Cognitive-behavioural treatment for amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS)-use disorders

Abstract

Background Amphetamine‐type stimulants (ATS) refer to a group of synthetic stimulants including amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4‐methylenedioxy‐methamphetamine (MDMA) and related substances. ATS are highly addictive and prolonged use may result in a series of mental and physical symptoms including anxiety, confusion, insomnia, mood disturbances, cognitive impairments, paranoia, hallucinations and delusion. Currently there is no widely accepted treatment for ATS‐use disorder. However, cognitive‐behavioural treatment (CBT) is the first‐choice treatment. The effectiveness of CBT for other substance‐use disorders (e.g. alcohol‐, opioid‐ and cocaine‐use disorders) has been well documented and as such this basic treatment approach has been applied to the ATS‐use disorder. Objectives To investigate the efficacy of cognitive‐behavioural treatment for people with ATS‐use disorder for reducing ATS use compared to other types of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, 12‐step facilitation, no intervention or treatment as usual. Search methods We identified randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi‐RCTs comparing CBT for ATS‐use disorders with other types of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, 12 step facilitation or no intervention. We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and five other databases up to July 2018. In addition, we examined reference lists of eligible studies and other systematic reviews. We contacted experts in the field. Selection criteria Eligibility criteria consisted of RCTs and quasi‐RCTs comparing CBT versus other types of interventions with adult ATS users (aged 18 years or older) diagnosed by any explicit diagnostic system. Primary outcomes included abstinence rate and other indicators of drug‐using behaviours. Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Main results Only two studies met the eligibility criteria. Both studies were at low risk of selection bias and reporting bias. In one study, almost half of participants in the intervention group dropped out and this study was at high risk of attrition bias. The studies compared a single session of brief CBT or a web‐based CBT to a waiting‐list control (total sample size across studies of 129). Results were mixed across the studies. For the single‐session brief CBT study, two out of five measures of drug use produced significant results, percentage of abstinent days in 90 days (odds ratio (OR) 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 2.11) and dependence symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) –0.59, 95% CI–1.16 to–0.02). Little confidence could be placed in the results from this study give the small sample size (25 participants per group) and corresponding large CIs around the observed effects. For the web‐based CBT, there was no significant difference across different outcomes. Neither study reported adverse effects. The meta‐analytic mean across these two trials for drug use was not significant (...

Treatment of stimulant use disorder: A systematic review of reviews

“…CBT involves psychotherapy aimed at modifying a patient's thoughts and behaviours in order to reduce stimulant use. Its effectiveness in treating other substance use disorders has been well documented, however evidence is limited for its efficacy in treatment of stimulant use disorder [21]. The review by De Crescenzo et al included seven RCTs comparing CBT to TAU.…”

“…A systematic review by Harada et al evaluating the effectiveness of CBT for amphetaminetype stimulant use disorder included two RCTs and was unable to determine the effectiveness of CBT due to poor quality data [21]. There are limited available systematic reviews and metaanalyses focusing on CBT for the treatment of stimulant use disorder.…”

Pharmacological Treatment of Methamphetamine/Amphetamine Dependence: A Systematic Review

“…Psychosocial therapies have been trialled for AMPH/MA dependence with varying efficacy [14,15]. These include Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), Contingency Management (CM), Motivational Interviewing (MI) and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT).…”

The Autonomic Progress Bar Motivates Treatment Completion for Patients of Stimulant Use Disorder and Cannabis Use Disorder

“…In this context, both computer and mobile-based applications have helped eradicate the care gap while removing treatment barriers. Such tools also provide cognitive behavioral training, automated newsletter reminders, and treatment motivation (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6). Many mobile apps have successfully been used to augment alcohol abuse treatment (4), while computers have become major intervention and meeting tools among therapists who need to monitor patient progress in cases of depression and marijuana use disorders (7).…”