Suchergebnisse

This article examines to what extent and how cannabis users in different countries, with different cannabis legislation and policies practice normalization and self-regulation of cannabis use in everyday life. Data were collected in a survey among a convenience sample of 1,225 last-year cannabis users aged 18–40 from seven European countries, with cannabis policies ranging from relatively liberal to more punitive. Participants were recruited in or in the vicinity of Dutch coffeeshops. We assessed whether cannabis users experience and interpret formal control and informal social norms differently across countries with different cannabis policies. The findings suggest that many cannabis users set boundaries to control their use. Irrespective of national cannabis policy, using cannabis in private settings and setting risk avoidance rules were equally predominant in all countries. This illustrates that many cannabis users are concerned with responsible use, demonstrating the importance that they attach to discretion. Overall, self-regulation was highest in the most liberal country (the Netherlands). This indicates that liberalization does not automatically lead to chaotic or otherwise problematic use as critics of the policy have predicted, as the diminishing of formal control (law enforcement) is accompanied by increased importance of informal norms and stronger self-regulation. In understanding risk-management, societal tolerance of cannabis use seems more important than cross-national differences in cannabis policy. The setting of cannabis use and self-regulation rules were strongly associated with frequency of use. Daily users were less selective in choosing settings of use and less strict in self-regulation rules. Further differences in age, gender, and household status underline the relevance of a differentiated, more nuanced understanding of cannabis normalization.

Aims: To examine the course and the predictors of the persistence of cannabis dependence. Methods: Through cannabis outlets and chain referral, a prospective enriched community cohort of 207 young adults (aged 18-30) with DSM-IV cannabis dependence at baseline (T0) was formed and followed-up after 1.5 (T1) and 3 (T2) years. The presence of cannabis dependence, cannabis-related problems, functional impairment and treatment was assessed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0) and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Predictors of persistence were lifetime cannabis abuse and dependence symptoms, cannabis use characteristics, distant vulnerability factors (e.g. childhood adversity, family history of psychological/substance use problems, impulsivity, mental disorders), and proximal stress factors (recent life events, social support). Results: Four groups were distinguished: persistent dependent (DDD: 28.0%), stable non-persistent (DNN: 40.6%), late non-persistent (DDN: 17.9%) and recurrent dependent (DND: 13.5%). At T2, persisters (DDD) reported significantly more (heavy) cannabis use and cannabis problems than non-persisters (DNN/DDN/DND). Treatment seeking for cannabis-related problems was rare, even among persisters (15.5%). The number (OR = 1.23 (1.03-1.48)) and type ('role impairment' OR = 2.85 (1.11-7.31), 'use despite problems' OR = 2.34 (1.15-4.76)) of lifetime cannabis abuse/dependence symptoms were the only independent predictors of persistence with a total explained variance of 8.8%. Conclusions: Persistence of cannabis dependence in the community is low, difficult to predict, and associated with a negative outcome. The substantial proportion of stable non-persisters suggests that screening and monitoring or low-threshold brief interventions may suffice for many non-treatment-seeking cannabis-dependent people. However, those with many lifetime abuse/dependence symptoms may benefit from more intensive interventions.

Introduction: Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATSs) are the second most commonly consumed class of illicit drugs globally, but there is limited understanding of the precise factors associated with problematic versus controlled ATS consumption. This exploratory study aimed to identify which individual, social, and environmental factors are associated with different patterns of ATS use over time. Methods: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted in Germany, England, The Netherlands, Poland, and the Czech Republic via face-to-face computer-assisted personal interviews to collect data on different user groups. 1,458 adults (18+) reported exposure to but no ATS use (n = 339); former rare/moderate ATS use (n = 242); current rare/moderate ATS use (n = 273); former frequent/dependent ATS use (n = 201); current frequent/dependent ATS use (n = 403). Extent of ATS/other substance use was assessed by number of consumption days (lifetime, past year, past month) and Severity of Dependence Scale. To identify factors associated with group membership, data were also collected on previous injecting drug use (IDU) and consumption setting/rules. Psychological distress was measured using the Brief Symptom Inventory, with additional data collected on self-reported adverse life events and physical/mental health. Results: Currently, using frequent/dependent ATS users experienced more frequent unstable living conditions (27.5%) and psychological distress (59.8%) compared to other groups. A multinomial logistic regression showed that currently abstinent rare/moderate users were more likely to abstain from methamphetamine use {odds ratio (OR) = 2.48 (confidence interval [CI] = 1.32–4.68)} and from IDU (OR = 6.33 [CI = 2.21–18.14]), to avoid ATS use during working hours (OR = 6.67 [CI = 3.85–11.11]), and not to use ATS for coping reasons (OR = 4.55 [CI = 2.50–6.67]) compared to the reference group of currently using frequent/dependent users. Conclusions: People who use ATS frequently and/or at dependent levels are more likely to have experienced social and economic adversity compared to infrequent ATS users. On the other hand, there is a substantial share of users, which show a controlled use pattern and are able to integrate ATS use into their lives without severe consequences.

The standardization of cannabis doses is a priority for research, policy-making, clinical and harm-reduction interventions and consumer security. Scientists have called for standard units of dosing for cannabis, similar to those used for alcohol. A Standard Joint Unit (SJU) would facilitate preventive and intervention models in ways similar to the Standard Drink (SD). Learning from the SD experiences allows researchers to tackle emerging barriers to the SJU by applying modern forecasting methods. During a workshop at the Lisbon Addictions Conference 2019, a back-casting foresight method was used to address challenges and achieve consensus in developing an SJU. Thirty-two professionals from 13 countries and 10 disciplines participated. Descriptive analysis of the workshop was carried out by the organizers and shared with the participants in order to suggest amendments. Several characteristics of the SJU were defined: (1) core values: easy-to use, universal, focused on THC, accurate, and accessible; (2) key challenges: sudden changes in patterns of use, heterogeneity of cannabis compounds as well as in administration routes, variations over time in THC concentrations, and of laws that regulate the legal status of recreational and medical cannabis use); and (3) facilitators: previous experience with standardized measurements, funding opportunities, multi-stakeholder support, high prevalence of cannabis users, and widespread changes in legislation. Participants also identified three initial steps for the implementation of a SJU by 2030: (1) Building a task-force to develop a consensus-based SJU; (2) Expanded available national-level data; (3) Linking SJU consumption to the concept of "risky use," based on evidence of harms.

The standardization of cannabis doses is a priority for research, policy-making, clinical and harm-reduction interventions and consumer security. Scientists have called for standard units of dosing for cannabis, similar to those used for alcohol. A Standard Joint Unit (SJU) would facilitate preventive and intervention models in ways similar to the Standard Drink (SD). Learning from the SD experiences allows researchers to tackle emerging barriers to the SJU by applying modern forecasting methods. During a workshop at the Lisbon Addictions Conference 2019, a back-casting foresight method was used to address challenges and achieve consensus in developing an SJU. Thirty-two professionals from 13 countries and 10 disciplines participated. Descriptive analysis of the workshop was carried out by the organizers and shared with the participants in order to suggest amendments. Several characteristics of the SJU were defined: (1) core values: easy-to use, universal, focused on THC, accurate, and accessible; (2) key challenges: sudden changes in patterns of use, heterogeneity of cannabis compounds as well as in administration routes, variations over time in THC concentrations, and of laws that regulate the legal status of recreational and medical cannabis use); and (3) facilitators: previous experience with standardized measurements, funding opportunities, multi-stakeholder support, high prevalence of cannabis users, and widespread changes in legislation. Participants also identified three initial steps for the implementation of a SJU by 2030: (1) Building a task-force to develop a consensus-based SJU; (2) Expanded available national-level data; (3) Linking SJU consumption to the concept of "risky use," based on evidence of harms.