Search

Reduction-based cannabis use endpoints are needed to better evaluate treatments for cannabis use disorder (CUD). This exploratory, secondary analysis aimed to characterize cannabis frequency and quantity reduction patterns and corresponding changes in psychosocial functioning during treatment. We analyzed 16 weeks (4 prerandomization, 12 postrandomization) of data (

Episodic Future Thinking (EFT), mental simulation of personally relevant and positive future events, may modulate delay discounting (DD) in cannabis users. Whether EFT impacts cannabis use, whether DD mediates this effect, and whether EFT can be enhanced by prompting future events across specific life domains is unknown. Active, adult cannabis users (n = 90) recruited from Amazon mTurk and Qualtrics Panels were administered an Episodic Specificity Induction (ESI) to enhance quality of imagined events before being randomized to EFT, domain-specific-EFT (DS-EFT), or Episodic Recent Thinking (ERT). All participants created four, positive life events; DS-EFT participants imagined social, leisure, health, and financial events. Event-quality ratings were assessed (e.g., enjoyment). DD was assessed at baseline (Day 1), post-intervention (Days 2-4), and follow-up (Days 9-12). Cannabis use was assessed at baseline and follow-up. Differences in change in days and grams of cannabis use between conditions and mediation of changes in use by DD were examined. No differences in DD were observed between conditions. DS-EFT, but not EFT, showed significantly greater reductions in grams (d = .54) and days of cannabis use (d = .50) than ERT. DS-EFT and EFT demonstrated significantly greater event-quality ratings than ERT (ds > .55). EFT-based interventions showed potential for reducing cannabis use. Unexpectedly, effects on DD did not mediate this effect. Further testing with larger samples of cannabis users is needed to better understand EFT's mechanisms of action and determine optimal implementation strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

OBJECTIVE Abstinence is rarely achieved in clinical trials for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Cannabis reduction is associated with functional improvement, but reduction endpoints have not been established, indicating a need to identify and validate clinically meaningful reduction endpoints for assessing treatment efficacy. METHOD Data from a 12-week double-blind randomized placebo-controlled medication trial for cannabis cessation (NCT01675661) were analyzed. Participants (N = 225) were treatment-seeking adults, M = 30.6 (8.9) years old, 70.2% male, and 42.2% Non-White, with CUD who completed 12 weeks of treatment. Frequency (days of use per week) and quantity (grams per using day) were used to define high-, medium-, and low-risk levels. Anxiety and depression were assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and cannabis-related problems were assessed using the Marijuana Problems Scale. General linear models for repeated measures tested associations between the magnitude of risk reduction and functional outcomes from baseline (BL) to end-of-treatment (EOT). RESULTS Cannabis risk levels were sensitive to reductions in use from BL to EOT for frequency- (χ² = 19.35, p = .004) and quantity-based (χ² = 52.06, p < .001) metrics. Magnitude reduction in frequency-based risk level was associated with magnitude decrease in depression (F = 2.76, p = .043, ηp² = .04), anxiety (F = 3.70, p = .013, ηp² = .05), and cannabis-related problems (F = 8.95, p < .001, ηp² = .12). Magnitude reduction in quantity-based risk level was associated with magnitude decrease in anxiety (F = 3.02, p = .031, ηp² = .04) and cannabis-related problems (F = 3.24, p = .023, ηp² = .05). CONCLUSIONS Cannabis use risk levels, as operationalized in this study, captured reductions in use during a clinical trial. Risk level reduction was associated with functional improvement suggesting that identifying risk levels and measuring the change in levels over time may be a viable and clinically meaningful endpoint for determining treatment efficacy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

This study explored mediating pathways, moderating factors, and moderated mediation effects of a web-based, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention for chronic pain patients with aberrant drug-related behavior (ADRB). In a 2-arm RCT, patients with chronic pain who screened positive for ADRB received treatment-as-usual (TAU, n = 55) or TAU plus a 12-week, web-based CBT intervention (n = 55). Assessments were conducted at weeks 4, 8, and 12, and at 1- and 3-months post intervention. Web-CBT significantly reduced pain catastrophizing, which, in turn, reduced pain interference and pain severity via a pathway of pain catastrophizing. Web-CBT also significantly reduced ADRB both directly and indirectly by reducing pain catastrophizing. For pain interference and pain severity, web-CBT was more effective than TAU for younger patients (≤ age 50). For pain severity, web-CBT was more effective for both younger patients (≤ age 50), and those with a lifetime substance use disorder. Findings suggest that web-CBT's positive impact on pain outcomes and ADRB are mediated by its effect on pain catastrophizing, and its treatment effects may be most robust for younger patients and those with histories of substance dependence.

OBJECTIVE: Two primary compounds of the cannabis plant (Cannabis sativa), delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), differentially and dose-dependently affect mood and anxiety. In this systematic review, the authors summarize the design and results of controlled trials assessing the effects of THC and CBD on affective disorders, anxiety disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHODS: A keyword search of eight online literature data-bases identified eight randomized controlled trials of defined CBD or THC doses for the target populations. RESULTS: A 1-month trial of daily THC (up to 3 mg per day) for DSM-II anxiety disorder reduced anxiety symptoms, but symptoms were very low throughout the study. Another trial of sequential, single-day, low-dose THC in social anxiety disorder found no symptom changes. Two studies reported that single-dose CBD pretreatment reduced anxiety in laboratory paradigms among individuals with social anxiety disorder. A study of daily CBD for 4 weeks among adolescents with social anxiety disorder indicated modest symptom improvements. One crossover trial involving 10 patients with PTSD showed that THC added to standard pharmacotherapy reduced self-reported nightmares. Two small studies of THC for hospitalized patients with unipolar or bipolar depression found no improvement of depression; instead, anxiety and psychotic symptoms emerged in >50% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: With only eight very small studies, insufficient evidence was found for efficacy of CBD and THC to manage affective disorders, anxiety disorders, or PTSD. Therefore, medical cannabis should not be recommended for treating patients with these disorders. Further research should investigate the safety and efficacy of managing psychiatric disorders with cannabinoids.

Background Cannabis misuse in young adults is a major public health concern. An important predictor of continued use is cannabis craving. Due to the time-varying nature of cravings, brief momentary interventions delivered while cravings are elevated may improve the use of strategies to cope with cravings and reduce cannabis use. Objective The goal of this manuscript is to describe a formative study to develop coping strategy messages for use in a subsequent intervention. Methods Young adults (aged 19-25 years; n=20) who reported using cannabis >10 of the past 30 days recruited via social media participated in this formative study. Participants rated an initial set of 15 mindfulness and 15 distraction coping strategies on a scale from 1 to 4 (very low degree to very high degree) for clarity, usefulness, and tone. They also provided comments about the content. Results Participants found the initial distraction messages slightly clearer than mindfulness (mean 3.5, SD 0.4 and mean 3.4, SD 0.4, respectively), both were comparable in tone (mean 3.2, SD 0.5 and mean 3.2, SD 0.4, respectively), and mindfulness messages were more useful than distraction (mean 3.0, SD 0.5 and mean 2.8, SD 0.6, respectively). Of the 30 messages, 29 received a rating of very low or low (3 participants or received a comment suggesting a change. We revised all these messages based on this feedback, and the participants rated the revised messages approximately 2 weeks later. Participants earned US $10 for completing the first and US $20 for the second survey. The ratings improved on usefulness (especially the distraction items) with very little change in clarity and tone. The top 10 messages of each coping type (mindfulness and distraction) were identified by overall average rating (collapsed across all 3 dimensions: all rated >3.0). The final items were comparable in clarity (distraction mean 3.6, SD 0.4; mindfulness mean 3.6, SD 0.4), tone (distraction mean 3.4, SD 0.4; mindfulness mean 3.4, SD 0.4), and usefulness (distraction mean 3.1, SD 0.5; mindfulness mean 3.2, SD 0.5). Conclusions The inclusion of end users in the formative process of developing these messages was valuable and resulted in improvements to the content of the messages. The majority of the messages were changed in some way including the removal of potentially triggering language. These messages were subsequently used in an ecological momentary intervention.

UNSTRUCTURED Cannabis misuse in young adults is a major public health concern. An important predictor of continued use is cannabis craving. Due to the time-varying nature of craving, brief momentary interventions delivered while cravings are elevated may improve use of strategies to cope with cravings and reduce cannabis use. The goal of this manuscript is to describe a formative study to develop coping strategy messages for use in a subsequent intervention. Young adults (19 – 25 years; n=20) who reported using cannabis >10 of the past 30 days recruited via social media participated in this formative study. Participants rated an initial set of 15 mindfulness and 15 distraction coping strategies on a scale from 1 – 4 (very low degree to very high degree) for clarity, usefulness, and tone. They also provided comments about content. Participants found the initial distraction messages slightly clearer than mindfulness (m=3.5, SD=0.4; m=3.4, SD=0.4), both were comparable in tone (m=3.2, SD=0.5; m=3.2, SD=0.4), and mindfulness messages were more useful than distraction (m=3.0, SD=0.5; m=2.8, SD=0.6). Of the 30 messages, 29 received a rating of very low or low (3 participants or received a comment suggesting a change. We revised all these messages based on this feedback, and participants rated the revised messages approximately two weeks later. Participants earned $10 for completing the first and $20 for the second survey. Ratings improved on usefulness (especially the distraction items) with very little change on clarity and tone. The top ten messages of each coping type (mindfulness and distraction) were identified by overall average rating (collapsed across all three dimensions: all rated >3.0). The final items were comparable in clarity (distraction m = 3.6, SD = 0.4; mindfulness m = 3.6, SD = 0.4 respectively), tone (m = 3.4, SD = 0.4; m = 3.4, SD = 0.4), and usefulness (m = 3.1, SD = 0.5; m = 3.2, SD = 0.5). These messages were subsequently used in an ecological momentary intervention.

ObjectiveTo explore the feasibility and utility of a tolerance break (T-Break) guide on young adults’ cannabis use.ParticipantsYoung adults aged 18-29 (n=125) who were current cannabis users.MethodsParticipants recruited through posters and listservs at various universities were offered the T-Break Guide—daily activities, advice, and encouragement—to help complete a 21-day cannabis break. Bivariate analyses examined associations between Guide use and follow-up measures.ResultsCompared to non-Guide users, participants who used the Guide “a lot” were more likely to complete the 21-day abstinence break (84% vs. 57%), revise their personal definition of balance to mean less cannabis (84% vs. 62%), and plan a future break (32% vs. 11%).ConclusionUse of this self-directed Guide may help young adults take a break from cannabis use and reduce future use. Further research using more rigorous designs to test the Guide’s efficacy and assess longer-term maintenance of effects is needed.

Introduction Cannabis use is increasing among cigarette smokers in the United States. Prior studies suggest that cannabis use may be a barrier to smoking cessation. Yet, the extent to which this is the case among adults seeking to quit tobacco use remains unclear. Tobacco quitlines are the most common provider of no-cost treatment for adults who use smoke in the United States. This study investigated the association between cannabis use and smoking cessation outcomes among quitline callers. Aims and Methods Participants included callers to the New York State Smokers’ Quitline, who were seeking to quit smoking cigarettes and were contacted for outcome assessment 7 months after intake. Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence rates were calculated and compared among cannabis use groups, based on frequency of past-30-day cannabis use at baseline (none: 0 days, occasional: 1–9 days, regular: 10–19 days, and daily: 20–30 days). Results Approximately 8.3% (n = 283) of participants (n = 3396) reported past-30-day cannabis use at baseline. Callers with daily cannabis use (20–30 days per month) had significantly lower odds of 30-day abstinence, relative to those who did not use cannabis (odds ratio = 0.5; 95% confidence interval [0.3, 0.9]). Conclusions Daily cannabis use appears to be associated with poorer smoking cessation treatment outcomes among adults seeking to quit smoking cigarettes via a quitline. Because quitlines are among the most accessible, affordable, and frequently utilized community-based treatments available in the United States, and the prevalence of cannabis use is increasing among cigarette smokers, detailed inquiry into cannabis use might enhance cigarette smoking cessation outcomes. Implications Quitlines are free of cost and accessible to millions of smokers in the United States. The current study found an inverse relationship between daily cannabis use at baseline and 30-day abstinence from cigarette smoking at 7-month follow-up among New York State Smokers’ Quitline callers. Findings suggest that daily cannabis use may be a barrier to smoking cessation and sustained abstinence among those seeking help to stop smoking cigarettes.

PURPOSE: New oral nicotine products (ONPs), often advertised as “tobacco-free” (i.e., pouches, gum, lozenges, gummies), come in nontobacco flavors appealing to adolescents. It is unknown how adolescent willingness to use ONPs differs by product type and flavor, and whether sociodemographic disparities exist. METHODS: Adolescent never tobacco product users (n = 1, 289) in ninth or 10th grade from 11 high schools in Southern California were surveyed in fall 2021 about ever and past 6-month use of ONPs and sociodemographic characteristics. Adolescents were randomized to view five different ONPs in either fruit or mint flavor, and asked to rate their willingness to use each product. Multivariable logistic random effect-repeated measures regression examined associations of product type, flavor, and sociodemographic characteristics with any willingness to use ONPs. RESULTS: Compared to traditional smokeless tobacco (willingness = 17.8%), adolescents reported greater willingness to use ONPs (gum, 28.2%; pouches, 21.1%; lozenge, 22.4%; gummies, 24.1%); adjusted odd ratios [aORs] 1.25–1.84; p-values

Prevalence of cannabis use in the United States continues to rise, and 30% of cannabis users eventually meet criteria for Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD). One response to this problem is to develop decision-making constructs that indicate vulnerability to CUD that might not be gleaned from diagnostic criteria. Unfortunately, there is limited evidence that decision-making constructs consistently relate to cannabis use. Interestingly, those who exhibit the sunk cost bias, an overgeneralized tendency to persist based on past investment, and those who use cannabis, both tend to focus on the past and perseverate more than their counterparts. Despite this overlap, no studies have assessed whether the sunk cost bias is positively associated with cannabis use. In 2 experiments with undergraduates, relations between cannabis use and the propensity to engage in the sunk cost bias were examined using negative binomial models. Experiment 1 (n = 46) evaluated the association between sunk cost bias propensity (using hypothetical costs and rewards) and frequency of cannabis use over the past 30 days. Greater sunk cost propensity was associated with more frequent cannabis use after controlling for demographics and alcohol use. In Experiment 2 (n = 103), more frequent cannabis use during a 6-week follow-up period was predicted by greater sunk cost propensity at baseline (using a real cost and reward-based task), independently and after controlling for mental health symptoms, alcohol use, and demographics. These findings provide preliminary evidence that a propensity to exhibit the sunk cost bias may be an important feature associated with cannabis use. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Multiple interventions for treating adolescents with substance use disorders have demonstrated efficacy, but most teens do not show an enduring positive response to these treatments. Contingency management (CM)-based strategies provide a promising alternative, and clinical research focused on the development and testing of innovative CM models continues to grow. This article provides information on the principles that underlie CM interventions, key metrics that define their development and implementation, a brief review of studies that have tested these approaches, and some clinical CM tools. As with other interventions to help youth with substance use problems, there is much to learn about CM approaches.

Background Highly-potent cannabis products, e.g., concentrates, entail greater risks of cannabis-related harms than lower-potency products such as plant or flower material. However, little information is available on whether individuals in U.S. states with recreational cannabis laws (RCL) or medical cannabis laws (MCL) are more likely than individuals in U.S. states without cannabis legalization (no-CL) to use highly-potent forms of cannabis. Methods Cannabis-using adults in a 2017 online survey (N = 4064) provided information on state of residence and past-month cannabis use, including types of products used, categorized as low-potency (smoked or vaped plant cannabis) or high-potency (vaping or dabbing concentrates). Multivariable logistic regression models generated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for use of high-potency cannabis products by state cannabis legalization status (RCL, MCL, no-CL). Results Compared to participants in no-CL states, participants in RCL states had greater odds of using high-potency concentrate products (aOR=2.61;CI=1.77–3.86), as did participants in MCL-only states (aOR=1.55;CI=1.21–1.97). When participants in RCL states and MCL states were directly compared, those in RCL states had greater odds of using high-potency concentrate products (aOR=1.69;CI=1.27–2.42). Discussion Although the sample was not nationally representative and the cross-sectional data precluded determining the direction of effect, results suggest that use of high-potency cannabis concentrates is more likely among those in RCL states. Clinicians in RCL states should screen cannabis users for harmful patterns of use. Policymakers in states that do not yet have RCL should consider these findings when drafting new cannabis laws, including the specific products permitted and how best to regulate them.

Background and aims Cannabis withdrawal is a well characterized phenomenon that occurs in approximately half of regular and dependent cannabis users after abrupt cessation or significant reductions in cannabis that contains Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). This review describes the diagnosis, prevalence, course and management of cannabis withdrawal and highlights opportunities for future clinical research. Methods Narrative review of literature. Results Symptom onset typically occurs 24-48 hours after cessation and most symptoms generally peak at days 2-3, with some symptoms lasting up to 3 weeks in heavy cannabis users. The most common features of cannabis withdrawal are anxiety, irritability, anger or aggression, disturbed sleep/dreaming, depressed mood and loss of appetite. Less common physical symptoms include chills, headaches, physical tension, sweating and stomach pain. Despite limited empirical evidence, supportive counselling and psychoeducation are the first line approaches in the management of cannabis withdrawal. There are no medications currently approved specifically for medically assisted withdrawal (MAW). Medications have been used to manage short-term symptoms (e.g., anxiety, sleep, nausea). A number of promising pharmacological agents have been examined in controlled trials but these have been underpowered and positive findings not reliably replicated. Some (e.g., cannabis agonists) are used 'off label' in clinical practice. While inpatient admission is rarely required for MAW, psychiatric comorbidities and polysubstance use and dependence can require additional management to avoid severe complications. Conclusions The clinical significance of cannabis withdrawal is that its symptoms may precipitate relapse to cannabis use. Complicated withdrawal may occur in persons with concurrent mental health and polysubstance use.

This cross-sectional study examined the feasibility of using four different web-based strategies to recruit rural and urban adults who use opioids non-medically for a survey on opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment preferences, and compared the treatment preferences of rural versus urban participants. Preferences for medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) formulation and OUD treatment models were assessed through an online survey. Recruitment advertisements were shown on Facebook, Google AdWords, Reddit, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Participants were categorized by zip code into urban versus rural residence using the Centers for Medicaid and Medicaid Health Resources and Services Administration definitions. OUD treatment preferences were compared using chi-square and t-tests. Among the 851 participants recruited, 815 provided zip codes and were classified as residing in rural (n=200, 24.5%) or urban (n=615, 75.4%) regions. A crowdsourcing service (MTurk) recruited the most rural participants, while posts on a social news website (Reddit) recruited the most urban participants (χ(2)(3)=17.0, p

Background Cannabis use is increasingly common among pregnant women despite concern that it may be linked to adverse maternal and infant outcomes. Determining whether variables associated with cannabis use predict whether women continue or quit using during pregnancy may inform strategies to reduce prenatal use. Methods Pregnant women who regularly used cannabis before pregnancy (n = 296) were recruited via Facebook. After finding out they were pregnant, 41 % reported quitting, 13 % quit then relapsed, 32 % reduced use, and 15 % continued use at the same rate. Differences among these four cannabis use status groups (quit, relapsed, reduced, continued) in sociodemographics, cannabis use, cigarette use, perceived risk/benefit, delay discounting, and communications about cannabis with their doctor were assessed. Results Compared to those who quit, continuing use during pregnancy was associated with being unemployed (Relative Risk (RR) = .32, 95 %CI [.13, .78]), using cigarettes pre-pregnancy (RR = 3.43, 95 %CI [1.32, 8.94]), being in an earlier trimester (RR = 4.38, 95 %CI [1.18, 16.23]), less perceived risk (RR = .79, 95 %CI [.74, .85]), and more days per week of use pre-pregnancy (RR = .10, 95 %CI [.01, .84]). Unintended pregnancy, shorter time to cannabis use after waking pre-pregnancy, using cannabis more times per day pre-pregnancy, and greater perceived benefits of use had significant bivariate associations with continued use during pregnancy, but did not retain significance in a multinomial model. Conclusions Identification of these correlates provides potential targets for prevention of or intervention for prenatal cannabis use. However, much more research is needed to understand prenatal cannabis use and its effects in order to better educate women and healthcare providers, and to design optimal public health strategies.

Purpose The legal landscape of cannabis availability and use in the United States is rapidly changing. As the heterogeneity of cannabis products and methods of use increases, more information is needed on how these changes affect use, especially in vulnerable populations such as youth. Methods A national sample of adolescents aged 14–18 years (N = 2,630) were recruited online through advertisements displayed on Facebook and Instagram to complete a survey on cannabis. The survey assessed patterns of edible use, vaping, and smoking cannabis, and the associations among these administration routes and use of other substances. Results The most frequent and consistent route of cannabis use was smoking (99% lifetime), with substantial numbers reporting vaping (44% lifetime) and edible use (61% lifetime). The majority of those who had experimented with multiple routes of cannabis administration continued to prefer smoking, and the most common pattern of initiation was smoking, followed by edibles and then vaping. In addition to cannabis use, adolescents reported high rates of nicotine use and substantial use of other substances. Adolescents who used more cannabis administration routes tended to also report higher frequency of other substances tried. Conclusions Additional work is needed to determine whether the observed adolescent cannabis administration patterns are similar across different samples and sampling methods as well as how these trends change over time with extended exposure to new products and methods. The combined knowledge gained via diverse sampling strategies will have important implications for the development of regulatory policy and prevention and intervention efforts.

Background Daily cannabis use is increasing in the United States (US). Yet, it is not known whether daily cannabis use is disproportionately common, or whether it has increased differentially over time, by mental health status. This study estimated the prevalence of daily cannabis use among adults in the US with and without past-month serious psychological distress (SPD; measured by the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6)) in 2016 and estimated trends in daily cannabis use by past-30-day SPD status from 2008 to 2016. Methods Data were drawn from adults age 18 and older in the 2008–2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (combined total analytic sample n = 356,413). Linear time trends of daily cannabis use, stratified by SPD status, were assessed using logistic regression models with continuous year as the predictor. Results In 2016, past-month daily cannabis use was significantly more common among those with past-month SPD (8.07%), compared to those without past-month SPD (2.66%). Daily cannabis use increased significantly from 2008 to 2016 among those both with and without SPD although use among those with SPD was persistently higher than use among those without SPD over the time period studied. Conclusions Daily cannabis use is significantly more common among persons with serious psychological distress and is increasing in this group, as well as among those without. Given this increase and the high prevalence of cannabis use among those with SPD, it may be important to consider potential consequences of this increased use for those with mental health vulnerabilities.

Tobacco smoking among those seeking treatment for cannabis use disorder (CUD) is common and is a negative predictor of cannabis outcomes. Quitting tobacco may be beneficial for those seeking to quit cannabis use. This initial proof of concept, controlled trial was designed to compare a simultaneous versus sequential tobacco intervention among those seeking treatment for CUD. Sixty-seven adults received either a simultaneous (SIM) or sequential (SEQ) approach to tobacco cessation in the context of outpatient treatment for CUD. A tobacco intervention (TI) that combined web-based counseling with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was provided during weeks 1–12 for SIM and was delayed until weeks 13–24 for SEQ. During weeks 1–12, no between-condition significant differences were observed on treatment participation or cannabis use outcomes. The majority of SIM participants initiated TI counseling (62%), 50% made at least one quit attempt and 41% initiated NRT. Interestingly, 39% in SEQ made tobacco quit attempts and 18% initiated NRT on their own before the TI was offered to them. However, only 30% of those in SEQ continued treatment during weeks 13–24, which compromised between-condition comparisons following the TI, but illustrated a potential clinical concern with delaying the TI. Tobacco cessation outcomes generally were poor and did not differ between conditions. This initial controlled trial suggests that addressing tobacco use during CUD treatment is acceptable and generates action towards tobacco cessation. Additional trials testing more intensive TI models may be necessary to identify more efficacious interventions for co-use of cannabis and tobacco.

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is an underappreciated risk of using cannabis that affects ~10% of the 193 million cannabis users worldwide. The individual and public health burdens are less than those of other forms of drug use, but CUD accounts for a substantial proportion of persons seeking treatment for drug use disorders owing to the high global prevalence of cannabis use. Cognitive behavioural therapy, motivational enhancement therapy and contingency management can substantially reduce cannabis use and cannabis-related problems, but enduring abstinence is not a common outcome. No pharmacotherapies have been approved for cannabis use or CUD, although a number of drug classes (such as cannabinoid agonists) have shown promise and require more rigorous evaluation. Treatment of cannabis use and CUD is often complicated by comorbid mental health and other substance use disorders. The legalization of non-medical cannabis use in some high-income countries may increase the prevalence of CUD by making more potent cannabis products more readily available at a lower price. States that legalize medical and non-medical cannabis use should inform users about the risks of CUD and provide information on how to obtain assistance if they develop cannabis-related mental and/or physical health problems.

Background Increasingly, treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is offered in integrated treatment models addressing both substance use and other health conditions within the same system. This often includes offering medications for OUD in general medical settings. It remains uncertain whether integrated OUD treatment models are preferred to non-integrated models, where treatment is provided within a distinct treatment system. This study aimed to explore preferences for integrated versus non-integrated treatment models among people with OUD and examine what factors may influence preferences. Methods This qualitative study recruited participants (n = 40) through Craigslist advertisements and flyers posted in treatment programs across the United States. Participants were 18 years of age or older and scored a two or higher on the heroin or opioid pain reliever sections of the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medications, and Other Substances (TAPS) Tool. Each participant completed a demographic survey and a telephone interview. The interviews were coded and content analyzed. Results While some participants preferred receiving OUD treatment from an integrated model in a general medical setting, the majority preferred non-integrated models. Some participants preferred integrated models in theory but expressed concerns about stigma and a lack of psychosocial services. Tradeoffs between integrated and non-integrated models were centered around patient values (desire for anonymity and personalization, fear of consequences), the characteristics of the provider and setting (convenience, perceived treatment effectiveness, access to services), and the patient-provider relationship (disclosure, trust, comfort, stigma). Conclusions Among this sample of primarily White adults, preferences for non-integrated versus integrated OUD treatment were mixed. Perceived benefits of integrated models included convenience, potential for treatment personalization, and opportunity to extend established relationships with medical providers. Recommendations to make integrated treatment more patient-centered include facilitating access to psychosocial services, educating patients on privacy, individualizing treatment, and prioritizing the patient-provider relationship. This sample included very few minorities and thus findings may not be fully generalizable to the larger population of persons with OUD. Nonetheless, results suggest a need for expansion of both OUD treatment in specialty and general medical settings to ensure access to preferred treatment for all.

How to treat adults and adolescents with a Cannabis Use Disorder is a burgeoning research area. This article reviews the empirical literature pertaining to several psychosocial approaches (cognitive-behavior therapy, motivational enhancement, and contingency management), all of which are associated with favorable outcomes. We also review the emerging research on the use of pharmacotherapy, brief interventions and technology-delivered interventions, and conclude with an overview of future research needs.

Scientific advances and clinical epidemiology provide clear evidence of cannabis’ potential for addiction and adverse psychosocial and health consequences, yet skepticism about its addictive potential remains, and perceived risk of its potential for harm continues to decrease. Indeed, treatment seeking for cannabis use disorder (CUD) comprises a substantial proportion of all substance use treatment admissions. This chapter is focused on cannabis’ potential for misuse and addiction and reviews what is known about behavioral and pharmacological interventions for cannabis use reduction or cessation. Behavioral treatments, brief interventions, and digital health interventions have demonstrated efficacy, although there remains much room for continued improvement in outcomes. Unfortunately, a growing body of research has yet to identify an effective pharmacotherapy, and no medications are currently approved by the FDA for treating CUD. Continued efforts to identify and increase access to effective interventions for misuse and CUD are imperative to the public health considering the loosening of cannabis laws for both therapeutic and recreational use, the burgeoning of cannabis industry, and societal and cultural trends toward acceptance of cannabis use. The field will continue to benefit from efforts to develop innovative treatments that leverage scientific and technological advances and that better tailor interventions to individuals or subgroups of cannabis users.

Different patterns of cannabis use can be traced directly back to different interactions between 2 types of variables: pharmacological and environmental. As legal cannabis expands in the U.S. and around the world, state and national regulatory agencies are gaining control over these variables. Specifically, regulatory agencies are increasingly capable of altering (a) the pharmacological properties of cannabis products and (b) the way these products are distributed to the population. Consequently, cannabis regulatory agencies are in a unique position to use evidence from psychological science to alter cannabis consumption patterns in ways that mitigate potential harm to public health. However, most state-level legal cannabis regulatory systems in the U.S. are not yet evidence-based or public health-oriented. This applied review and commentary draws on evidence from the psychological science literature to help regulators better understand the types of behaviors they must address and guide empirically supported regulation of THC-laden cannabis, whether used putatively for medical or recreational reasons. This review is organized into 3 parts that correspond to the 3 primary agents within the cannabis regulation ecosystem: (a) the cannabis consumer, (b) the cannabis industry, and (c) the cannabis regulatory agency. Within this structure, the review addresses critical psychological variables that drive cannabis consumer and industry behaviors and discusses how regulatory agencies can use this information to protect public health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Aim Treatment for opioid use disorders has recently evolved to include long-acting injectable and implantable formulations of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Incorporating patient preferences into treatment for substance use disorders is associated with increased motivation and treatment satisfaction. This study sought to assess treatment preferences for long-acting injectable and implantable MOUD as compared to short-acting formulations among individuals with OUD. Methods We conducted qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with forty adults recruited from across the United States through Craigslist advertisements and flyers posted in treatment programs. Eligible participants scored a two or greater on the heroin or opioid pain reliever sections of the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medications, and Other Substances (TAPS) Tool, indicative of a past-year OUD. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed. Results Twenty-four participants (60%) currently or previously had been prescribed MOUD. Sixteen participants (40%) expressed general opposition to MOUD, citing concerns that MOUD is purely financial gain for pharmaceutical companies and/or a “band aid” solution replacing one drug with another, rather than a path to abstinence. Some participants expressed personal preference for long-acting injectable (n = 16/40: 40%) and implantable formulations (n = 12/40: 30%) over short-acting formulations. About half of the participants were not willing to use injectables (n = 19/40: 48%) or implantables (n = 22/40: 55%), preferring short-acting formulations. Mixed evaluations of long- and short-acting MOUD focused on considerations of medication-related beliefs (privacy, concern over an embedded foreign body), the medication-related burden (convenience, provision of structure and support, medication administration, potential side effects), and medication-taking practices (potential for non-prescribed use, control over dosage, and duration of treatment). Conclusions Though many participants personally prefer short-acting to long-acting MOUD, some were open to including long-acting formulations in the range of options for those with OUD. Participants felt long-acting formulations may reduce medication-related burden and the risk of diversion. Conversely, participants expressed concern about invasive administration and loss of control over their treatment. Results suggest support for expanded access to a variety of formulations of MOUD. The use of shared decision making may also help patients select the formulation best aligned with their experiences, values, and treatment goals.

There is considerable variability in the use of outcome measures in clinical trials for cannabis use disorder (CUD), and a lack of consensus regarding optimal outcomes may have hindered development and approval of new pharmacotherapies. The goal of this paper is to summarize an evaluation of assessment measures and clinical endpoints for CUD clinical trials, and propose a research agenda and priorities to improve CUD clinical outcome assessments. The primary recommendation is that sustained abstinence from cannabis should not be considered the primary outcome for all CUD clinical trials as it has multiple limitations. However, there are multiple challenges to the development of a reliable and valid indicator of cannabis reduction, including the lack of a standard unit of measure for the various forms of cannabis and products and the limitations of currently available biological and self-report assessments. Development of a core toolkit of assessments is needed to both allow flexibility for study design, while facilitating interpretation of outcomes across trials. Four primary agenda items for future research are identified to expedite development of improved clinical outcome assessments for this toolkit: (1) determine whether minimally invasive biologic assays could identify an acute level of cannabis use associated with psychomotor impairment or other cannabis-related harms; (2) create an indicator of quantity of cannabis use that is consistent across product types; (3) examine the presence of cannabis-specific functional outcomes; and (4) identify an optimal duration to assess changes in CUD diagnostic criteria.

Anxiety sensitivity (AS) is a promising intervention target due to its relevance to negative health behaviors broadly, and substance use specifically. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the direct and indirect pathways through which elevated AS could relate to recent substance use among a national adolescent sample recruited via social-media. As predicted, AS was indirectly associated with greater likelihood of using alcohol, cigarettes, and electronic nicotine delivery systems in the past-month through anxiety symptoms. Regarding cannabis, AS was directly related to increased likelihood of past-month cannabis use; however, the indirect relation between AS and likelihood of past-month use via anxiety symptoms was not significant. Through chained indirect effects, AS was related positively to past-month alcohol and cannabis use via anxiety symptoms and coping-related motives, and through withdrawal symptoms and coping-related motives. Study findings can be used to generate hypotheses on potential pathways through which AS could prospectively relate to substance use among youth.

Multiple interventions for treating adolescents with substance use disorders have demonstrated efficacy, but most teens do not show an enduring positive response to these treatments. Contingency management (CM)-based strategies provide a promising alternative, and clinical research focused on the development and testing of innovative CM models continues to grow. This article provides information on the principles that underlie CM interventions, key metrics that define their development and implementation, a brief review of studies that have tested these approaches, and some clinical CM tools. As with other interventions to help youth with substance use problems, there is much to learn about CM approaches.

Although depression is common among cannabis users, there is a paucity of targeted interventions addressing depression and cannabis use disorders concurrently. In the present pilot study, we examine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes of a computer-assisted intervention combining cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and motivational enhancement therapy (MET) techniques for adults with comorbid major depressive disorder (MDD) and cannabis use disorder (CUD) presenting for care in a psychiatric setting. Adults with MDD and CUD (N=26) recruited from mental health care settings were enrolled in a 10-week, computer-assisted psychosocial intervention: Self-Help for Alcohol and other Drug Use and Depression (SHADE). Feasibility, acceptability, perceived helpfulness, treatment retention, completion, and clinical outcomes including cannabis use and depression were assessed. Participants found the SHADE intervention to be acceptable and helpful in facilitating action towards their therapeutic goals concerning depression and cannabis use. Treatment completion, achieved by the majority (85%) of participants, was excellent. On average, participants reduced their past 30 day cannabis use from baseline (mean percentage of days using = 69%) to follow-up (M=44%) (t(22)= 2.3, p

UNSTRUCTURED The health care field has integrated advances into digital technology at an accelerating pace to improve health behavior, health care delivery, and cost-effectiveness of care. The realm of behavioral science has embraced this evolution of digital health, allowing for an exciting roadmap for advancing care by addressing the many challenges to the field via technological innovations. Digital therapeutics offer the potential to extend the reach of effective interventions at reduced cost and patient burden and to increase the potency of existing interventions. Intervention models have included the use of digital tools as supplements to standard care models, as tools that can replace a portion of treatment as usual, or as stand-alone tools accessed outside of care settings or direct to the consumer. To advance the potential public health impact of this promising line of research, multiple areas warrant further development and investigation. The Center for Technology and Behavioral Health (CTBH), a P30 Center of Excellence supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse at the National Institutes of Health, is an interdisciplinary research center at Dartmouth College focused on the goal of harnessing existing and emerging technologies to effectively develop and deliver evidence-based interventions for substance use and co-occurring disorders. The CTBH launched a series of workshops to encourage and expand multidisciplinary collaborations among Dartmouth scientists and international CTBH affiliates engaged in research related to digital technology and behavioral health (eg, addiction science, behavioral health intervention, technology development, computer science and engineering, digital security, health economics, and implementation science). This paper summarizes a workshop conducted on the Development and Evaluation of Digital Therapeutics for Behavior Change, which addressed (1) principles of behavior change, (2) methods of identifying and testing the underlying mechanisms of behavior change, (3) conceptual frameworks for optimizing applications for mental health and addictive behavior, and (4) the diversity of experimental methods and designs that are essential to the successful development and testing of digital therapeutics. Examples were presented of ongoing CTBH projects focused on identifying and improving the measurement of health behavior change mechanisms and the development and evaluation of digital therapeutics. In summary, the workshop showcased the myriad research targets that will be instrumental in promoting and accelerating progress in the field of digital health and health behavior change and illustrated how the CTBH provides a model of multidisciplinary leadership and collaboration that can facilitate innovative, science-based efforts to address the health behavior challenges afflicting our communities.

The evolving legal cannabis landscape in the US continues to present novel regulatory challenges that necessitate the development of a Cannabis Regulatory Science. Two specific issues of concern within Cannabis Regulatory Science are (1) the impact that cannabis use has on the incidence, prevalence, and severity of mental disorders, and (2) how cannabis laws and regulations modify this impact. This paper first provides several conceptual points that are useful for evaluating the relationship between cannabis use and mental disorders. Second, it selectively reviews and comments on data relevant to the relationship between cannabis use and depression, several forms of anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. Next, regulatory and public health parallels between the nascent cannabis industry and the pharmaceutical, tobacco, and alcohol industries are discussed. The focus is on specific types of industry practices that may harm those with or at risk for mental disorders. Recommendations are then offered for legal cannabis regulations that could mitigate this harm. Last, future research goals are discussed for building the field of Cannabis Regulatory Science and addressing the potential negative impact of cannabis on those with mental disorders.

Introduction Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in the U.S. with 19.8 million current users. Population-based data indicate that almost all cannabis users (90%) have a lifetime history of tobacco smoking and the majority (74%) currently smoke tobacco. Among cannabis users, smoking tobacco is associated with increased frequency of cannabis use, increased morbidity, and poorer cannabis cessation outcomes. There is a lack of research, however, focused on addressing cessation of both substances simultaneously. The purpose of the current pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a multi-component tobacco/cannabis abstinence treatment. Methods Five participants completed Abstinence Reinforcement Therapy, an intervention that included five sessions of cognitive-behavioral telephone counseling for tobacco/cannabis, pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation, and five weeks of mobile contingency management to remain abstinent from tobacco and cannabis. Results Feasibility of recruitment, retention and treatment completion was high. Satisfaction with the treatment was also high. Conclusion Results support the feasibility and acceptability of this approach with dual cannabis and tobacco users and suggest that further research examining the efficacy of this approach is warranted.

Many people are interested in using marijuana for therapeutic purposes as legalization expands across the country. The impact of marijuana depends upon the consumed potency and dose of its major psychoactive components, tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol, which have very different psychiatric effects. This Open Forum discusses what is known about the impact of these marijuana constituents on people with serious mental illnesses, who may experience many adverse effects and more easily develop addiction with marijuana use. As use of medical marijuana increases, mental health clinicians can help prevent or address adverse effects by informing themselves and others about marijuana's effects and by coordinating with marijuana prescribers.

Background Alternative methods for consuming cannabis (e.g., vaping and edibles) have become more popular in the wake of U.S. cannabis legalization. Specific provisions of legal cannabis laws (LCL) (e.g., dispensary regulations) may impact the likelihood that youth will use alternative methods and the age at which they first try the method – potentially magnifying or mitigating the developmental harms of cannabis use. Methods This study examined associations between LCL provisions and how youth consume cannabis. An online cannabis use survey was distributed using Facebook advertising, and data were collected from 2630 cannabis-using youth (ages 14–18). U.S. states were coded for LCL status and various LCL provisions. Regression analyses tested associations among lifetime use and age of onset of cannabis vaping and edibles and LCL provisions. Results Longer LCL duration (OR vaping : 2.82, 95% CI: 2.24, 3.55; OR edibles : 3.82, 95% CI: 2.96, 4.94), and higher dispensary density (OR vaping : 2.68, 95% CI: 2.12, 3.38; OR edibles : 3.31, 95% CI: 2.56, 4.26), were related to higher likelihood of trying vaping and edibles. Permitting home cultivation was related to higher likelihood (OR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.50, 2.48) and younger age of onset (β: −0.30, 95% CI: −0.45, −0.15) of edibles. Conclusion Specific provisions of LCL appear to impact the likelihood, and age at which, youth use alternative methods to consume cannabis. These methods may carry differential risks for initiation and escalation of cannabis use. Understanding associations between LCL provisions and methods of administration can inform the design of effective cannabis regulatory strategies.

The purpose of this study was to conduct a randomized test of clinic- and home-based incentives plus parent training for adolescent problem alcohol use. Adolescents (N = 75) with alcohol misuse, with or without other substance misuse, were enrolled. All youth received individual Motivational Enhancement Therapy/Cognitive Behavior Therapy and weekly urine drug testing. The experimental condition (EXP) included Abstinence Incentives (clinic-based incentives for abstinence from all substances) plus weekly behavioral parent training that included a parent-delivered, abstinence-based, substance monitoring contract. The comparison condition (CONTROL) included Attendance Incentives (ATTI). All adolescents met DSM-IV criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence or reported recent binge drinking, and 77% (N = 58) met criteria for a cannabis use disorder or had recent cannabis use at baseline. Alcohol and cannabis use outcomes were compared across treatment conditions. A similar percentage of youth maintained complete alcohol abstinence across the 36-week follow-up in both conditions. However, among youth not entirely abstinent from alcohol, EXP resulted in a lower percentage of days using alcohol during the 36 weeks after the end of treatment than CONTROL. Among youth who also used cannabis at baseline, results showed similar benefits of EXP on cannabis use days. Combined individual and family based treatment, plus abstinence based incentives can reduce substance use days during and after treatment over and above individual evidence-based psychosocial treatment plus attendance incentives. Future research should focus on identifying cost-effective components and incentive levels and delivery via technology to facilitate dissemination. (PsycINFO Database Record

Objective The utility of studying substance use during early adolescence depends on how well indicies of lower-level experimentation predict the development of substance use problems. We examined associations between experimental cigarette use at T1, recanting of use 8 months later (T2), and daily smoking at 2 years (T4). Methods Longitudinal telephone survey of 6522 US youth aged 10–14, examining lifetime cigarette smoking (none, just puffing, 1–19, 20–100, >100) and recanting (i.e., reporting lifetime use at T1, denying ever using at T2) as predictors of T4 daily smoking using multivariable logistic regression. Covariates included sociodemographics, friend/family smoking, school performance, and personality characteristics. Results The sample was 51% male, 18% Black, 17% Hispanic, with 70% retained at T2. At T1, 407 (8.9%) adolescents reported some smoking, of whom 85 (20.9%) recanted at T2. At T4, 970 reported any smoking, of whom 88 (9.1%) were daily smokers. Any T1 experimentation identified two-thirds of T4 daily smokers (sensitivity = 66.7%) with a false positive rate of 7.8%. T1 lifetime smoking categories were associated with the following adjusted odds ratios for T4 daily smoking (vs. never smokers): 2.7 for recanters (95% confidence interval 0.82, 8.5), 3.5 for few puffs (1.7, 7.0), 9.6 for 1–19 cigarettes (4.1, 22.3), 3.8 for 20–100 cigarettes (1.0, 14.3), and 30.1 for >100 cigarettes (8.1, 111). Conclusions In this sample experimentation with cigarettes predicted future daily smoking with high utility. The findings provide a rationale for monitoring and reporting any experimentation cigarettes as a tobacco surveillance outcome.

This report provides an updated overview of pre-clinical and clinical research on the etiology and biological substrates of the cannabis withdrawal syndrome.Long-term cannabis use is associated with downregulation of type-1 cannabinoid receptors (CBRecent studies have extended knowledge of the biological processes and individual difference variables that influence cannabis withdrawal. However, caveats include small sample sizes in clinical studies, participant samples that are predominantly male, and limited examinations of endocannabinoids, enzymes that degrade endocannabinoids, negative allosteric modulators, and other neurobiological systems that may directly impact cannabis withdrawal symptom expression.

Multiple interventions for treating adolescents with substance use disorders have demonstrated efficacy, but a majority of teens do not show an enduring positive response to these treatments. Contingency management (CM)-based strategies provide a promising alternative, and clinical research focused on the development and testing of innovative CM models continues to grow. This article provides an updated review on the progress made in this area. It is important to continue to search for more effective models, focus on post-treatment maintenance (reduce relapse), and strive for high levels of integrity and fidelity during dissemination efforts to optimize outcomes.

Background Rates of young adult cannabis use are rising, perceived harm is at its historical nadir, and most users do not want to quit. Most studies evaluating effects of cannabis use in young adults are cross-sectional, limiting causal inference. A method to reliably induce abstinence periods in cannabis users would allow assessment of the effects of abstinence and resumption of use on a variety of outcomes in a within-subjects, repeated measures design. Methods We examined the efficacy and feasibility of a voucher-based contingency management procedure for incentivizing one month of continuous cannabis abstinence among young adults who reported at least weekly cannabis use, volunteered to participate in a laboratory study, and did not express a desire to discontinue cannabis use long-term. Continuous cannabis abstinence was reinforced with an escalating incentive schedule, and self-report of abstinence was confirmed by frequent quantitative assays of urine cannabis metabolite (THCCOOH) concentration. New cannabis use during the abstinence period was determined using an established algorithm of change in creatinine-adjusted cannabis metabolite concentrations between study visits. Results Thirty-eight young adults, aged 18–25 years, enrolled and 34 (89.5%) attained biochemically confirmed 30-day abstinence. Among those who attained abstinence, 93.9% resumed regular use within two-weeks of incentive discontinuation. Conclusion Findings support the feasibility and efficacy of contingency management to elicit short-term, continuous cannabis abstinence among young adult, non-treatment seeking, regular cannabis users. Further work should test the effectiveness of this contingency management procedure for cannabis abstinence in periods longer than one month, which may be required to evaluate some effects of abstinence.