Discriminative validity of a substance use symptom checklist for moderate-severe DSM-5 cannabis use disorder (CUD) in primary care settings

Leah K. Hamilton , Katharine A. Bradley , Theresa E. Matson , Gwen T. Lapham
{"title":"Discriminative validity of a substance use symptom checklist for moderate-severe DSM-5 cannabis use disorder (CUD) in primary care settings","authors":"Leah K. Hamilton ,&nbsp;Katharine A. Bradley ,&nbsp;Theresa E. Matson ,&nbsp;Gwen T. Lapham","doi":"10.1016/j.dadr.2024.100260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The prevalence of cannabis use disorder (CUD) is increasing in the US and primary care providers need tools to identify patients with moderate-severe CUD to facilitate treatment. A single-item screen for cannabis (SIS-C) has outstanding discriminative validity for CUD. However, because the prevalence of moderate-severe CUD is typically low, the probability that an average patient who screens positive for daily cannabis has moderate-severe cannabis use disorder is low, making follow-up assessment important.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study reports the discriminative validity of a DSM-5 Substance Use Symptom Checklist (“Checklist”) for moderate-severe CUD among 498 primary care patients who reported daily cannabis use on the SIS-C. We evaluated the performance of the Checklist (score 0–11) completed during routine care, compared to ≥4 DSM-5 CUD symptoms (moderate-severe CUD) on the Composite International Diagnostic Interview <em>Substance Abuse Module</em> from a confidential survey (reference standard). We estimated areas under receiver operating curve (AUROC), sensitivities, specificities, and post-test probabilities.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 498 eligible patients, 17 % met diagnostic criteria for moderate-severe CUD. The Checklist’s AUROC for moderate-severe CUD was 0.77 (95 % CI: 0.71–0.83), and Checklist scores of 1–2 balanced sensitivity and specificity. Among patients from a population with average prevalence of CUD before screening (~6 % prevalence) and daily use on the SIS-C, a Checklist score of 3 indicated a post-test probability of 82.1 %.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Overall performance of the Checklist was good and the high specificity made it useful for identifying patients likely to have moderate-severe CUD among those at average risk.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72841,"journal":{"name":"Drug and alcohol dependence reports","volume":"12 ","pages":"Article 100260"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772724624000441/pdfft?md5=468e165c6ff5e4b110eb7e7271a87843&pid=1-s2.0-S2772724624000441-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug and alcohol dependence reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772724624000441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The prevalence of cannabis use disorder (CUD) is increasing in the US and primary care providers need tools to identify patients with moderate-severe CUD to facilitate treatment. A single-item screen for cannabis (SIS-C) has outstanding discriminative validity for CUD. However, because the prevalence of moderate-severe CUD is typically low, the probability that an average patient who screens positive for daily cannabis has moderate-severe cannabis use disorder is low, making follow-up assessment important.

Methods

This study reports the discriminative validity of a DSM-5 Substance Use Symptom Checklist (“Checklist”) for moderate-severe CUD among 498 primary care patients who reported daily cannabis use on the SIS-C. We evaluated the performance of the Checklist (score 0–11) completed during routine care, compared to ≥4 DSM-5 CUD symptoms (moderate-severe CUD) on the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Substance Abuse Module from a confidential survey (reference standard). We estimated areas under receiver operating curve (AUROC), sensitivities, specificities, and post-test probabilities.

Results

Of 498 eligible patients, 17 % met diagnostic criteria for moderate-severe CUD. The Checklist’s AUROC for moderate-severe CUD was 0.77 (95 % CI: 0.71–0.83), and Checklist scores of 1–2 balanced sensitivity and specificity. Among patients from a population with average prevalence of CUD before screening (~6 % prevalence) and daily use on the SIS-C, a Checklist score of 3 indicated a post-test probability of 82.1 %.

Conclusion

Overall performance of the Checklist was good and the high specificity made it useful for identifying patients likely to have moderate-severe CUD among those at average risk.

药物使用症状核对表对基层医疗机构中度-重度 DSM-5 大麻使用障碍 (CUD) 的鉴别有效性
背景在美国,大麻使用障碍(CUD)的发病率正在上升,初级保健提供者需要一些工具来识别中度-重度 CUD 患者,以促进治疗。单项大麻筛查(SIS-C)对 CUD 具有突出的鉴别有效性。然而,由于中度重度 CUD 的患病率通常较低,因此日常大麻筛查呈阳性的普通患者患有中度重度大麻使用障碍的概率较低,这使得随访评估变得非常重要。本研究报告了 DSM-5 物质使用症状核对表("核对表")对 498 名在 SIS-C 中报告日常使用大麻的初级保健患者中的中度重度 CUD 的鉴别有效性。我们评估了在常规护理过程中完成的核对表(0-11 分)与保密调查(参考标准)中综合国际诊断访谈药物滥用模块上≥4 个 DSM-5 CUD 症状(中度-重度 CUD)的性能比较。我们估算了接受者操作曲线下面积(AUROC)、灵敏度、特异性和测试后概率。结果 在 498 名符合条件的患者中,17% 符合中度-重度 CUD 诊断标准。检查表对中度重度 CUD 的 AUROC 为 0.77(95 % CI:0.71-0.83),检查表评分为 1-2 分时,敏感性和特异性达到平衡。在筛查前 CUD 患病率为平均水平(约 6% 的患病率)且日常使用 SIS-C 的人群中,核对表得分 3 表示测试后的概率为 82.1%。结论:核对表的总体性能良好,特异性高,有助于在平均风险人群中识别可能患有中度严重 CUD 的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Drug and alcohol dependence reports
Drug and alcohol dependence reports Psychiatry and Mental Health
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
100 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信