There is growing interest in non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) as a novel treatment option for substance-use disorders (SUDs). Recent momentum stems from a foundation of preclinical neuroscience demonstrating links between neural circuits and drug consuming behavior, as well as recent FDA-approval of NIBS treatments for mental health disorders that share overlapping pathology with SUDs. As with any emerging field, enthusiasm must be tempered by reason; lessons learned from the past should be prudently applied to future therapies. Here, an international ensemble of experts provides an overview of the state of transcranial-electrical (tES) and transcranial-magnetic (TMS) stimulation applied in SUDs. This consensus paper provides a systematic literature review on published data-emphasizing the heterogeneity of methods and outcome measures while suggesting strategies to help bridge knowledge gaps. The goal of this effort is to provide the community with guidelines for best practices in tES/TMS SUD research. We hope this will accelerate the speed at which the community translates basic neuroscience into advanced neuromodulation tools for clinical practice in addiction medicine.

No abstract

No abstract

While a lack of advanced training in addictions among faculty may be a limiting factor, developing expertise through faculty development activities and nationally disseminating model curricula can help improve national addictions training. Future goals include development of a strategic plan for improving addictions training, including an outline of a developmental approach across training to the acquisition of milestones-based competencies that apply to addictions assessment and treatment.

PURPOSE: Several states, particularly in the Southeast, have restrictive medical marijuana laws that permit qualified patients to use specific cannabis products. The majority of these states, however, do not provide avenues for accessing cannabis products such as in-state dispensaries. METHODS: We conducted a survey of patients registered for medical marijuana (low tetrahydrocannabinol [THC] oil cards) in an ambulatory palliative care practice in Georgia (one of the states with restrictive medical marijuana laws). RESULTS: We had a total of 101 responses. Among our sample of patients who use cannabis as part of a state-approved low THC oil program, 56% were male and 64% were older than age 50 years. Advanced cancer was the most common reason (76%) for granting the patients access to a low THC oil card. Although patients reported cannabis products as being extremely helpful for reducing pain, they expressed considerable concerns about the legality issues (64%) and ability to obtain THC (68%). Several respondents were using unapproved formulations of cannabis products. For 48% of the patients, their physician was the source of information regarding marijuana-related products. Furthermore, they believed that their health care providers and family members were supportive of their use of cannabis (62% and 79%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients on Georgia’s medical marijuana program are most concerned about the legality of the product and their ability to obtain marijuana-related products. Therefore, we recommend that states with medical marijuana laws should provide safe and reliable access to cannabis products for qualifying patients.

A growing evidence base supports the use of medication to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) in adolescents, but little is known about behavioral therapies for adolescents with OUD. A systematic review using PRISMA methodology was conducted on behavioral therapy for adolescent OUD. Only three studies were identified. Combined evidence from two studies indicates initial efficacy of the Adolescent–Community Reinforcement Approach, motivational enhancement therapy, and cognitive-behavioral therapy for reducing opioid use. The only group therapy identified, which involved adolescents and their parents, demonstrated improvement in participants’ knowledge of relapse-prevention strategies, drug-refusal skills, and overall psychosocial functioning. Additional studies that included behavioral therapy but that did not specifically test its efficacy are also highlighted to expand the understanding of the small literature base. This review highlights the sparse evidence base for these therapies in this population. In addition, we highlight promising areas for future research and include evidence from the adult literature that may inform that research. Studies on behavioral therapies that utilize randomized, controlled trials for this population are imperative.

BACKGROUND Whether parental permission of alcohol and other drug use in a home environment is protective against substance‐related negative outcomes remains controversial. We investigated substance use at home, with or without parental knowledge, and its association with substance‐related consequences. METHODS The sample consisted of 21,207 U.S. students in the 6th to 12th grades surveyed between 2009 and 2017. Substance use patterns and rates of negative outcomes were analyzed by comparing groups of participants who had not used at home, or had used at home with and/or without parental knowledge. RESULTS Adolescents who used substances at home without parental knowledge used alcohol and substances in greater amounts, and tended to have more negative outcomes than those who did not. Students who had not used at home or had used only with parental knowledge tended to have lower levels of use and negative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Using at home without parental knowledge was a consistent risk factor for substance‐related negative outcomes. These results highlight the importance of screening adolescents for the use of alcohol or drugs in the home without parental knowledge, as well as attempting to prevent substance use in the household.

No abstract