Cannabis Use Characteristics Associated with Self-Reported Cognitive Function in a Nationally Representative U.S. sample.

BACKGROUND: With increases in cannabis use and potency, there is a need to improve our understanding of the impact of use on cognitive function. Previous research indicates long-term cannabis use may have a negative effect on executive function. Few studies have examined persistence of it in protracted abstinence, and there is limited evidence of predictors of worse cognitive function in current and former users. In this study, we aim to evaluate the associations between cannabis use status (current, former, and never use) and self-report cognition. Further, we investigate if cannabis use characteristics predict self-report cognitive function. METHODS: Cross-sectional cannabis use data from the National Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III), a national survey (N = 36,309) conducted in the USA between 2012 and 2013 were used alongside the Executive Function Index scales. The data were analyzed by using Ordinary Least Squares regression. RESULTS: Current (N = 3,681, Female = 37.7%) and former users (N = 7,448, Female = 45.4%) reported poorer cognition than never users (N = 24,956, Female = 56.6%). Self-reported cognition of former users was in-between that of current and never users. Several cannabis use characteristics were associated with self-reported cognition in current and former users. CONCLUSION: While prospective studies are required to confirm, findings suggest cannabis use is linked to worse cognition. There may be some limited recovery of cognition in former users and some cannabis use characteristics predict impairment. These findings add to our understanding of the cognitive impact of cannabis use. As worse cognitive function may impact relapse, findings have implications for personalization of cannabis use disorder treatment.

Patterns of use and adverse events reported among persons who regularly inject buprenorphine: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Given the ongoing opioid crisis, novel interventions to treat severe opioid use disorder (OUD) are urgently needed. Injectable opioid agonist therapy (iOAT) with diacetylmorphine or hydromorphone is effective for the treatment of severe, treatment-refractory OUD, however barriers to implementation persist. Intravenous buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD (BUP iOAT) has several possible advantages over traditional iOAT, including a safety profile that might enable take-home dosing. We aimed to characterize injecting practices among real-world populations of persons who regularly inject buprenorphine, as well as associated adverse events reported in order to inform a possible future BUP iOAT intervention. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO from inception through July 2020 and used backwards citation screening to search for publications reporting on dose, frequency among persons who regularly inject the drug, or adverse events associated with intravenous use of buprenorphine. The review was limited to English language publications and there was no limitation on study type. Study quality and risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Narrative synthesis was used in reporting the results. RESULTS: Eighty-eight studies were included in our review. Regular injection of buprenorphine was identified across diverse settings world-wide. Daily dose of oral buprenorphine injected was < 1-12 mg. Frequency of injection was 0-10 times daily. Adverse events could be characterized as known side effects of opioids/buprenorphine or injection-related complications. Most studies were deemed to be of low quality. CONCLUSIONS: Extramedical, intravenous use of buprenorphine, continues to be documented. BUP iOAT may be feasible and results may inform the development of a study to test the efficacy and safety of such an intervention. Future work should also examine acceptability among people with severe OUD in North America. Our review was limited by the quality of included studies.

The impact of cannabis legalization for recreational purposes on youth: A narrative review of the Canadian experience.

Cannabis legalization for non-medical purposes (subsequently referred to as "cannabis legalization" or "legalization") took place in Canada in October 2018. One of the federal government's stated goals with cannabis legalization was to protect Canadian youth from cannabis-related harms. The main objective of this narrative review is to describe the impact of cannabis legalization on Canadian youth. To that end, we discuss the regulation of the Canadian cannabis market, outline changes in the epidemiology and parameters of cannabis use (modes of use, potency of cannabis) among youth, and discuss prevention and education initiatives related to cannabis. The Canadian model differs from other jurisdictions that legalized recreational cannabis use, especially with regard to a higher degree of government regulation of the cannabis market. Another difference is the development and endorsement of lower-risk cannabis use guidelines to educate the public and health professionals. The results available for this review cover only 3 years post-legalization. Cannabis legalization in Canada brought an apparent increase in use among Canadian older than 25. However, results for youth are mixed, with the majority of studies showing no pronounced increase. Notably, the trend of a decrease in adolescents' cannabis use seen pre-legalization may have reversed. Emerging evidence also suggests that cannabis-related hospitalizations and emergency department visits among Canadian youth may have increased due to cannabis legalization. Data about changes in the age of initiation, the influence of legalization on sex and gender, and race/ethnicity are limited, with evidence suggesting that the age of initiation slightly increased. So far, there is limited data about the impact of cannabis legalization on Canadian youth. Further long-term monitoring and research to assess the effects of cannabis legalization on Canadian youth.

Medical Cannabis and Past-Year Cannabis Use Disorder Among Adult Recreational Users in the United States: Results From a Nationally Representative Sample.

Introduction: With the increasing number of cannabis users and more jurisdictions allowing medical cannabis, more evidence-based knowledge about the prevalence of cannabis use disorder (CUD) among medical users is greatly needed. Objectives: To examine and compare the prevalence and severity of CUD and the prevalence of different CUD criteria among two groups: those who combine recreational and medical use vs. those who exclusively use cannabis recreationally. To examine the association between CUD and sociodemographic characteristics, medical conditions, and psychiatric comorbidities between these two groups. Methods: The National Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions III data were used, a US nationally representative in-person interview of 36,309 adults aged ≥18 years collected in 2012-2013. The statistical examination included proportion comparison hypothesis testing and linear regressions, all using complex survey design analysis procedures. Results: Recreational users who used cannabis also for medical purposes had a higher prevalence of CUD in general, as well as mild and moderate CUD than users who used cannabis only for recreational purposes. CUD is more prevalent in recreational, medical users with the following characteristics: young, male, non-white, living in the Midwest, using a greater amount of cannabis, having a concurrent mental disorder, and had CUD before the past year. Conclusion: Recreational, medical cannabis users have a higher likelihood of having CUD. Although the results should be taken with caution, given the lack of established validity of CUD among medical users, health care professionals who prescribe or recommend the use of cannabis for medical purposes should take this into consideration while evaluating the risks/benefits ratio of cannabis. They need to assess patients' recreational cannabis use, screen for CUD, and educate users about the possible complications caused by cannabis use.

Combined effect of alcohol and cannabis on simulated driving.

RATIONALE: With alcohol and cannabis remaining the most commonly detected drugs in seriously and fatally injured drivers, there is a need to understand their combined effects on driving. OBJECTIVES: The present study examined the effects of combinations of smoked cannabis (12.5% THC) and alcohol (target BrAC 0.08%) on simulated driving performance, subjective drug effects, cardiovascular measures, and self-reported perception of driving ability. METHODS: In this within-subjects, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, cannabis users (1-7 days/week) aged 19-29 years attended four drug administration sessions in which simulated driving, subjective effects, cardiovascular measures, and whole blood THC and metabolite concentrations were assessed following placebo alcohol and placebo cannabis (<0.1% THC), alcohol and placebo cannabis, placebo alcohol and active cannabis, and alcohol and active cannabis. RESULTS: Standard deviation of lateral position in the combined condition was significantly different from the placebo condition (p < 0.001). Standard deviation of lateral position was also significantly different from alcohol and cannabis alone conditions in the single task overall drive (p = 0.029 and p = 0.032, respectively), from the alcohol alone condition in the dual task overall drive (p = 0.022) and the cannabis alone condition in the dual task straightaway drive (p = 0.002). Compared to the placebo condition, the combined and alcohol conditions significantly increased reaction time. Subjective effects in the combined condition were significantly greater than with either of the drugs alone at some time points, particularly later in the session. A driving ability questionnaire showed that participants seemed unaware of their level of impairment. CONCLUSION: Combinations of alcohol and cannabis increased weaving and reaction time, and tended to produce greater subjective effects compared to placebo and the single drug conditions suggesting a potential additive effect. The fact that participants were unaware of this increased effect has important implications for driving safety.

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder After a Psychedelic Experience, a Case Report.

In the last 2 decades, there is a renaissance in the scientific investigation of the therapeutic potential of psychedelic compounds. It is studied for the treatment of many psychiatric disorders, including posttraumatic stress disorder. The treatment is always done in the setting of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. A little is known about the potential effects, outside of the setting of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy, on people diagnosed with a mental disorder or have a significant trauma history. In this case report, we present a young man who developed posttraumatic stress disorder after a psychedelic experience, induced by both Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) and N, N Dimethyltryptamine (DMT). In the psychedelic experience, a repressed memory of childhood sexual abuse was recovered. To our knowledge, this is the first report on posttraumatic stress disorder onset after a psychedelic experience. We believe that this case report is important since the history of trauma is prevalent among individuals with substance use disorder. Medical staff that treat people with either substance use disorder or trauma should be familiar with irregular presentations, such as the one described in this case.

Multiple Substance Use Disorders and Self-Reported Cognitive Function in U.S. Adults: Associations and Sex-Differences in a Nationally Representative Sample.

Polysubstance use is a growing public health concern that has been associated with poor clinical outcomes. Compared to single-drug users, this population suffers greater deficits in cognitive function, which hinder treatment success and recovery. Despite its high prevalence and poor prognosis, epidemiological research on polysubstance use and accompanying cognitive profile is lacking. We investigated associations between numbers of past-year co-occurring substance use disorders (SUDs) and self-reported cognitive function using data from the National Epidemiologic Survey for Alcohol and Related Conditions III (NESARC-III). Regression analyses revealed a significant negative association between cognitive scores and numbers of past-year SUDs, which was moderated by sex. After adjusting for confounding variables, greater numbers of SUDs were associated with declining self-reported cognitive function, and this relationship was stronger among females. Our findings expand on current literature on cognitive impairments among polysubstance users and provide a novel, nuanced description of this relationship among the general population. We highlight the need for targeted and individualized treatment approaches in order to improve outcomes in this population.

Cognitive enhancement drug use among resident physicians: Prevalence and motivations for use - results from a survey.

Background: Non-medical use of prescription drugs for the enhancement of cognitive functioning has gained popularity in recent years, especially among young educated adults. To our knowledge, no previous study investigated this phenomenon among resident physicians.Objective: To analyze cognitive enhancement drugs use motivations and patterns among resident physicians.Methods: A survey and statistical analysis regarding the use of drugs traditionally prescribed for the treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: stimulants, amphetamines and modafinil.Participants: 1,453 residents who took their written residency exam in the summer of 2017. The response rate was 32.3%.Results: 28.1% of responders reported past use, with 73.67% of them reporting use without a related medical diagnosis. Almost half of the users (47.1%) acquired the drug with a prescription, but without a diagnosis of a related medical disorder. The first use was predominantly during residency (54.3%), with 45% reporting it as related to the residency exam.Factors found to positively impact non-medical use include: declaring undiagnosed Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, fear of failing the exam, a belief that more than 30% of other examinees take cognitive enhancements drugs, and a learning disability diagnosis. Self-reports of being a competitive person and being a parent, were negatively correlated with non-medical use.Conclusions: The use of drugs that are taken traditionally for the treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is common among resident physicians, both with and without related medical indication. Interestingly, factors associated with the fear of being "left behind" increase non-medical use and not the desire to succeed.

The effectiveness of high-dose escitalopram in the treatment of patients suffering from schizophrenia with comorbid obsessive-compulsive disorder: an open-label study.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder frequently co-occur with schizophrenia causing a significant impairment. There is a paucity of published data on the treatment of such complicated patients. It has been suggested that the combination of antipsychotics and antiobsessive agents is the best treatment for schizophrenia with obsessive-compulsive disorder; however, there is no published data regarding the use of high dose (up to 40 mg/day) escitalopram. This open-label, prospective study was designed to investigate the efficacy, short-term safety and tolerability of escitalopram in doses up to 40 mg in patients with schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Patients were treated with increasing doses of escitalopram for 13 weeks. Thirteen patients (86.67%) completed the study. A significant improvement was observed in the total Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) scores and in the scores of Y-BOCS-Obsession and Y-BOCS-Compulsion subscales. Furthermore, a significant improvement was observed in the total scores of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and Clinical Global Impression-severity scale. Escitalopram, up to 40 mg/day was well tolerated and may be beneficial in the management of patients with schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Further studies are needed to confirm this finding and to assess long-term safety.