Disorders - Cannabis Use
Teeters, J. B., Armstrong, N.M., King, S. A., Hubbard, S. M.
Introduction: Driving after cannabis use (DACU)
and riding with a cannabis-impaired driver (RWCD) are national public health concerns. Though driving impairments and increased crash risk make DACU
and RWCD two of the riskiest cannabis-related behaviors, many continue to drive after use and ride with others who are under the influence and do not
view DACU or RWCD as dangerous. The current study examined the efficacy of an accessible, low-cost, mobile phone - based brief intervention aimed at
reducing DACU and RWCD among college cannabis users in the context of a randomized three-group pilot trial.\rMethod: Participants were 97 college
cannabis users (67.4 % women; average age = 21.34; 80.4 % Caucasian) who endorsed DACU at least three times in the past three months. After
completing baseline measures, the study randomly assigned participants to one of three conditions: a) a substance impaired - driving personalized
feedback plus MI-style interactive text messaging intervention (PF + MIT); b) a substance impaired - driving personalized feedback only intervention
(PF); and c) a substance information control condition (IC). All conditions completed outcome measures three months postintervention.\rResults:
Generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) analyses indicated that after controlling for sex, cannabis users in the PF + MIT condition significantly
reduced DACU and RWCD over time compared to those in the IC condition.\rConclusions: These findings provide preliminary support for the short-term
efficacy of a mobile phone - based intervention in decreasing DACU and RWCD among college cannabis users. Future research should determine whether
these reductions in driving behaviors persist past three months.
Journal of substance abuse
treatment, 142 : 1-9
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Service Delivery & Improvement, Psychological Interventions
(any), Other Psychological Interventions, Personalised feedback, normative feedback, Technology, interventions delivered using technology (e.g. online, SMS)
Paz-Castro, R., Haug, S., Wenger, A., Schaub, M.
P.
Introduction: The main objective of this study was to test the longer-term and differential
efficacy of a mobile phone-based life-skills training program designed to prevent substance use among adolescents. Study Design: A 2-arm, parallel-
group, cluster RCT with assessments at baseline and follow-up after 6 and 18 months was conducted. The efficacy of the intervention was compared with
that of an assessment-only control condition. Setting/Participants: A total of 1,473 students with a mean age of 15.4 years were recruited in
2019/2020 within 89 Swiss secondary and upper secondary school classes. Intervention(s): The automated intervention program included online feedback
and individually tailored text messages provided over 22 weeks. The contents were based on social cognitive theory and addressed self-management,
social, and substance use resistance skills. Main Outcome Measure(s): Primary outcomes included 30-day prevalence rates for problem drinking and
tobacco use. Result(s): The 18-month follow-up assessments were completed by 1,232 study (83.6%) participants. Those in the intervention group
reported lower tobacco-smoking prevalence than the controls (OR=0.67; 95% CI=0.47, 0.96), but no significant difference in problem drinking (OR=0.84;
95% CI=0.61, 1.17) was observed. Among secondary outcomes, the intervention was effective at reducing cannabis-smoking prevalence (OR=0.55; 95%
CI=0.39, 0.76) and cannabis use days (Cohen's d= -0.19; 95% CI= -0.29, -0.09), whereas no effects were observed for quantity of alcohol use,
quantity of cigarettes smoked, well-being, or social skills. No significant moderators of the primary outcomes were observed. Conclusion(s): An
automated mobile phone-based life-skills training program produced longer-term effectiveness in preventing tobacco smoking and cannabis use, whereas
no effects were observed for problem drinking. These results suggest that digitally delivered life-skills training programs are similarly effective
and are an easy-to-implement alternative to training conducted within a school curriculum. Trial Registration: This study is registered at
ISRCTN41347061 (registration date: 21/07/2018). Copyright © 2022 American Journal of Preventive Medicine
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 63(6) : 944-953
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Alcohol
Use, Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: Universal prevention
-
Treatment and intervention: Service Delivery & Improvement, Psychological Interventions
(any), Skills training, Personalised feedback, normative feedback, Technology, interventions delivered using technology (e.g. online, SMS)
Kirkland, A. E., Browning, B. D., Green, R., Liu, H., Squeglia, L. M.
Purpose: Youth-oriented pharmacotherapies may bolster treatment for adolescent alcohol use disorder (AUD). N-
acetylcysteine (NAC) is a promising candidate medication given its safety profile and extensive preclinical addiction-related mechanistic and
behavioral evidence. The next step in pharmacotherapy development pipeline is to translate these findings to human adolescents by characterizing the
behavioral changes and neural mechanisms associated with NAC. This presentation will review the development of NAC as a candidate pharmacotherapy for
adolescent AUD and other substance use, including the extant preclinical and clinical literature, and present data from an ongoing mechanistic
clinical trial examining the neural effects of NAC in non-treatment-seeking alcohol-using adolescents. Method(s): An overview of data will be
presented, including a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in treatment-seeking youth who met criteria for cannabis use disorder (CUD) and also used
alcohol (ages 15-21, N = 116; 2400 mg NAC or placebo for 8 weeks), a follow-up RCT in CUD and alcohol using treatment-seeking adults (ages 18-50, N =
302; 2400 mg NAC or placebo for 12 weeks), and a mechanistic crossover study in non-treatment-seeking heavy drinking adolescents (ages 15-19, N = 22;
2400 mg NAC/placebo for 10 days). The two RCTs measured alcohol and cannabis use, while the mechanistic study assessed levels of glutamate, GABA, and
glutathione using magnetic resonance spectroscopy and short-term drinking outcomes. Result(s): In the RCTs, adolescent CUD treatment-seekers
randomized to NAC who reduced cannabis use also reduced alcohol consumption (p = 0.016), which was not found in placebo. In the followup adult RCT,
those randomized to NAC had increased odds of fewer drinks (p = 0.045) and drinking days per week (p = 0.014), with decreases in cannabis use only
found in the 18-21 age range, consistent with the adolescent trial. The mechanistic study in alcohol-using adolescents found no effects for study
medication (NAC/placebo) on any brain metabolite, nor on drinking behaviors (p < 0.05). Conclusion(s): Current findings suggest that NAC reduces
alcohol and cannabis use in adolescents. Behavioral data indicates NAC's effect is stronger in treatment versus non-treatment seekers, suggesting
that treatment motivation and alcohol use severity may be important efficacy indicators. While NAC did not correspond with neurometabolite changes in
non-treatment seekers, future studies should explore mechanisms of action in treatment-seeking youth who meet criteria for AUD.
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 46(Supplement
1) : 44A
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Alcohol
Use, Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention), Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Medications used to treat substance abuse
Jenzer, T., Treloar-Padovano, H. Chun, T., Blanchard, A., Miranda, R.
Purpose: Alcohol use and the onset of alcohol use
disorder (AUD) peak during adolescence and young adulthood, and problematic drinking is a leading public health concern for youth worldwide. Yet the
best psychosocial interventions yield only modest short-term benefit among youth. One potential way to improve treatment is to augment psychosocial
interventions with pharmacotherapy. Method(s): Youth (N = 82; ages 14-24) with alcohol-related problems and interest in receiving help to reduce
their drinking were randomized to topiramate (n = 41; titrated to 200mg/day) or placebo (n = 41) for 8 weeks. All participants received four
individually delivered biweekly sessions of a psychosocial platform that combinedmotivational enhancement and cognitive behavioral therapies. Data:
Primary outcomes were percent drinking days (DD) and heavy drinking days (HDD) during the 4-week target dose period. The secondary endpoint was
cannabis use. Result(s): Of the 82 participants, 40 were assigned female sex at birth (48.8%); 42 were male (51.2%). The mean (SD) age was 20.7
(2.0), and the race/ethnicity self-identified by most participants was White (69.5%) and non-Hispanic (80.5%); 15.9% were Black/African American,
4.9% were American Indian/Native Alaskan, 3.7% were Asian, 6% were another race or multiracial. At baseline, the mean (SD) number of AUD symptoms was
3.3 (2.2), drinking days (DD) was 38% (20.1), and heavy drinking days (HDD) was 15.9% (16.3). There were no significant between-group differences in
demographic or AUD/drinking variables at baseline. Although youth were recruited from the community for alcohol problems, 64.6% also reported
cannabis use. Of this subset, half (52.8%) were randomized to topiramate. Thirty-one participants (75.6%) randomized to topiramate completed the
trial compared with 36 (87.8%) randomized to placebo. Results showed a significant reduction in percent DD and HDD across both medication conditions.
Compared with placebo, topiramate did not reduce drinking. By contrast, topiramate reduced cannabis use. Conclusion(s): Participants significantly
reduced the frequency and quantity of their drinking during the trial, but this effect did not vary by medication condition. These findings are
inconsistent with prior adult studies. Consistent with another recent clinical trial with youth, topiramate reduced cannabis use at target dose. The
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholismsupported this project (R01 AA007850).
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental
Research, 46(Supplement 1) : 44A
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Alcohol
Use, Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Biological Interventions
(any), Medications used to treat substance abuse, Psychological Interventions
(any), Cognitive & behavioural therapies (CBT), Motivational interviewing, includes Motivational Enhancing Therapy
Gonzalez-Ortega, I., Echeburua,
E., Alberich, S., Bernardo, M., Vieta, E., Pablo, G. S., Gonzalez-Pinto, A.
Despite the negative influence of cannabis use on the development and prognosis of first-episode psychosis (FEP), there
is little evidence on effective specific interventions for cannabis use cessation in FEP. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of a
specific cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for cannabis cessation (CBT-CC) with treatment as usual (TAU) in FEP cannabis users. In this single-
blind, 1-year randomized controlled trial, 65 participants were randomly assigned to CBT-CC or TAU. The primary outcome was the reduction in cannabis
use severity. The CBT-CC group had a greater decrease in cannabis use severity and positive psychotic symptoms over time, and a greater improvement
in functioning at post-treatment than TAU. The treatment response was also faster in the CBT-CC group, reducing cannabis use, anxiety, positive and
general psychotic symptoms, and improving functioning earlier than TAU in the follow-up. Moreover, patients who stopped and/or reduced cannabis use
during the follow-up, decreased psychotic symptoms and increased awareness of disease compared to those who continued using cannabis. Early
intervention based on a specific CBT for cannabis cessation, may be effective in reducing cannabis use severity, in addition to improving clinical
and functional outcomes of FEP cannabis users. Copyright © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(12) (no pagination) :
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Psychosis Disorders, Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: First episode (psychosis only), Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions
(any), Cognitive & behavioural therapies (CBT)
Ewing, S. F., Bryan, A. D., Dash, G. F., Lovejoy, T.
I., Borsari, B., Schmiege, S. J.
Hispanic youth represent one of the fastest-growing minority groups. Yet, we know little about Hispanic adolescents' response
to empirically-supported interventions for adolescent addiction, including motivational interviewing (MI). This randomized controlled trial (RCT)
compared MI to an active educational treatment for adolescent alcohol and cannabis use (alcohol and cannabis education; ACE). Adolescents who
regularly use substances (N = 448; n = 347 Hispanic; n = 101 non-Hispanic white; ages 13-18) were randomized to two 1-hr individual sessions of MI or
ACE. We examined 6-month outcomes and mechanisms of change across Hispanic and non-Hispanic white youth. Treatment response was comparable across
ethnicities (Hispanic vs. non-Hispanicwhite youth). Additionally, adolescents in the MI condition showed greater reductions in alcohol use compared
to those in ACE, with support for motivation and self-efficacy as mechanisms of treatment response. Direct effects of MI on cannabis use were not
observed; however, a significant indirect effect of motivationwas observed for reductions in cannabis use. Data support the efficacy of MI in
reducing adolescent alcohol use, through the vehicle of enhanced motivation and self-efficacy.While consistent treatment response was observed for
adolescent alcohol use across ethnicities (Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic white), further exploration into potential underexplored mechanisms of Hispanic
adolescents' treatment response is requisite to strengthening prevention and intervention programming for Hispanic adolescents' cannabis use.
Copyright © 2021. American Psychological Association
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 30(3) : 287-
299
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Alcohol
Use, Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions
(any), Motivational interviewing, includes Motivational Enhancing Therapy
Chazal, C., Roux, C., Kinouani,
S., Schuers, M., Fortin, F., Pereira, B., Blanc, O., Pinol-Domenech, N., Brousse, G., Vorilhon,
P., Laporte, C.
Introduction: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of brief interventions
realized in primary care in reducing cannabis use for adolescents and emerging adults. Method(s): PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, and Central
(Cochrane Library) were searched until December 2020. Randomized controlled trials conducted in primary care, concerning in-person brief
interventions for non-medical cannabis users aged from 12 to 25 years old were eligible for inclusion. Brief interventions had to last 30 min or
less. Patients with comorbid mental health disorder or very specific populations were not included. Result(s): One thousand eighty hundred and
fifty-five studies were identified through database searching; only 8 studies involving 2,199 patients were included for qualitative synthesis after
double reading and data extraction. Randomized controlled trials selected were heterogeneous regarding screening tools, initial levels of cannabis
use and cannabis outcomes measures. Brief interventions were all based on motivational interviewing techniques or personalized feedback. Seven
studies consisted in a single session of brief intervention. Six studies involved also other substance users. No significant reduction of cannabis
use after brief intervention was found for most studies, especially in the long term. A trend of decreased cannabis consequences, such as negative
psychosocial repercussions, perception of cannabis use by peers, or driving under the influence of cannabis, was reported. Conclusion(s): The current
state of knowledge does not allow us to say that the brief intervention is effective in reducing cannabis use among adolescents in primary care. We
found a mild positive effect on cannabis consequences after brief intervention. Mixed qualitative and quantitative studies are need to better
evaluate the impact of brief intervention and his faisability. PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): ndegree
CRD42016033080. Copyright © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
Family Practice, 39(6) : 1156-1168
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Cannabis Use
- Type: Systematic reviews
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions
(any), Motivational interviewing, includes Motivational Enhancing Therapy, Psychoeducation
Bonar, E. E., Goldstick, J. E., Chapman, L., Bauermeister, J. A., Young, S. D., McAfee, J., Walton, M. A.
Purpose: Cannabis use is
increasing among emerging adults (ages 18-25), necessitating the need for prevention interventions. Using a novel platform-social media-we developed
an 8-week motivational interviewing and cognitive-behavioral intervention targeting cannabis use among emerging adults. Herein, we report on the
feasibility and acceptability of the intervention in a pilot trial. Procedures: For NCT 04187989 we recruited N = 149 emerging adults who used
cannabis (at least 3 times/week for the past month) using social media advertising. Their mean age was 21.0 years (SD = 2.2); 55.7% were female. Most
were White (70.5%; 20.1% Black/African American, 9.4% Other races), with 20.1% identifying as Hispanic/Latinx. Participants were randomized to the 8
-week intervention or an 8-week attention-placebo control condition, both delivered in secret Facebook groups by electronic health coaches (e-
coaches). Follow-up assessments occurred at 3- and 6-months. Results: The intervention was well-received and follow-up rates were high; fidelity was
good. Intervention participants rated e-coaches significantly higher in terms of helpfulness, warmth, etc., compared to control participants.
Intervention participants were more likely to engage with and recommend the group. In terms of percentage reductions in cannabis outcomes, the
intervention group evidenced absolute reductions over time in several measures of cannabis consumption across modalities. In an adjusted model,
reductions in vaping days in the intervention group, relative to attention-control, reached statistical significance (p = .020, D =.40). Conclusions:
This social media intervention for emerging adults' cannabis use was feasible and acceptable in the target population warranting future testing in a
fully powered trial. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 232 : 1-
10
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Service Delivery & Improvement, Psychological Interventions
(any), Other Psychological Interventions, Technology, interventions delivered using technology (e.g. online, SMS)
Beneria, A., Santesteban-Echarri, O., Daigre,
C., Tremain, H., Ramos-Quiroga, J. A., McGorry, P. D., Alvarez-Jimenez, M.
Background: Young people present high rates of cannabis use,
abuse, and dependence. The United Nations estimates that roughly 3.8% of the global population aged 15-64 years used cannabis at least once in 2017.
Cannabis use in young people may impair cognitive skills, interfere with learning, impact relationships, and lead to long term behavioural and
psychological consequences. Online cannabis interventions (OCI) are increasingly popular, but their dissemination is not often supported by empirical
evidence. Aim(s): To systematically compile and analyse the effectiveness of OCI for the reduction of cannabis use among adolescents and young adults
(AYA). Method(s): Pooled effect sizes of cannabis use between treatment and control groups were estimated. For each comparison, Hedge's g was
calculated using a random effects model. Result(s): The search strategy yielded 4531 articles. Of those, a total of 411 articles were retrieved for
detailed evaluation resulting in 17 eligible studies (n = 3525). Analyses revealed that online interventions did not significantly reduce cannabis
consumption (Hedge's g = -0.061, 95% CI [-0.363] to [-0.242], p =.695) and high heterogeneity was noted (Q = 191.290). More recent studies using
structured interventions, daily feedback, AYA centred designs, and peer support, specifically targeting CU seemed to have positive effects to address
CU in this population. Conclusion(s): The lack of positive outcomes suggests that more specific and targeted interventions may be necessary to
promote cannabis-related behavioural change among young people. These targeted interventions may include structured CU modules, daily feedback, peer
support for increased adherence, user-centred design procedures, and input from key stakeholders such as families and service providers. Copyright ©
2021 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 16(8) : 821-
844
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Cannabis Use
- Type: Systematic reviews
-
Stage: Universal prevention, At risk (indicated or selected prevention), Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Service Delivery & Improvement, Psychological Interventions
(any), Technology, interventions delivered using technology (e.g. online, SMS)
Belenko, S., Dennis, M., Hiller, M., Mackin, J., Cain, C., Weiland,
D., Estrada, B., Kagan, R.
Juvenile Drug Treatment Courts (JDTC) emerged in the mid-1990s as a potential solution to concern about substance use among youth in the
juvenile justice system (JJS). Despite substantial research, findings on the JDTC effectiveness for reducing recidivism and substance use remain
inconsistent, hampered by methodological problems. In 2016, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention published research-based JDTC
Guidelines for best practices, and funded technical assistance for implementation and a multisite national outcomes study among JDTCs implementing
the Guidelines. Ten sites were originally selected for this study, with a JDTC and Traditional Juvenile Court (TJC) participating. In two sites,
moderate- to high-risk youth were randomized to JDTC or TJC, and in eight sites, a regression discontinuity design assigned moderate- to high-risk
youth to JDTC, and other youth to TJC. Findings from four sites with sufficient cases and follow-up rates indicated that JDTCs reduced cannabis use,
increased access to mental health services, and reduced recidivism. However, the effects were small to moderate, with positive impacts mainly
observed among high-risk youth. The impacts of JDTCs may have been attenuated because Guidelines implementation was inconsistent across courts, and
some TJCs implemented elements of the Guidelines, blurring the distinction between JDTCs and TJCs. Copyright © 2022. National Council for Mental
Wellbeing.
The journal of behavioral health services & research, 49(4) : 436-
455
- Year: 2022
- Problem: Substance Use Disorders (any), Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Service Delivery & Improvement, Other service delivery and improvement
interventions
Teesson, M., Newton, N., Slade, T., Chapman, C., Birrell, L., Mewton, L., Mather, M., Hides, L., McBride, N., Allsop, S., Andrews, G.
Introduction and Aims: Mental health and
substance use disorders are leading causes of disability among young people globally [1]. Research has highlighted the comorbidity of these disorders
[2], yet few existing prevention programs concurrently target these issues. Furthermore, many programs are hampered by poor implementation fidelity.
The Climate Schools Combined (CSC) Study was the first trial to test the effectiveness of an online prevention model targeting both mental health and
substance use disorders among adolescents. Design and Methods: A four-arm cluster RCT involving 6386 students from 71 schools was conducted from
2014-2016. Schools were randomised to one of the following conditions; 1) \"Control,\" 2) \"Climate Schools-Substance Use,\" 3) \"Climate Schools-
Mental Health,\" or 4) the \"CSC\" intervention. Result(s): Compared to Controls, the Combined intervention increased knowledge related to alcohol
and cannabis at 12, 24 and 30 months (30 months: alcohol SMD 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 - 0.39, cannabis SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.06 - 0.28), increased knowledge
related to mental health at 24 months (SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.08 - 0.27), less growth in their odds of drinking and heavy episodic drinking at 12, 24 and
30 months (30 months: drinking OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12 - 0.51, heavy episodic drinking OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 - 0.58), and reduced increases in anxiety
symptoms at 12 and 30 months (30 months: SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.22 - -0*01). No difference was found in symptoms or probable diagnosis of depression.
The Combined intervention also showed evidence of improvement on some outcomes compared to the Substance Use and Mental Health interventions.
Discussions and Conclusion(s): For the first time, there is evidence of the effectiveness of a universal school-based preventive intervention
concurrently targeting substance use, depression and anxiety. It provides educators with an easy to implement and scalable approach to prevention.
Disclosure of Interest Statement: MT and NN are developers of the Climate Schools programs, as well as the Directors of Climate Schools Pty Ltd,
which distributes the Climate Schools programs on a not-for-profit basis.
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 45
(SUPPL 1) : 75A
- Year: 2021
- Problem: Anxiety Disorders (any), Depressive Disorders, Substance Use Disorders (any), Alcohol
Use, Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: Universal prevention
-
Treatment and intervention: Service Delivery & Improvement, Psychological Interventions
(any), Other Psychological Interventions, Technology, interventions delivered using technology (e.g. online, SMS)
Short, N. A., Zvolensky, M. J., Schmidt, N.
B.
Background: Insomnia
symptoms may be an important etiological factor for substance use disorders; however, whether improving sleep leads to reductions in problematic
substance use among at-risk populations remains unclear. Method(s): As such, the current pilot study used a randomized controlled design to test the
effects of Brief Behavioral Treatment for Insomnia (BBTI) against a waitlist control among a sample of trauma-exposed young adults with elevated
insomnia symptoms who regularly use cannabis (N = 56). Result(s): Intent-to-treat multilevel modeling analyses indicated that BBTI may be more
efficacious than waitlist control in reducing self-reported insomnia symptoms, with large effects three months post-treatment (d = 1.34). Further,
our initial evidence suggested that BBTI resulted in reductions in cannabis-related problems with medium to large effects at three months post-
treatment (d = 0.75). The current pilot analyses indicated BBTI also reduced cravings to use cannabis to reduce negative emotions in response to
trauma cues with a large effect size. Conclusion(s): This pilot study suggests BBTI may be efficacious not only in improving insomnia symptoms among
cannabis users but also in reducing cannabis-related problems and cravings over three months. Future research should replicate these results in a
larger, fully powered sample with improved follow-up rates designed to test temporal mediation using multimethod assessments of insomnia symptoms and
problematic cannabis use. Overall, BBTI may be a promising intervention for trauma-exposed cannabis users to improve sleep and reduce cannabis-
related problems. Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc.
Journal of substance abuse treatment, 131 (no
pagination) :
- Year: 2021
- Problem: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Cannabis Use
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Complementary & Alternative
Interventions (CAM), Psychological Interventions
(any), Other Psychological Interventions, Other complementary & alternative
interventions