Alan K. Davis

Acceptance of Non-Abstinence Goals by Addiction Professionals in the United States

Previous research has found relatively limited acceptance of nonabstinence goals in addiction treatment settings in the United States. Because such attitudes may have changed over time, this study was designed to assess the current acceptance of nonabstinence goals by addiction professionals as a function of type of substance (alcohol vs. drug), severity of the disorder (DSM-IV abuse vs. DSM-IV dependence), and finality of the outcome goal (intermediate vs. final). The sample comprised 913 members of a national association of addiction professionals who completed a web-based survey. Over one half of respondents rated nonabstinence as somewhat or completely acceptable as both an intermediate and final outcome goal for clients with alcohol abuse, but considerably smaller proportions rated nonabstinence an acceptable intermediate or final outcome goal for clients with alcohol dependence. Regarding drug-taking clients, one half and one third of respondents rated nonabstinence at least somewhat acceptable as an intermediate goal and final outcome goal, respectively, for clients with drug abuse, but fewer rated nonabstinence an acceptable outcome goal for clients with drug dependence. One implication of the findings is that individuals with alcohol and drug problems who avoid treatment because they are ambivalent about abstinence should know that--depending on the severity of their condition, the finality of their nonabstinence goal, and their drug of choice--their interest in moderating their consumption will be acceptable to many clinicians, especially those working in outpatient and independent practice settings.

Differences in the acceptability of non-abstinence goals by type of drug among American substance abuse clinicians.

To assess whether acceptability of non-abstinence outcome goals varied depending on the specific drug a client consumes (alcohol, cannabis, amphetamine, heroin, cocaine, MDMA/ecstasy, polydrug), severity of diagnosis (DSM-IV Abuse vs. Dependence), and finality of outcome goal (intermediate vs. final), we recruited 432 clinicians to complete a web-based questionnaire. More respondents rated non-abstinence acceptable as an intermediate goal for clients diagnosed with alcohol abuse (44%) or cannabis abuse (43%) than for clients diagnosed as abusing the other listed drugs (23 to 31%). Similarly, larger proportions of respondents rated non-abstinence as acceptable as a final goal for clients diagnosed with alcohol abuse (30%) or cannabis abuse (24%) than for clients diagnosed as abusing the other drugs (11 to 13%). Only 9 to 13% of respondents rated non-abstinence as an acceptable final goal for clients diagnosed with dependence, but 20% to 30% rated non-abstinence as acceptable as an intermediate goal for clients diagnosed as dependent.

Self-Medication of Somatic and Psychiatric Conditions Using Botanical Marijuana

Abstract As a complement to research evaluating botanical marijuana as a medical therapy for various somatic and psychiatric conditions, there is a growing body of research assessing marijuana users’ self-reports of the symptoms and conditions for which they use marijuana without a physician’s recommendation. As part of two larger web-based surveys and one in-situ survey at an outdoor marijuana festival, we asked regular marijuana users if they consumed the drug without a physician’s recommendation and, if so, to describe (or select from a checklist) the conditions for which they used marijuana as a medication. Participants reported using marijuana to self-medicate a wide variety of both somatic conditions (such as pain, diabetes, and irritable bowel syndrome) and psychiatric conditions (such as depression, anxiety, and insomnia). Because fewer than half of the American states, and only a few countries, allow physicians to recommend medicinal marijuana, these findings may be of interest to clinicians as they treat patients, to lawmakers and policymakers as they consider legislation allowing physicians to recommend botanical marijuana for somatic and psychiatric conditions, and to researchers evaluating conditions that individuals elect to self-medicate using botanical marijuana.

Patterns of Use, Acute Subjective Experiences, and Motivations for Using Synthetic Cathinones (“Bath Salts”) in Recreational Users

ABSTRACT Given the variety and potential toxicity of synthetic cathinones, clinicians and educators would benefit from information about patterns of and motivations for use, frequency of psychosocial consequences, and experience of acute subjective effects. We administered a comprehensive, web-based survey to 104 recreational users of synthetic cathinones. Sixty percent of respondents consumed synthetic cathinones once or more per month, usually snorting or swallowing these drugs, typically at home, usually with others, customarily during the evening and nighttime hours, and often in combination with another drug such as alcohol or marijuana. Acute subjective effects attributed to synthetic cathinones were similar to those of other psychostimulants, including increased energy, rapid heartbeat, racing thoughts, difficulty sleeping, euphoria, decreased appetite, open-mindedness, and increased sex drive. Reported reasons for using synthetic cathinones included its stimulating effects, curiosity, substitution for another drug, and being at a party/music event. Respondents had experienced an average of six negative consequences of using synthetic cathinones during the previous year (e.g., tolerance, neglecting responsibilities, personality change). In combination with previously published investigations, these findings increase our understanding of the reported rationales and outcomes of recreational use of synthetic cathinones.

The Prevalence, Intensity, and Assessment of Craving for MDMA/Ecstasy in Recreational Users

Abstract This study evaluated the prevalence, intensity, and correlates of craving for MDMA/ecstasy among recreational users employing a new multi-item, self-report questionnaire reflecting experiences of desire, intention to use, and anticipated loss of control. Using a web-based data collection procedure, we recruited MDMA/ecstasy users (n = 240) to rate their agreement with eight craving statements immediately before and immediately following 90 seconds of exposure to either ecstasy-related or control stimuli. Participants then completed questionnaires to measure ecstasy refusal self-efficacy, passionate engagement in ecstasy use, substance use history, and demographic information. Fifty percent of participants indicated some level of agreement with at least two (out of eight) statements indicative of craving and 30% agreed at some level with six or more such statements. The questionnaire used to assess craving was internally consistent, unidimensional, and had excellent one-week test-retest reliability. Craving scores varied as a function of both cue exposure and frequency of ecstasy use, and were significantly associated with ecstasy-related attitudes. Recreational users of MDMA/ecstasy endorse some experiences indicative of craving for this drug, even though only a minority report intense craving following explicit cue exposure.

Acceptability of non-abstinence goals among students enrolled in addiction studies programs across the United States

BACKGROUND Previous studies of acceptability of non-abstinence recruited older, experienced addiction professionals; its possible that younger, emerging addiction professionals may be more accepting of non-abstinence, perhaps due to training in harm reduction. METHODS One hundred seventy graduate and undergraduate students enrolled in college/university-based programs offering training in addiction studies across the United States were recruited to complete a Web-based questionnaire assessing whether acceptability of non-abstinence outcome goals varied depending on the specific substance a client consumes, severity of diagnosis, and finality of outcome goal. RESULTS More respondents rated non-abstinence an acceptable Intermediate goal for clients diagnosed with a Moderate cannabis use disorder (57%) or Moderate alcohol use disorder (45%) than for clients diagnosed with any other listed Moderate substance use disorder (32% to 36%). Similarly, larger proportions of respondents rated non-abstinence an acceptable Final goal for clients diagnosed with a Moderate cannabis use disorder (37%) or Moderate alcohol use disorder (31%) than for clients diagnosed with any other listed Moderate substance use disorder (19% to 23%). Only 14% to 26% of respondents rated non-abstinence an acceptable Final goal for clients diagnosed with a Severe substance use disorder, but 28% to 42% rated non-abstinence acceptable for clients diagnosed with a Severe substance use disorder when non-abstinence was an Intermediate goal. CONCLUSIONS Compared with previous research examining the acceptability of non-abstinence, these results suggest that students enrolled in addiction studies training programs may be more accepting of clients who decide to pursue non-abstinence either as an intermediate step on the way to abstinence or as a final goal.

Using the Theory of Planned Behavior to predict implementation of harm reduction strategies among MDMA/ecstasy users.

This prospective study was designed to test whether the variables proposed by the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) were associated with baseline intention to implement and subsequent use of 2 MDMA/ecstasy-specific harm reduction interventions: preloading/postloading and pill testing/pill checking. Using targeted Facebook advertisements, an international sample of 391 recreational ecstasy users were recruited to complete questionnaires assessing their ecstasy consumption history, and their attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, habit strength (past strategy use), and intention to use these two strategies. Attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control were significantly associated with baseline intention to preload/postload and pill test/pill check. Out of the 391 baseline participants, 100 completed the two-month follow-up assessment. Baseline habit strength and frequency of ecstasy consumption during the three months prior to baseline were the only significant predictors of how often participants used the preloading/postloading strategy during the follow-up. Baseline intention to pill test/pill check was the only significant predictor of how often participants used this strategy during the follow-up. These findings provide partial support for TPB variables as both correlates of baseline intention to implement and predictors of subsequent use of these two strategies. Future investigations could assess whether factors related to ecstasy consumption (e.g., subjective level of intoxication, craving, negative consequences following consumption), and environmental factors (e.g., accessibility and availability of harm reduction resources) improve the prediction of how often ecstasy users employ these and other harm reduction strategies. (PsycINFO Database Record

Factors associated with alcohol consumption among medical cannabis patients with chronic pain

INTRODUCTION Chronic pain is the most common reason for medical cannabis certification. Data regarding alcohol use and risky drinking among medical cannabis patients with pain is largely unknown. Therefore, we examined the prevalence and correlates of alcohol use and risky drinking in this population. METHODS Participants completed surveys regarding demographics, pain-related variables, anxiety, cannabis use, and past six-month alcohol consumption. Alcohol use groups were defined using the AUDIT-C [i.e., non-drinkers, low-risk drinkers, and high-risk drinkers (≥4 for men and ≥3 for women)] and compared on demographic characteristics, pain measures, anxiety, and cannabis use. RESULTS Overall, 42% (n=330/780) were non-drinkers, 32% (n=251/780) were low-risk drinkers, and 26% (n=199/780) were high-risk drinkers. Compared to non-drinkers, low- and high-risk drinkers were significantly younger whereas a larger proportion of low-risk drinkers reported being African-American compared to non- or high-risk drinkers. High-risk drinkers reported significantly lower pain severity/interference compared to the other groups; high-risk drinkers were also less likely to be on disability compared to other groups. A multinomial logistic regression showed that patients reporting lower pain severity and less disability had greater odds of being classified a high-risk drinker. CONCLUSIONS High-risk drinking appears common among medical cannabis patients. Future research should examine whether such use is concurrent or consecutive, and the relationship of such co-use patterns to consequences. Nevertheless, individuals treating patients reporting medical cannabis use for pain should consider alcohol consumption, with data needed regarding the efficacy of brief alcohol interventions among medical cannabis patients.

Specific harm reduction strategies employed by 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetmine/ ecstasy users in the United States and the United Kingdom:

Both recreational and problematic 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)/ecstasy users could benefit from employing harm reduction interventions intended to preserve health and prevent negative consequences. To evaluate whether use of such interventions varied by country of residence and frequency of ecstasy use, we used web-based surveys to assess how often 104 lower-frequency and higher-frequency American ecstasy users and 80 lower-frequency and higher-frequency British ecstasy users employed each of 19 self-initiated harm reduction strategies when they used ecstasy during a 2-month period. Several significant differences notwithstanding, at least 75% of participants had used 11 of the 19 strategies one or more times during the 2-month assessment period, regardless of whether they lived in the United States or United Kingdom and whether they were lower-frequency or higher-frequency ecstasy users. When proportions of American and British participants using a strategy differed significantly, it was typically larger proportions of Americans using those strategies. Many of the less frequently employed strategies are not applicable on every occasion of ecstasy use. However, because ecstasy is not a diverted pharmaceutical of known quality/potency, testing for the presence of MDMA, other stimulants, and adulterants is a strategy that everyone should employ, regardless of country of residence or how frequently one consumes ecstasy.

Application of the Passionate Attachment Model to Recreational Use of MDMA/Ecstasy

Abstract Those who are not addicted to ecstasy, but who use it persistently over time, could be viewed as having a “passionate attachment” to a highly valued activity. To evaluate the associations of obsessive and harmonious passion with psychological and behavioral aspects of ecstasy consumption, we recruited a community sample of ecstasy users to complete a modified version of the Passion Scale (Vallerand et al. 2003) and other questionnaires assessing their substance use history, self-efficacy to refuse ecstasy, and use of ecstasy to cope with worries and problems. Both Obsessive and Harmonious passion scores were negatively correlated with self-efficacy to refuse ecstasy and positively correlated with using ecstasy to cope with worries and problems. The findings also provided partial support for our hypotheses that scores on the Obsessive Passion subscale would be associated with number of times participants had used ecstasy, the frequency of use, and the typical number of pills consumed. Participants agreed more strongly with statements indicative of Harmonious Passion to consume ecstasy, but Harmonious subscale scores were not associated with several measures of consumption. As a supplemental measure, the modified questionnaire could provide a more comprehensive picture of the psychology of one’s ecstasy use.