Determining clinical cutoff scores for the Australian Treatment Outcomes Profile psychological health, physical health and quality of life questions.

INTRODUCTION: The Australian Treatment Outcomes Profile (ATOP) is a brief instrument that measures self-reported substance use, health, and wellbeing in the previous 28 days for people in alcohol and other drug treatment. Previous studies have established the concurrent validity, inter-rater, and test-retest reliability of the tool. The current study sought to identify recommended cutoff scores for ATOP items for psychological health, physical health and quality of life that identify clients reporting clinically significant problems warranting further assessment and/or intervention, compared to cutoffs used by 'gold-standard' measures for these domains. METHODS: Clients attending for treatment for problems with opioid (n = 144) or alcohol use (n = 134) completed the ATOP and comparison standardised questionnaires (Kessler-10, Short Form Survey 12 and the Personal Wellbeing Index) with a researcher. Receiver operating characteristics analysis, along with clinician perspectives, were used to recommend cutoff scores for ATOP items indicative of clinically significant problems. RESULTS: A cutoff score of 5 or less out of 10 was identified as an optimal pragmatic cutoff for ATOP items relating to psychological health, physical health and quality of life items with regards to balancing sensitivity, specificity, and application in a treatment setting. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The recommended clinical cutoffs will support clinicians and treatment services to identify clients who require further assessment and follow up for their psychological health, physical health and quality of life. The current study provides further evidence for the utility of the ATOP for individual clinical review, service planning and research.

The use and effects of synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists by New South Wales cannabis treatment clients.

INTRODUCTION: Despite decreasing consumption by general populations, use of synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRAs) persists in some marginalised groups, including those who use other substances. This article explores SCRA consumption in an Australian cannabis treatment sample, comparing those who report ever using SCRAs with those who have never used SCRAs. METHODS: A questionnaire orally administered in person to a convenience sample of 154 cannabis treatment service clients from New South Wales, Australia (71% male, median age 35) collected information regarding cannabis and SCRA use including motivations, effects and health-related consequences of use, demographics, other substance use and overall health. Demographic profiles and between-group differences were explored. McNemar tests compared effects of SCRA and cannabis. Logistic regression analysis determined predictors of SCRA use. RESULTS: Half (53%) reported lifetime SCRA use; 20% reported previous-month use. The SCRA + cannabis group displayed greater polysubstance use and psychological distress. Reduced dependence on cannabis but higher levels of other substance use may predict SCRA use. Although curiosity motivated initial SCRA consumption, perceived psychoactive strength drove continued use. SCRAs appear to induce more negative side-effects than cannabis. Of the SCRA + cannabis group, 27% sought medical assistance for SCRA use. Most (90%) preferred cannabis to SCRAs, citing superior safety, effects and consistency of cannabis. CONCLUSIONS: Among clients seeking treatment for cannabis use, SCRA use was relatively common, although not a preferred substance. Hazardous substance use and poor mental health characterised SCRA consumers, highlighting the need for continued monitoring by researchers and treatment providers of SCRA consumption in populations who use substances.

Nabiximols for the Treatment of Cannabis Dependence: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: There are no effective medications for treating dependence on cannabis. OBJECTIVE: To examine the safety and efficacy of nabiximols in the treatment of patients with cannabis dependence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This parallel double-blind randomized clinical trial comparing nabiximols with placebo in a 12-week, multisite outpatient study recruited participants from February 3, 2016, to June 14, 2017, at 4 outpatient specialist alcohol and drug treatment services in New South Wales, Australia. Participants had cannabis dependence (as defined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision) and were seeking treatment, were nonresponsive to prior treatment attempts, were 18 to 64 years of age, had no other substance use disorder, had no severe medical or psychiatric conditions, were not pregnant, were not mandated by a court to undergo treatment, and provided informed consent. Results for primary efficacy measures and all secondary outcomes were obtained using a modified intention-to-treat data set. INTERVENTIONS: Participants received 12-week treatment involving weekly clinical reviews, structured counseling, and flexible medication doses-up to 32 sprays daily (tetrahydrocannabinol, 86.4 mg, and cannabidiol, 80 mg), dispensed weekly. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was self-reported number of days using illicit cannabis during the 12-week period. Other outcomes included alternate cannabis use parameters (periods of abstinence, withdrawal, cravings, and problems), safety parameters (adverse events and aberrant medication use), health status, other substance use, and treatment retention. RESULTS: A total of 128 participants (30 women and 98 men; mean [SD] age, 35.0 [10.9] years) were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study medication. Participants had used a mean (SD) of 2.3 (2.1) g of cannabis on a mean (SD) of 25.7 (4.5) days in the past 28 days. Treatment retention was comparable for the 2 groups (placebo, 30 of 67 participants [44.8%]; nabiximols, 30 of 61 participants [49.2%]), and both groups used similar mean (SD) doses (placebo, 18.5 [9.5] sprays daily; nabiximols, 17.6 [9.5] sprays daily, equivalent to a mean [SD] of 47.5 [25.7] mg of tetrahydrocannabinol and 44.0 [23.8] mg of cannabidiol). For the primary end point, the placebo group reported significantly more days using cannabis during the 12 weeks (mean [SD], 53.1 [33.0] days) than the nabiximols group (mean [SD], 35.0 [32.4] days; estimated difference, 18.6 days; 95% CI, 3.5-33.7 days; P = .02). Both groups showed comparable improvements in health status, with no substantial changes in other substance use. Medication was well tolerated with few adverse events. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study demonstrates that cannabinoid agonist treatment, in this case using nabiximols, in combination with psychosocial interventions is a safe approach for reducing cannabis use among individuals with cannabis dependence who are seeking treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12616000103460.

Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) of cannabinoid replacement therapy (Nabiximols) for the management of treatment-resistant cannabis dependent patients: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The cannabis extract nabiximols (Sativex®) effectively supresses withdrawal symptoms and cravings in treatment resistant cannabis dependent individuals, who have high relapse rates following conventional withdrawal treatments. This study examines the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of longer-term nabiximols treatment for outpatient cannabis dependent patients who have not responded to previous conventional treatment approaches. METHODS/DESIGN: A phase III multi-site outpatient, randomised, double-blinded, placebo controlled parallel design, comparing a 12-week course of nabiximols to placebo, with follow up at 24 weeks after enrolment. Four specialist drug and alcohol outpatient clinics in New South Wales, Australia. One hundred forty-two treatment seeking cannabis dependent adults, with no significant medical, psychiatric or other substance use disorders. Nabiximols is an oromucosal spray prescribed on a flexible dose regimen to a maximum daily dose of 32 sprays; 8 sprays (total 21.6 mg tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and 20 mg cannabidiol (CBD)) four times a day, or matching placebo, dispensed weekly. All participants will receive six-sessions of individual cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and weekly clinical reviews. Primary endpoints are use of non-prescribed cannabis (self-reported cannabis use days, urine toxicology), safety measures (adverse events and abuse liability), and cost effectiveness (incremental cost effectiveness in achieving additional Quality Adjusted Life Years). Secondary outcomes include, improvement in physical and mental health parameters, substance use other than cannabis, cognitive functioning and patient satisfaction measures. DISCUSSION: This is the first outpatient community-based randomised controlled study of nabiximols as an agonist replacement medication for treating cannabis dependence, targeting individuals who have not previously responded to conventional treatment approaches. The study and treatment design is modelled upon an earlier study with this population and more generally on other agonist replacement treatments (e.g. nicotine, opioids). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12616000103460 (Registered 1st February 2016).

Transdiscal mid- and upper thoracic vertebroplasty: first description of 2 exemplary cases.

Kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty are established treatment methods to reinforce fractured vertebral bodies. In cases of previous pedicle screw instrumentation, vertebral body cannulation may be challenging. The authors describe, for the first time, an approach through the adjacent inferior vertebra and disc space in the thoracic spine for cement augmentation. A 78-year-old woman underwent posterior fusion with pedicle screws after vertebrectomy and reconstruction with cement and Steinmann pins for a pathological T-7 fracture. Two months later she developed a compression fracture of the vertebral body at the lower part of the construct, and a vertebroplasty was performed. Because a standard transpedicular route was not available, an inferior transdiscal trajectory was used for the cement injection. A 73-year-old man with a history of rheumatoid arthritis underwent cervicothoracic fusion posteriorly for subluxation. He developed pain in the upper thoracic area, and the authors performed a transdiscal vertebroplasty at T-2. The standard transpedicular route was not possible. The vertebral body was satisfactorily filled up with cement. Clinically both patients benefited significantly in terms of back pain and showed an uneventful follow-up of 3 months. Transdiscal vertebroplasty can achieve good results in the mid- and upper thoracic spine when a standard transpedicular trajectory is not possible, and can therefore be a good alternative in select cases.