Successful outcomes with low-threshold intervention for cannabis use disorders in Norway - an observational study

John-Kåre Vederhus, Malin Rørendal, Madelene Skårdal, Marianne Otterstad Næss, Thomas Clausen, Øistein Kristensen, John-Kåre Vederhus, Malin Rørendal, Madelene Skårdal, Marianne Otterstad Næss, Thomas Clausen, Øistein Kristensen

Abstract

Aims: Cannabis is the most commonly used regulated drug by European youths. Yet, few cannabis-specific interventions have been examined in Europe. The Cannabis Cessation Program (CCP) was developed in Sweden in the 1990s and has been implemented in some Norwegian municipalities. The present study aimed to examine outcomes of this intervention in the Norwegian setting.

Method: The respondents (N = 102) were recruited in four community-based CCPs in Norway. We examined their changes in cannabis use, other substance use, mental distress, well-being, sense of coherence (SoC), and social networks, from baseline (T0) to post-treatment (T1) and up to a 3-month follow-up period (T2). Changes were evaluated with pair-wise t-tests.

Result: Seventy-six participants (75%) completed the 8-week program, according to plan. All participants reported a significant reduction in cannabis use at T1 (average reduction ~16 days per month) and at T2 (N = 59; ~13 days per month). Among those that completed the program, 67% was abstinent from cannabis at T1 and 37% was abstinent at T2. An intention-to-treat analysis showed that 50% (51/102) and 22% (22/102) were abstinent from cannabis use at T1 and T2, respectively. In parallel to abstinence, we observed a substantial reduction in mental distress and an increase in well-being and SoC. Respondents socialized with fewer friends with current substance use, but drug-free social networks were not expanded.

Conclusion: Our findings suggested that the CCP was a valuable, low-threshold manual-based intervention for cannabis use disorders. It showed considerable potential for reducing individuals' cannabis use.

Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT04989205. Registered 12 July 2021, i.e., the study was retrospectively registered.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. European drug report: trends and developments. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2021.
    1. Lopez-Quintero C, Pérez de los Cobos J, Hasin DS, Okuda M, Wang S, Grant BF, et al.. Probability and predictors of transition from first use to dependence on nicotine, alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine: results of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC). Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;115(1–2):120–30. Epub 2010/12/15. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.11.004 .
    1. Winters KC, Mader J, Budney AJ, Stanger C, Knapp AA, Walker DD. Interventions for cannabis use disorder. Curr Opin Psychol. 2021;38:67–74. Epub 2020/12/19. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.11.002 .
    1. Christiansen SG, Bretteville-Jensen AL. Who seeks treatment for cannabis use? Registered characteristics and physical, psychological and psychosocial problem indicators among cannabis patients and matched controls. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):780. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5625-0 .
    1. Vindenes V, Bramness JG, Bretteville-Jensen AL, Morland J, Bachs L. Does stronger cannabis cause more health problems? [Gir sterkere cannabis flere helseproblemer?]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2016;136(20):1736–8. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.15.1297 .
    1. Gates PJ, Sabioni P, Copeland J, Le Foll B, Gowing L. Psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(5):CD005336. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005336.pub4 .
    1. Stenius K. Treatment of cannabis-related problems in the Nordic countries. Stockholm: The Nordic Welfare Centre; 2019.
    1. Lundqvist T, Ericsson D. The theoretical background for the cannabis cessation program [Den teoretiska bakgrunden till Haschavvänjningsprogrammet (HAP)—en metod för behandling av cannabismissbruk]. Socialmedicinsk Tidsskrift. 2007;(1):37–45.
    1. Petrell B, Nordberg A. The Cannabis Cessation Program at Maria Ungdom. [Haschavgiftningsprogrammet vid Maria Ungdom]. Socialmedicinsk tidskrift. 2007;(1):46–53.
    1. Sinadinovic K, Johansson M, Johansson AS, Lundqvist T, Lindner P, Hermansson U. Guided web-based treatment program for reducing cannabis use: a randomized controlled trial. Addiction science & clinical practice. 2020;15(1):9. Epub 2020/02/20. doi: 10.1186/s13722-020-00185-8 .
    1. Vederhus JK, Rørendal M, Bjelland C, Skar AKS, Kristensen Ø. Can a Smartphone App for Cannabis Cessation Gain a Broader User Group than Traditional Treatment Services? Subst Abuse: Res Treat. 2020;14:1178221820902237. doi: 10.1177/1178221820902237 .
    1. Hansen AR, Ropstad G, Kristensen Ø, Clausen T. Cannabis smoking cessation courses; feasibility and follow-up results [Kurs i røykeavvenning for cannabisbrukere–en oppfølgingsstudie]. Sykepleien Forskning. 2011;6(4):368–74. doi: 10.4220/sykepleienf.2011.0188
    1. Ligthelm RJ, Borzì V, Gumprecht J, Kawamori R, Wenying Y, Valensi P. Importance of observational studies in clinical practice. Clin Ther. 2007;29:1284–92. Epub 2007/12/01. .
    1. Lundqvist T, Ericsson D. A guide for those who want to quit smoking cannabis [En guide for DEG som vil slutte med hasj]. Skien: Borgestadklinikken, 2005.
    1. Martin G, Copeland J, Gates P, Gilmour S. The Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS) in an adolescent population of cannabis users: reliability, validity and diagnostic cut-off. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006;83(1):90–3. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.10.014 .
    1. McLellan AT, Cacciola JC, Alterman AI, Rikoon SH, Carise C. The Addiction Severity Index at 25: Origins, Contributions and Transitions. Am J Addict. 2006;15(2):113–24. doi: 10.1080/10550490500528316
    1. Parkin D, Devlin N. Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis? Health Econ. 2006;15(7):653–64. doi: 10.1002/hec.1086 .
    1. Strand BH, Dalgard OS, Tambs K, Rognerud M. Measuring the mental health status of the Norwegian population: a comparison of the instruments SCL-25, SCL-10, SCL-5 and MHI-5 (SF-36). Nord J Psychiatry. 2003;57(2):113–8. Epub 2003/05/15. doi: 10.1080/08039480310000932 .
    1. Miller SD, Duncan BL. The outcome rating scale: A preliminary study of the reliability, validity, and feasibility of a brief visual analog measure. Journal of Brief Therapy. 2003;2(2):91–100.
    1. Eriksson M, Lindstrom B. Validity of Antonovsky’s sense of coherence scale: a systematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59(6):460–6. doi: 10.1136/jech.2003.018085 .
    1. Vederhus JK, Timko C, Kristensen Ø, Hjemdahl B, Clausen T. Motivational intervention to enhance post-detoxification 12-Step group affiliation: a randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2014;109(5):766–73. doi: 10.1111/add.12471 .
    1. Goodman I, Peterson-Badali M, Henderson J. Understanding motivation for substance use treatment: the role of social pressure during the transition to adulthood. Addict Behav. 2011;36(6):660–8. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.01.011 .
    1. Buckner JD, Carroll KM. Effect of anxiety on treatment presentation and outcome: results from the Marijuana Treatment Project. Psychiatry Res. 2010;178(3):493–500. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2009.10.010 .
    1. Copeland J, Swift W, Roffman R, Stephens R. A randomized controlled trial of brief cognitive-behavioral interventions for cannabis use disorder. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2001;21(2):55–64. doi: 10.1016/s0740-5472(01)00179-9 .
    1. Lundqvist T. Chronic cannabis use and the sense of coherence. Life Sci. 1995;56(23–24):2145–50. doi: 10.1016/0024-3205(95)00201-g .
    1. Holmberg SAC, Thelin AG. Predictors of sick leave owing to neck or low back pain: A 12-year longitudinal cohort study in a rural male population. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2010;17(2):251–7. .
    1. Olsson M, Gassne J, Hansson K. Do different scales measure the same construct? Three sense of coherence scales. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2009;63(2):166–7. doi: 10.1136/jech.2007.063420 . pmid: 2009-01151-005.
    1. Hunter-Reel D, McCrady BS, Hildebrandt T, Epstein EE. Indirect effect of social support for drinking on drinking outcomes: The role of motivation. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2010;71(6):930–7. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2010.71.930 . pmid: 2011-22145-012.
    1. Vederhus JK, Høie M, Birkeland B. One size doesn’t fit all: a thematic analysis of interviews with people who have stopped participating in Narcotics Anonymous in Norway. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2020;15(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s13722-020-00191-w .

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren