Cannabis use regimens in trauma-exposed individuals: Associations with cannabis use quantity and frequency

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
T. Snooks , P.G. Tibbo , P. Romero-Sanchiz , S. DeGrace , S.H. Stewart
{"title":"Cannabis use regimens in trauma-exposed individuals: Associations with cannabis use quantity and frequency","authors":"T. Snooks ,&nbsp;P.G. Tibbo ,&nbsp;P. Romero-Sanchiz ,&nbsp;S. DeGrace ,&nbsp;S.H. Stewart","doi":"10.1016/j.addbeh.2024.108203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>People with trauma histories have an increased odds of cannabis use. Little is known about the frequency or consequences of different cannabis use regimens in cannabis users with trauma histories. Individuals with anxiety disorders tend to administer benzodiazepines in a <em>pro re nata</em> (PRN; i.e., as needed) as opposed to regularly scheduled (RS, e.g., twice daily [BID], three times daily [TID]) manner. Although physicians tend to prescribe benzodiazepines on a PRN regimen to minimize use, this regimen is paradoxically associated with greater use levels. Indeed, PRN administration regimens may increase use via negative reinforcement processes. We extended this older benzodiazepine literature to cannabis by examining regimen of cannabis use among 94 trauma-exposed cannabis users (mean age = 35.1 years; 52.1 % male; 23.4 % with cannabis prescription). Participants reported their initial and current cannabis use regimen (PRN vs. RS vs. both [‘PRN+’]) and their past month cannabis use frequency (use occasions in last month) and quantity (grams/use occasion). Consistent with patterns in benzodiazepine research, PRN (47.1 % of sample) and PRN+ (43.5 % of sample) were more common than RS regimens (9.4 % of sample). Also consistent with patterns seen with benzodiazepines, our sample moved toward PRN regimens from initial to current use: e.g., 100 % of initial RS users switched to a regimen that included PRN use. Consistent with predictions emerging from learning theory, PRN and PRN+ cannabis users reported significantly higher cannabis use frequencies compared to RS users (<em>p</em>’s &lt; 0.01). Unexpectedly, there were no significant differences between cannabis use regimen groups for quantity of cannabis/occasion. While limited by their cross-sectional nature, with longitudinal replication, result may have implications for identifying cannabis use regimens that minimize frequency of use and thereby reduce risk for negative health outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7155,"journal":{"name":"Addictive behaviors","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addictive behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460324002521","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

People with trauma histories have an increased odds of cannabis use. Little is known about the frequency or consequences of different cannabis use regimens in cannabis users with trauma histories. Individuals with anxiety disorders tend to administer benzodiazepines in a pro re nata (PRN; i.e., as needed) as opposed to regularly scheduled (RS, e.g., twice daily [BID], three times daily [TID]) manner. Although physicians tend to prescribe benzodiazepines on a PRN regimen to minimize use, this regimen is paradoxically associated with greater use levels. Indeed, PRN administration regimens may increase use via negative reinforcement processes. We extended this older benzodiazepine literature to cannabis by examining regimen of cannabis use among 94 trauma-exposed cannabis users (mean age = 35.1 years; 52.1 % male; 23.4 % with cannabis prescription). Participants reported their initial and current cannabis use regimen (PRN vs. RS vs. both [‘PRN+’]) and their past month cannabis use frequency (use occasions in last month) and quantity (grams/use occasion). Consistent with patterns in benzodiazepine research, PRN (47.1 % of sample) and PRN+ (43.5 % of sample) were more common than RS regimens (9.4 % of sample). Also consistent with patterns seen with benzodiazepines, our sample moved toward PRN regimens from initial to current use: e.g., 100 % of initial RS users switched to a regimen that included PRN use. Consistent with predictions emerging from learning theory, PRN and PRN+ cannabis users reported significantly higher cannabis use frequencies compared to RS users (p’s < 0.01). Unexpectedly, there were no significant differences between cannabis use regimen groups for quantity of cannabis/occasion. While limited by their cross-sectional nature, with longitudinal replication, result may have implications for identifying cannabis use regimens that minimize frequency of use and thereby reduce risk for negative health outcomes.
受创伤者的大麻使用方案:与大麻使用数量和频率的关系。
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
Addictive behaviors
Addictive behaviors 医学-药物滥用
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
283
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Addictive Behaviors is an international peer-reviewed journal publishing high quality human research on addictive behaviors and disorders since 1975. The journal accepts submissions of full-length papers and short communications on substance-related addictions such as the abuse of alcohol, drugs and nicotine, and behavioral addictions involving gambling and technology. We primarily publish behavioral and psychosocial research but our articles span the fields of psychology, sociology, psychiatry, epidemiology, social policy, medicine, pharmacology and neuroscience. While theoretical orientations are diverse, the emphasis of the journal is primarily empirical. That is, sound experimental design combined with valid, reliable assessment and evaluation procedures are a requisite for acceptance. However, innovative and empirically oriented case studies that might encourage new lines of inquiry are accepted as well. Studies that clearly contribute to current knowledge of etiology, prevention, social policy or treatment are given priority. Scholarly commentaries on topical issues, systematic reviews, and mini reviews are encouraged. We especially welcome multimedia papers that incorporate video or audio components to better display methodology or findings. Studies can also be submitted to Addictive Behaviors? companion title, the open access journal Addictive Behaviors Reports, which has a particular interest in ''non-traditional'', innovative and empirically-oriented research such as negative/null data papers, replication studies, case reports on novel treatments, and cross-cultural research.
×
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