Substances and Your Senses: The Sensory Patterns of Young People within an Alcohol and Drug Treatment Service

Abstract

Background Substance use disorders (SUD) and trauma histories in adults have been linked with sensory processing patterns that are significantly different from the general population. Nevertheless, no studies have investigated sensory patterns, or the variables with which they are related, in youth with SUD. This study aimed to compare sensory patterns of this sample with normative data and consider associations between sensory patterns and: substance use, trauma, quality-of-life, mental and physical health. Methods A cross-sectional quantitative research design was employed with a sample of 87 young people (mean age = 20.8 years) with SUD voluntarily attending a specialist youth outpatient alcohol and other drug (AOD) service. For participants, the Adolescent Adult Sensory Profile was added to measures routinely collected at the service. Results Participants’ sensory processing patterns for low registration, sensory sensitivity, and sensation avoiding were significantly higher than the normative population, while sensation seeking was both lower and higher. Ninety-one percent reported atypical scores on one or more sensory patterns. High rates of probable Post-Traumatic-Stress-Disorder (PTSD), psychological distress, and low quality-of-life were also reported, which were meaningfully related with sensory patterns. Conclusion Young people reported complex combinations of sensory processing patterns, with comorbid probable PTSD, psychological distress, and low quality-of-life. Findings reflect studies with adult AOD, trauma, and other clinical conditions, and highlight the potential value of screening for sensory patterns and applying transdiagnostic approaches which simultaneously address substance use, mental health, trauma and sensory needs to optimize outcomes for young people with SUD.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms, Sensation-Seeking, and Sensory Modulation Dysfunction in Substance Use Disorder: A Cross Sectional Two-Group Comparative Study

“…Its clinical manifestations are characterized by sensory under-responsivity (SMD-SUR), demonstrated by disregarded or delayed responses to stimulation; and sensory over-responsivity (SMD-SOR), perceiving non-painful sensations as irritating, unpleasant [ 25 , 27 ], or painful [ 28 , 29 , 30 ]. The sensory realm has been neglected over the years [ 31 ], and only recently, initial findings indicate SMD in SUD [ 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Importantly, our recent work found that 54% of individuals with SUD were also identified as having SMD; specifically, 47% were identified with SMD-SOR [ 32 ].…”

Investigating autonomic biomarkers of sensory processing patterns in young adults

“…This research has primarily used biomarkers of either the sympathetic or parasympathetic branches of the ANS; however, recent recommendations suggest that studies should concurrently measure both systems (Christensen et al, 2020; Gomez et al, 2017). Furthermore, researchers have highlighted the need for more sensory processing research with adolescents and young adults (Kelly et al, 2021; Meredith et al, 2020). The present study seeks to address these two needs by investigating the relationship between autonomic balance (i.e.…”

Perfect sense: The case for sensationalising telephone interventions for people with alcohol and other drug issues

“…Studies show that the sensory processing of people with AOD issues differs from the general population. This population are more likely to be sensitive to sensations (sensory sensitivity or hyper-sensitivity) [3,[8][9][10][11]. This could manifest in a telephone intervention with difficulty processing multiple sensory inputs (e.g., the conversation plus noises from the caller's and receiver's environment) resulting in challenges with attention.…”

“…They are more likely to avoid many sensory inputs (sensory avoiding) which could pose problems with therapeutic relationships if, for example, a client does not experience a felt sense of safety using an auditory-based intervention. This cohort are more likely to seek out low and high amounts of sensory stimuli (sensory seeking) meaning a telephone intervention may support a nonseeker given the limited sensory inputs but might not support a seeker of sensory stimuli [3,[8][9][10][11].…”

“…The occupation (activity) of using the telephone is another area available for sensory modulation. Incorporating supportive sensory inputs into the occupation has the benefits of rapid effect, low cognitive demand and minimal resource outlay [3,5,9,24,25]. Sensory inputs have been shown to decrease cravings [26], promote stress management [27,28] and improve task attention and efficiency [29].…”