Pain Is Not a Predictor of Cannabis Use in People With Psychotic Disorders.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Journal of Dual Diagnosis Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-25 DOI:10.1080/15504263.2025.2517176
Mirjam H Smid, Jojanneke Bruins
{"title":"Pain Is Not a Predictor of Cannabis Use in People With Psychotic Disorders.","authors":"Mirjam H Smid, Jojanneke Bruins","doi":"10.1080/15504263.2025.2517176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> People with a psychotic disorder are more likely to experience pain and interference from pain in their daily lives. There is also a high prevalence of cannabis use among people with psychotic disorders, which is known to be effective in pain management. This study investigates whether pain is a predictor of cannabis use in people with psychosis. Since sedating antipsychotics may also suppress pain, this is included as a covariate. <b>Methods:</b> This sample included 108 Dutch people with a psychotic disorder, participating in the VAT observational cohort study. Cross-sectional regression analyses were performed with cannabis use (yes/no and units per week) as outcomes, and pain and the degree of interference from pain (RAND-36-SF items 7 and 8) as predictors. Covariates included were age, sex, severity of psychosis, and use of sedating antipsychotics. <b>Results:</b> In this sample, 59% experienced some degree of pain and 18.5% used cannabis. Pain and interference from pain were not significant predictors of cannabis use, nor of the amount of cannabis use. However, the use of antipsychotics with low sedating effects was associated with a greater amount of cannabis use in our participants (<i>p</i> = .028). <b>Conclusions:</b> We found no direct link between pain experience and cannabis use in people with psychotic disorders. It is possible that cannabis effectively suppresses the pain, and participants using cannabis therefore did not report experiencing pain. Furthermore, our finding that participants who were prescribed antipsychotic drugs with low sedating effects use more cannabis warrants further investigation. It is possible that people with psychotic disorders who experience numbness and sedation from their antipsychotics, may be less inclined to attempt to reach these effects using cannabis, which could potentially influence the choice of prescribed antipsychotics in the treatment of psychotic disorders in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":46571,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dual Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":"183-190"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dual Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15504263.2025.2517176","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: People with a psychotic disorder are more likely to experience pain and interference from pain in their daily lives. There is also a high prevalence of cannabis use among people with psychotic disorders, which is known to be effective in pain management. This study investigates whether pain is a predictor of cannabis use in people with psychosis. Since sedating antipsychotics may also suppress pain, this is included as a covariate. Methods: This sample included 108 Dutch people with a psychotic disorder, participating in the VAT observational cohort study. Cross-sectional regression analyses were performed with cannabis use (yes/no and units per week) as outcomes, and pain and the degree of interference from pain (RAND-36-SF items 7 and 8) as predictors. Covariates included were age, sex, severity of psychosis, and use of sedating antipsychotics. Results: In this sample, 59% experienced some degree of pain and 18.5% used cannabis. Pain and interference from pain were not significant predictors of cannabis use, nor of the amount of cannabis use. However, the use of antipsychotics with low sedating effects was associated with a greater amount of cannabis use in our participants (p = .028). Conclusions: We found no direct link between pain experience and cannabis use in people with psychotic disorders. It is possible that cannabis effectively suppresses the pain, and participants using cannabis therefore did not report experiencing pain. Furthermore, our finding that participants who were prescribed antipsychotic drugs with low sedating effects use more cannabis warrants further investigation. It is possible that people with psychotic disorders who experience numbness and sedation from their antipsychotics, may be less inclined to attempt to reach these effects using cannabis, which could potentially influence the choice of prescribed antipsychotics in the treatment of psychotic disorders in the future.

疼痛不是精神病患者使用大麻的预测因子。
目的:患有精神障碍的人在日常生活中更容易经历疼痛和疼痛的干扰。在精神病患者中,大麻的使用率也很高,这在疼痛管理方面是有效的。这项研究调查了疼痛是否是精神病患者使用大麻的一个预测因素。由于镇静性抗精神病药物也可能抑制疼痛,因此这是一个协变量。方法:本样本包括108名荷兰精神病患者,参加VAT观察队列研究。横断面回归分析以大麻使用(是/否和每周单位)为结果,疼痛和疼痛干扰程度(RAND-36-SF项目7和8)为预测因子。协变量包括年龄、性别、精神病严重程度和镇静性抗精神病药物的使用。结果:在这个样本中,59%的人经历了不同程度的疼痛,18.5%的人使用大麻。疼痛和疼痛的干扰不是大麻使用的重要预测因素,也不是大麻使用量的重要预测因素。然而,在我们的参与者中,使用具有低镇静作用的抗精神病药物与更多的大麻使用量相关(p = 0.028)。结论:我们发现精神障碍患者的疼痛体验和大麻使用之间没有直接联系。有可能大麻有效地抑制了疼痛,因此使用大麻的参与者没有报告感到疼痛。此外,我们发现服用低镇静作用的抗精神病药物的参与者使用更多的大麻值得进一步调查。有可能精神病患者因服用抗精神病药物而感到麻木和镇静,他们可能不太倾向于尝试使用大麻来达到这些效果,这可能会影响将来治疗精神病疾病时处方抗精神病药物的选择。
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
13.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Journal of Dual Diagnosis is a quarterly, international publication that focuses on the full spectrum of complexities regarding dual diagnosis. The co-occurrence of mental health and substance use disorders, or “dual diagnosis,” is one of the quintessential issues in behavioral health. Why do such high rates of co-occurrence exist? What does it tell us about risk profiles? How do these linked disorders affect people, their families, and the communities in which they live? What are the natural paths to recovery? What specific treatments are most helpful and how can new ones be developed? How can we enhance the implementation of evidence-based practices at clinical, administrative, and policy levels? How can we help clients to learn active recovery skills and adopt needed supports, clinicians to master new interventions, programs to implement effective services, and communities to foster healthy adjustment? The Journal addresses each of these perplexing challenges.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信