Use of amphetamine and methamphetamine is widespread in the general population and common among patients with psychiatric disorders. Amphetamines may induce symptoms of psychosis very similar to those of acute schizophrenia spectrum psychosis. This has been an argument for using amphetamine-induced psychosis as a model for primary psychotic disorders. To distinguish the two types of psychosis on the basis of acute symptoms is difficult. However, acute psychosis induced by amphetamines seems to have a faster recovery and appears to resolve more completely compared to schizophrenic psychosis. The increased vulnerability for acute amphetamine induced psychosis seen among those with schizophrenia, schizotypal personality and, to a certain degree other psychiatric disorders, is also shared by non-psychiatric individuals who previously have experienced amphetamine-induced psychosis. Schizophrenia spectrum disorder and amphetamine-induced psychosis are further linked together by the finding of several susceptibility genes common to both conditions. These genes probably lower the threshold for becoming psychotic and increase the risk for a poorer clinical course of the disease.The complex relationship between amphetamine use and psychosis has received much attention but is still not adequately explored. Our paper reviews the literature in this field and proposes a stress-vulnerability model for understanding the relationship between amphetamine use and psychosis.

BackgroundAvailable studies vary in their estimated prevalence of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in substance use disorder (SUD) patients, ranging from 2 to 83%. A better understanding of the possible reasons for this variability and the effect of the change from DSM-IV to DSM-5 is needed.MethodsA two stage international multi-center, cross-sectional study in 10 countries, among patients form inpatient and outpatient addiction treatment centers for alcohol and/or drug use disorder patients. A total of 3558 treatment seeking SUD patients were screened for adult ADHD. A subsample of 1276 subjects, both screen positive and screen negative patients, participated in a structured diagnostic interview.ResultsPrevalence of DSM-IV and DSM-5 adult ADHD varied for DSM-IV from 5.4% (CI 95%: 2.4–8.3) for Hungary to 31.3% (CI 95%:25.2–37.5) for Norway and for DSM-5 from 7.6% (CI 95%: 4.1–11.1) for Hungary to 32.6% (CI 95%: 26.4–38.8) for Norway. Using the same assessment procedures in all countries and centers resulted in substantial reduction of the variability in the prevalence of adult ADHD reported in previous studies among SUD patients (2–83%→ 5.4–31.3%). The remaining variability was partly explained by primary substance of abuse and by country (Nordic versus non-Nordic countries). Prevalence estimates for DSM-5 were slightly higher than for DSM-IV.ConclusionsGiven the generally high prevalence of adult ADHD, all treatment seeking SUD patients should be screened and, after a confirmed diagnosis, treated for ADHD since the literature indicates poor prognoses of SUD in treatment seeking SUD patients with ADHD.

Aims To determine comorbidity patterns in treatment-seeking substance use disorder (SUD) patients with and without adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with an emphasis on subgroups defined by ADHD subtype, taking into account differences related to gender and primary substance of abuse. Design Data were obtained from the cross-sectional International ADHD in Substance use disorder Prevalence (IASP) study. Setting Forty-seven centres of SUD treatment in 10 countries. Participants A total of 1205 treatment-seeking SUD patients. Measurements Structured diagnostic assessments were used for all disorders: presence of ADHD was assessed with the Conners’ Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV (CAADID), the presence of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), major depression (MD) and (hypo)manic episode (HME) was assessed with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview-Plus (MINI Plus), and the presence of borderline personality disorder (BPD) was assessed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II (SCID II). Findings The prevalence of DSM-IV adult ADHD in this SUD sample was 13.9%. ASPD [odds ratio (OR) = 2.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.8–4.2], BPD (OR = 7.0, 95% CI = 3.1–15.6 for alcohol; OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.8–6.4 for drugs), MD in patients with alcohol as primary substance of abuse (OR = 4.1, 95% CI = 2.1–7.8) and HME (OR = 4.3, 95% CI = 2.1–8.7) were all more prevalent in ADHD+ compared with ADHD− patients (P < 0.001). These results also indicate increased levels of BPD and MD for alcohol compared with drugs as primary substance of abuse. Comorbidity patterns differed between ADHD subtypes with increased MD in the inattentive and combined subtype (P < 0.01), increased HME and ASPD in the hyperactive/impulsive (P < 0.01) and combined subtypes (P < 0.001) and increased BPD in all subtypes (P < 0.001) compared with SUD patients without ADHD. Seventy-five per cent of ADHD patients had at least one additional comorbid disorder compared with 37% of SUD patients without ADHD. Conclusions Treatment-seeking substance use disorder patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are at a very high risk for additional externalizing disorders.

AimTo test the efficacy and safety of osmotic release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate (MPH) in doses up to 180 mg/day to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and prevent any drug relapse in individuals with a co-diagnosis of ADHD and amphetamine dependence.DesignRandomized placebo-controlled 24-week double-blind trial with parallel groups design.SettingParticipants were recruited from medium security prisons in Sweden. The medication started within 2 weeks before release from prison and continued in out-patient care with twice-weekly visits, including once-weekly cognitive behavioural therapy.ParticipantsFifty-four men with a mean age of 42 years, currently incarcerated, meeting DSM-IV criteria for ADHD and amphetamine dependence.MeasurementsChange in self-reported ADHD symptoms, relapse to any drug use (amphetamine and other drugs) measured by urine toxicology, retention to treatment, craving and time to relapse.FindingsThe MPH-treated group reduced their ADHD symptoms during the trial (P = 0.011) and had a significantly higher proportion of drug-negative urines compared with the placebo group (P = 0.047), including more amphetamine-negative urines (P = 0.019) and better retention to treatment (P = 0.032).ConclusionsMethylphenidate treatment reduces attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms and the risk for relapse to substance use in criminal offenders with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and substance dependence.

Background To detect attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in treatment seeking substance use disorders (SUD) patients, a valid screening instrument is needed. Objectives To test the performance of the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale V1.1(ASRS) for adult ADHD in an international sample of treatment seeking SUD patients for DSM-IV-TR; for the proposed DSM-5 criteria; in different subpopulations, at intake and 1–2 weeks after intake; using different scoring algorithms; and different externalizing disorders as external criterion (including adult ADHD, bipolar disorder, antisocial and borderline personality disorder). Methods In 1138 treatment seeking SUD subjects, ASRS performance was determined using diagnoses based on Conner’s Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV (CAADID) as gold standard. Results The prevalence of adult ADHD was 13.0% (95% CI: 11.0–15.0%). The overall positive predictive value (PPV) of the ASRS was 0.26 (95% CI: 0.22–0.30), the negative predictive value (NPV) was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96–0.98). The sensitivity (0.84, 95% CI: 0.76–0.88) and specificity (0.66, 95% CI: 0.63–0.69) measured at admission were similar to the sensitivity (0.88,95% CI: 0.83–0.93) and specificity (0.67,95% CI: 0.64–0.70) measured 2 weeks after admission. Sensitivity was similar, but specificity was significantly better in patients with alcohol compared to (illicit) drugs as the primary substance of abuse (0.76 vs. 0.56). ASRS was not a good screener for externalizing disorders other than ADHD. Conclusions The ASRS is a sensitive screener for identifying possible ADHD cases with very few missed cases among those screening negative in this population.