 to -0.63; four trials, 158 women; low-certainty evidence). However, within medium-term follow-up, low-certainty evidence revealed that there may be no evidence between groups for the outcomes safety planning (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.25; one trial, 337 women), post-traumatic stress disorder (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.06; four trials, 484 women) or re-exposure to any form of IPV (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.2; two trials, 547 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that for women who experience IPV, psychological therapies probably reduce depression and may reduce anxiety. However, we are uncertain whether psychological therapies improve other outcomes (self-efficacy, post-traumatic stress disorder, re-exposure to IPV, safety planning) and there are limited data on harm. Thus, while psychological therapies probably improve emotional health, it is unclear if women's ongoing needs for safety, support and holistic healing from complex trauma are addressed by this approach. There is a need for more interventions focused on trauma approaches and more rigorous trials (with consistent outcomes at similar follow-up time points), as we were unable to synthesise much of the research.

Violence among illicit drug users recruited in drug treatment facilities. / Violencia en consumidores de drogas ilícitas reclutados en centros específicos de tratamiento.

Illicit drug use is known to be associated with injuries resulting from violence. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of violence, for the last 12 months, in illicit drug users and study the victim-offender overlap, separately by sex. Persons using illicit drugs (502) were recruited in drug treatment facilities. Violence was assessed using four questions for victim and one for perpetrator in the last 12 months. Associations between violence and socio-demographic, substance use, crime and illegal drug market aspects were examined with Poisson regression models. Victimization was reported by 49.6% men and 54.7% women; offending by 36.5% and 27.6%, respectively. Higher prevalence ratios of both victim and offender were observed among participants with marginal income generation activities and alcohol risk use. Victimization was more likely in women using parenteral route and among men with early illegal drug use, illegal polydrug use or history of imprisonment. Offending was more likely among men reporting psychological treatment, early illegal drug use, illegal polydrug use or past imprisonment, and women reporting early illegal drug use or trafficking. Thus, a high prevalence of violence (both victimization and perpetration) was found in illicit drug users, especially among those involved in market activities and crime. Drug treatment facilities should consider assessing for history and signs of violence and promote community health strategies.

El uso ilícito de drogas se ha asociado a lesiones producidas por violencia. Nuestro objetivo es estimar en usuarios de drogas ilícitas, la prevalencia de violencia en los últimos 12 meses y estudiar la superposición víctima-agresor. Se reclutaron personas consumidoras de drogas ilícitas (502) en centros de tratamiento de drogas. La violencia se evaluó mediante cuatro preguntas sobre victimización y una sobre agresión referidas a los últimos 12 meses. Las asociaciones entre violencia y aspectos sociodemográficos, consumo de sustancias, delincuencia y mercado de drogas ilegales se analizaron con modelos de regresión de Poisson. El 49,6% de los hombres y el 54,7% de las mujeres reportaron victimización; la agresión un 36,5% y 27,6%, respectivamente. Se observaron prevalencias elevadas de víctima y de ofensor entre los participantes con actividades marginales de generación de ingresos y con uso de riesgo de alcohol. La victimización fue más probable en las mujeres que usaban vía parenteral y entre los hombres con consumo precoz de drogas ilegales, policonsumo de drogas ilegales y antecedentes penitenciarios. La agresión fue más probable entre los hombres receptores de tratamiento psicológico, consumo precoz de drogas ilegales, policonsumo de drogas ilegales y antecedentes penitenciarios, y entre las mujeres, aquellas que reportaron consumo precoz de drogas ilegales y que habían traficado. Se encontró una alta prevalencia de violencia en los usuarios de drogas ilícitas, especialmente entre aquellos involucrados en actividades de mercado y delincuencia. Los centros de tratamiento de drogas deberían considerar evaluar los antecedentes y los signos de violencia, y promover estrategias de salud comunitaria.

Comprehensive interventions for reducing cannabis use.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cannabis is globally the most commonly cultivated, trafficked and consumed illicit drug of abuse. The current article provides an updated overview of existing comprehensive interventions for preventing and reducing cannabis use. RECENT FINDINGS: The PubMed database was searched for evidence regarding comprehensive interventions for preventing and reducing cannabis use from June 2016 to January 2018. The search resulted in 274 articles. Twenty-one studies were selected for assessment and 13 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Six systematic reviews regarding preventive, psychosocial, pharmacological and risk reduction interventions were identified. Psychosocial interventions included therapist-assisted and computerized interventions. Four therapist-assisted, one computerized and two pharmacological clinical trials were published over the review period. Overall, considering the three different approaches (preventive, psychosocial or pharmacological) promising results have been found in certain interventions in reducing cannabis use among different types of users. In addition, recommendations to reduce adverse health outcomes related to cannabis use have also been reviewed. SUMMARY: Although relevant findings have been found so far, further research with adequately powered trials assessing comprehensive interventions for reducing cannabis use remains a need before definitive treatment recommendations can be established.

Correction to: Psychiatric comorbidity and intimate partner violence among women who inject drugs in Europe: a cross-sectional study.

The original version of this article unfortunately missed the Acknowledgment.

Psychiatric comorbidity and intimate partner violence among women who inject drugs in Europe: a cross-sectional study.

Women who inject drugs (WWID) are an especially vulnerable group of drug users. This study determined the prevalence of psychiatric comorbidity and intimate partrner violence (IPV), and factors associated with psychiatric comorbidity among WWID recruited from drug treatment services (67%) and harm reduction services in five European regions in Austria, Catalonia, Italy, Poland, and Scotland. Psychiatric comorbidity was assessed among 226 WWID using the Dual Diagnosis Screening Instrument. IPV was assessed using the Composite Abuse Scale and injecting and sexual risk behaviors were assessed using a battery of questionnaires adapted and developed for the study. Eighty-seven percent met criteria for at least one lifetime psychiatric disorder. The most common disorders were depression (76%), panic (54%), and post-traumatic stress (52%). WWID recruited in drug treatment services were almost three times as likely (OR 2.90 95% CI 1.30-6.43; p = 0.007) to meet criteria for a lifetime psychiatric disorder than those recruited from harm reduction services, specifically dysthymia (OR 5.32 95% CI 2.27-12.48; p = 0.000) and post-traumatic stress disorder (OR 1.83 95% CI 1.02-3.27; p = 0.040). WWID who reported sharing needles and syringes were almost three times as likely to meet criteria for lifetime psychiatric comorbidity than those who did not (OR 2.65 95% CI 1.07-6.56). Compared to WWID who had not experienced IPV, victims (70%) were almost two times more likely to meet criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder (OR 1.95 95% CI 1.10-3.48). Psychiatric comorbidity and IPV among WWID are common. Drug treatment and harm reduction services should address psychiatric comorbidity and IPV to improve treatment outcomes.

The efficacy of computerized interventions to reduce cannabis use: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cannabis is the most widely consumed illicit drug. Although it is too early to confirm the impact of legalization, the use of cannabis appears to be on the rise in some countries due to its authorization for medical/recreational purposes. Among different types of therapeutic approaches to reduce cannabis use, computerized interventions are becoming a new treatment option. To assess their efficacy, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed employing randomized controlled clinical trials indexed in MEDLINE and PsycINFO. The principal outcome measure was cannabis use, and the secondary one was the use of other substances during interventions. A subgroup analysis was conducted by length of follow-up, number of sessions, age group, type of analysis, and type of control condition. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included nine studies with 2963 participants. Computerized interventions resulted in significant reductions in the use of cannabis (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.19; 95% CI: -0.26, -0.11) and other substances (SMD: -0.27; 95% CI: -0.46, -0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Computerized interventions examined in the present study reduced the frequency of cannabis and other substance use. Limitations included the recalculation of dichotomous and continuous data as SMD and the lower number of studies included in the secondary outcome. Computerized interventions could be a viable option to reduce cannabis use.

Dual diagnosis in Depression: treatment recommendations. / Patología dual en Depresión: recomendaciones en el tratamiento.

Comorbidity between substance use disorders (SUD) and major depression (MD) is the most common dual pathology in the field of addiction to substances and has prevalence rates ranging between 12% and 80%, which complicates the response to treatment and worsens the prognosis of patients. Differentiating between diagnoses of induced depressive episodes and primary depressive episodes concurrent to substance use is especially relevant for therapeutic management. This article presents the state of the art of the currently available pharmacologic treatments of comorbid depression in patients with SUD, taking into account the safety and risk of abuse of antidepressant drugs. Due to the fact that comorbidity of MD and SUD is frequent and presents greater psychopathological and medical severity, as well as worse social functioning, it is crucial to treat MD and SUD simultaneously using the integrated treatment model and not to treat both conditions separately.

La comorbilidad entre los trastornos por uso de sustancias (SUD) y la depresión mayor (DM) es la patología dual más común en el campo de las adicciones a sustancias, con prevalencias que oscilan entre el 12 y el 80% complicando la respuesta al tratamiento y empeorando el pronóstico de los pacientes. Diferenciar entre el diagnóstico de episodios depresivos inducidos y episodios depresivos primarios concurrentes al uso de sustancias es especialmente relevante para el manejo terapéutico. En este artículo se presenta el estado actual de los tratamientos farmacológicos disponibles hasta el momento para la depresión comórbida en pacientes con SUD, teniendo en cuenta la seguridad y el potencial de abuso de los fármacos antidepresivos. Debido a que la comorbilidad de DM y SUD es frecuente y a que estos pacientes presentan mayor gravedad psicopatológica y peor funcionamiento social, es crucial un modelo de tratamiento integrado y no abordar el tratamiento por separado.

Dual Depression: A Sex Perspective.

Mood and substance use disorders (SUDs) are mental conditions that are highly prevalent in the general population. Cooccurrence of major depression and SUD, also known as dual depression, is very common in the field of substance addiction. Sex differences are found in both major depression and SUD. This review, after presenting the state of the art of dual depression as regards prevalence, ethiopathologic mechanisms, and clinical aspects, is focused on dual depression in women. An overview of some potential factors associated with the sex gap in dual depression such as injecting, sexual risk behavior, intimate partner violence, and the reproductive cycle is presented.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Psychosocial Interventions to Reduce Drug and Sexual Blood Borne Virus Risk Behaviours Among People Who Inject Drugs.

Opiate substitution treatment and needle exchanges have reduced blood borne virus (BBV) transmission among people who inject drugs (PWID). Psychosocial interventions could further prevent BBV. A systematic review and meta-analysis examined whether psychosocial interventions (e.g. CBT, skills training) compared to control interventions reduced BBV risk behaviours among PWID. 32 and 24 randomized control trials (2000-May 2015 in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Collaboration and Clinical trials, with an update in MEDLINE to December 2016) were included in the review and meta-analysis respectively. Psychosocial interventions appear to reduce: sharing of needles/syringes compared to education/information (SMD -0.52; 95% CI -1.02 to -0.03; I2 = 10%; p = 0.04) or HIV testing/counselling (SMD -0.24; 95% CI -0.44 to -0.03; I2 = 0%; p = 0.02); sharing of other injecting paraphernalia (SMD -0.24; 95% CI -0.42 to -0.06; I2 = 0%; p < 0.01) and unprotected sex (SMD -0.44; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.01; I2 = 79%; p = 0.04) compared to interventions of a lesser time/intensity, however, moderate to high heterogeneity was reported. Such interventions could be included with other harm reduction approaches to prevent BBV transmission among PWID.

Intimate partner violence among female drug users admitted to the general hospital: screening and prevalence. / Violencia de género en mujeres con consumo de sustancias ingresadas en el hospital general: cribado y prevalencia.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health problem worldwide. Several factors have been found to be associated with an increased prevalence of IPV, such as substance use. A cross-sectional study was conducted with the aim of determining the prevalence of IPV among women entering Hospital del Mar (Barcelona) for any medical/surgical reason, and who had a diagnosis of substance use disorder. Secondly, it was intended to psychometrically validate the Spanish version of the Hurt, Insulted, Threatened with Harm, Screamed (HITS) questionnaire. All patients were assessed by two IPV questionnaires, the Composite Abuse Scale (CAS) and HITS. Out of 52 patients interviewed, 46 answered both questionnaires. According to the CAS questionnaire, 23 patients (50%) experienced IPV at some point in their lives and 11 (23.9%) in the last year. Cannabis consumption was also associated with an increased severity of IPV (95% CI 3.5-28.9, p = .013).According to the HITS questionnaire, there was a prevalence of 39.1% (18 patients) in the last 12 months. HITS had a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 78% relative to the CAS questionnaire. A cut-off score x∈ [6.7], derived through ROC analysis, correctly discriminated 91% of the victims and 100% of the non-victims. The results obtained showed that the prevalence of IPV was very high among women who suffered from more than one substance use disorder. Therefore, it is highly recommended to systematically screen for IPV victimization by putting the HITS questionnaire into practice.

La violencia de género (VG) es un problema de salud pública a escala mundial. Existen determinados factores asociados a un aumento de la prevalencia, como el consumo de sustancias. Se realizó un estudio transversal con el objetivo de determinar la prevalencia de VG en las mujeres que ingresaron en el Hospital del Mar (Barcelona) por cualquier motivo médico/quirúrgico y con el diagnóstico de trastorno por consumo de sustancias. Secundariamente, se pretendió validar la versión en español del cuestionario Hurt, Insulted, Threatened with Harm, Screamed (HITS). Se evaluaron a todas las pacientes mediante dos cuestionarios de detección de VG, el Composite Abuse Scale (CAS) y el HITS. De las 52 pacientes entrevistadas durante el período de estudio, 46 respondieron ambos cuestionarios. Según el cuestionario CAS, 23 pacientes (50%) presentaron VG alguna vez en la vida y 11 (23,9%) en el último año. El consumo de cannabis se asoció a una mayor gravedad de la VG (IC95% 3,5-28,9, p = .013). La prevalencia de VG, según el HITS, fue de 39,1% (18 pacientes) en los últimos 12 meses. El HITS mostró en relación al CAS una especificidad del 100% y una sensibilidad del 78%. Un punto de corte x∈ [6,7], obtenido mediante el análisis ROC, fue el que mejor discriminó al 91% de las víctimas y al 100% de las no-víctimas. Los resultados obtenidos demostraron una elevada prevalencia de VG entre las mujeres consumidoras de más de una sustancia de abuso. Por ese motivo, se recomienda incorporar el cribado sistemático mediante el cuestionario HITS.

A group intervention to reduce intimate partner violence among female drug users. Results from a randomized controlled pilot trial in a community substance-abuse center.

BACKGROUND: A greater proportion of drug dependent women are victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) than women in the general population; however, few interventions have been developed to reduce IPV among drug dependent women. METHODS: An adapted version of the Women's Wellness Treatment, to address IPV and depressive symptoms, was piloted in a randomized controlled trial conducted in outpatient treatment program in Barcelona, Spain among 14 women receiving outpatient treatment for a drug use disorder who screened positive for IPV in the previous month. Participants were randomly assigned to receive the 10 session cognitive behavioral therapy (IPaViT-CBT) group intervention or treatment as usual. The frequency of IPV, depressive symptoms, substance use, quality of life and health status were assessed at baseline and 1, 3 and 12 months post intervention. Intention to treat analysis was performed. RESULTS: Moderate effects for the intervention were found in reducing psychological maltreatment, increasing assertiveness of IPV and reducing aggressiveness in the partner relationship, and in reducing the frequency of drinking up to 3 months post intervention. The intervention did not significantly reduce the likelihood of any IPV, depressive symptoms, quality of life or self-reported health status, up to 12-months post intervention. CONCLUSION: This pilot trial suggests some initial support for the 10-session CBT group intervention among IPV victims who received treatment for drug use. Study findings indicate that it is feasible to deliver the intervention in a community substance abuse center. An adequately powered trial is required to replicate these results.

Antecedentes: Las mujeres usuarias de drogas son víctimas de violencia de género en mayor proporción que las mujeres en población general; sin embargo, pocas intervenciones se han desarrollado para reducir la violencia de género entre mujeres usuarias de drogas. Métodos: Una versión adaptada de la intervención "Women's Wellness Treatment" para reducir violencia de género y  síntomas depresivos, ha sido evaluada mediante un ensayo clínico piloto en un centro de tratamiento ambulatorio en Barcelona, España. Catorce mujeres que recibían tratamiento ambulatorio para un trastorno por consumo de sustancias  y que declararon ser víctimas de violencia en el mes anterior fueron incluidas en el ensayo clínico. Las participantes fueron asignados al azar para recibir 10 sesiones grupales de terapia cognitivo-conductual (IPaViT-CBT) o tratamiento habitual. La frecuencia de violencia, síntomas depresivos, consumo de sustancias, calidad de vida y estado de salud fueron evaluados al inicio del estudio y 1, 3 y 12 meses después de la intervención. Se realizó análisis por intención de tratar. Resultados: Se encontraron efectos moderados de la intervención en la reducción de maltrato psicológico, aumento de la asertividad y la reducción de la agresividad en la relación de pareja, y reducción en la frecuencia de consumo de alcohol hasta 3 meses después de la intervención. La intervención no redujo significativamente la probabilidad de ser víctima de cualquier tipo de violencia de género, los síntomas depresivos, calidad de vida o el estado de salud auto-referido, hasta 12 meses después de la intervención. Conclusiones: Los resultados de este estudio piloto indican que es factible realizar una intervención de 10 sesiones grupales  de TCC entre las víctimas de violencia de género que reciben tratamiento por uso de sustancias en un centro comunitario de tratamiento de adicciones. Se requiere un ensayo clínico más robusto para replicar estos resultados.

The efficacy of cognitive behavioural therapy and advocacy interventions for women who have experienced intimate partner violence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of Advocacy and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy interventions (CBT) in reducing physical, psychological, sexual, or any intimate partner violence (IPV). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using randomized control trials (RCTs) published in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane, and Clinical trials. The occurrence of physical, psychological, sexual, and/or any IPV measured efficacy. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs involving 2666 participants were included. Advocacy interventions resulted in significant reductions in physical (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.25, -0.00) and psychological (SMD -0.19; 95% CI -0.32, -0.05) but not in sexual (SMD -0.20; 95% CI -0.43, 0.02) or any IPV (SMD -0.32; 95% CI -0.69, 0.04). CBT interventions showed a significant reduction in physical (SMD -0.79; 95% CI -1.26, -0.33) and psychological (SMD -0.80; 95% CI -1.25, -0.36) but not sexual (SMD -0.35; 95% CI -1.73, 1.03) or any IPV (SMD 0.09; 95% CI -0.05, 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Both advocacy and CBT interventions reduced physical and psychological IPV but not sexual or any IPV. Limitations include the low number of studies and the heterogeneity of interventions.