Reasons for increased substance use in psychosis.

Division of Clinical Psychology, School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Rutherford House, Manchester Science Park, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Clinical Psychology Review (Impact Factor: 7.18). 06/2007; 27(4):494-510. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2006.09.004
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Around half of all patients with schizophrenia are thought to abuse drugs or alcohol and there is good evidence to suggest that they have poorer outcomes than their non substance using counterparts. However, despite more than twenty years of research there is still no consensus on the aetiology of increased rates of substance use in people with psychosis. There is a clear need to understand the reasons for such high rates of substance use if treatments designed to help patients abstain from substance use are to be successful. This paper provides an update of the literature examining the reasons for substance use by people with psychosis, and includes a comprehensive review of the self report literature. The main theories as to why people with psychosis use substances are presented. There is evidence to suggest that cannabis may have a causal role in the development of psychopathology but not for other substances. The self report literature provides support for an 'alleviation of dysphoria' model of substance use but there is little empirical support for the self medication hypothesis, or for common factor models and bidirectional models of comorbidity. It is likely that there are multiple risk factors involved in substance use in psychosis and more work to develop and test multiple risk factor models is required.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aimed to explore factors associated with outcomes in a randomised controlled trial of integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis and substance misuse. Clients and therapists completed self-report measures of alliance and clients completed a self-report measure of adult attachment. Trial therapists were also asked to identify challenges in therapy, client strengths and reasons for client making and not making changes in relation to substance misuse. Neither therapist-rated nor client-rated alliance was significantly related to objective outcomes. Client insecure attachment avoidance was associated with poorer symptoms and functioning at 12 and 24 months; although not changes in substance misuse. Therapists' perceptions of therapeutic processes (e.g., challenges to therapy, client strengths, client reasons for change and alliance) were consistent with previous literature. Therapists' perceptions of client improvement were associated with reductions in substance use at the end of treatment and their ratings of therapeutic alliance. Insecure adult attachment styles may be a potentially important predictor of symptom outcomes for people with psychosis and substance misuse. Trial therapists may also provide an important source of information about therapeutic processes and factors associated with outcome. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Drug and alcohol dependence 04/2015; 152. DOI:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.04.006 · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Why patients with psychosis use cannabis remains debated. The self-medication hypothesis has received some support but other evidence points towards an alleviation of dysphoria model. This study investigated the reasons for cannabis use in first-episode psychosis (FEP) and whether strength in their endorsement changed over time. FEP inpatients and outpatients at the South London and Maudsley, Oxleas and Sussex NHS Trusts UK, who used cannabis, rated their motives at baseline (n=69), 3 months (n=29) and 12 months (n=36). A random intercept model was used to test the change in strength of endorsement over the 12 months. Paired-sample t-tests assessed the differences in mean scores between the five subscales on the Reasons for Use Scale (enhancement, social motive, coping with unpleasant affect, conformity and acceptance and relief of positive symptoms and side effects), at each time-point. Time had a significant effect on scores when controlling for reason; average scores on each subscale were higher at baseline than at 3 months and 12 months. At each time-point, patients endorsed 'enhancement' followed by 'coping with unpleasant affect' and 'social motive' more highly for their cannabis use than any other reason. 'Conformity and acceptance' followed closely. 'Relief of positive symptoms and side effects' was the least endorsed motive. Patients endorsed their reasons for use at 3 months and 12 months less strongly than at baseline. Little support for the self-medication or alleviation of dysphoria models was found. Rather, patients rated 'enhancement' most highly for their cannabis use. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
    European Psychiatry 12/2014; 30(1). DOI:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2014.10.007 · 3.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cannabis use is a known risk factor for a range of mental health problems, but less is known on the association with general mental health. We aim to explore the relationship between cannabis use and general mental health. We did a cross-sectional online survey of 1,929 young adults aged 18-30 years. Participants reported socio-demographic data, substance use and the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90). Monthly cannabis use was associated with a higher total score on the SCL-90, both in a crude (OR 1.94, 95 % CI 1.57-2.38) and fully adjusted model (OR 1.48, 95 % CI 1.07-2.03). The association between cannabis and mental health was stronger in women and weekly users, and was independent of age at first use of cannabis. We conclude that moderate cannabis use is associated with general mental health problems in young adulthood. This relationship is independent of age at first use and of other risk factors, and is strongest in women.
    Community Mental Health Journal 04/2014; 50(7). DOI:10.1007/s10597-014-9699-6 · 1.03 Impact Factor