The prevalence of substance use disorders and psychiatric disorders as a function of psychotic symptoms

Abstract

Background Psychotic symptoms represent one of the most severe and functionally impairing components of several psychological disorders. One group with particularly high rates of psychotic symptoms is chronic substance users. However, the literature on psychotic symptoms and substance use is quite narrow and has focused almost exclusively on drug-induced psychosis, neglecting the population of substance users with psychotic symptoms occurring independently of acute drug effects. Method The current study examined demographics, substance dependence, and psychiatric comorbidities among substance users with current (CurrSx), past (PastSx), and no psychotic symptoms (NoSx). Patients (n = 685) were sequential admissions to a residential substance use treatment center from 2006 to 2009. Results Compared to NoSx, those who endorsed CurrSx were significantly more likely to meet criteria for lifetime alcohol dependence and lifetime amphetamine dependence. CurrSx were more likely than PastSx to meet for lifetime cannabis dependence. Additionally, CurrSx were more likely to meet criteria for a comorbid psychiatric disorder compared to NoSx, and evidenced a greater number of current psychiatric disorders. NoSx were less likely than both CurrSx and PastSx to meet criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder. Conclusion Individuals with non-substance induced psychotic symptoms appear to meet criteria for specific substance use disorders and psychiatric disorders at higher rates than those without psychotic symptoms; these effects were most evident for those with current as opposed to past symptoms. Findings suggest that these individuals may need specialized care to address potential psychiatric comorbidities and overall greater severity levels relative to substance users without psychotic symptoms.

Technology-Based Interventions for Substance Use and Comorbid Disorders: An Examination of the Emerging Literature

“…83 In addition, there is a high co-occurrence of SUDs and non-substance induced psychotic symptoms. 84 Therefore, TBIs for these individuals could be particularly useful. A pilot study using live text messaging between therapist and individuals with psychotic disorders found that participants reported that the intervention was helpful and useful.…”

Differences in Psychopathology among Patients with Dual Diagnosis Receiving Treatment in Mental Health Services and Substance use Treatment Programs

“…Similar results concerning patients with dual diagnosis are evident in other studies as well, without reporting any comparison of mental health service and substance use treatment program patients. For example, Lechner et al (2013) showed that more than a third of patients with dual diagnosis report more than one mental health disorder [16]. Ding et al (2011) also revealed high rates of more than one disorder [15].…”

“…Moreover, Rady, Salama, Elkholy, and Shawky (2013a, 2013b, 2013c, 2013d) showed that 57.32% of personality disorders patients, 17.71% of mood disorders patients, 17.42% of anxiety disorders patients and 16.67% of schizophrenic patients of a psychiatric hospital of Egypt suffered from dual diagnosis. It is often observed that patients with dual diagnosis present more than one mental disorder along with the substance use disorder (e.g., Ding, Yang, Cheng, Schiltz, summers, and Skinstad, 2011; Lechner et al, 2013) [11][12][13][14][15][16].…”

A psychometric investigation of gender differences and common processes across borderline and antisocial personality disorders.

“…Training included viewing the full video protocol for the SCID-IV, conducting two mock interviews using the SCID-IV and the DIPD, observing two full interviews by experienced interviewers, conducting a final certification practice interview, being observed while conducting two real interviews at the treatment center (with the SCID-IV and the DIPD), and participating in weekly supervision led by a clinical psychologist. When disagreements occurred, discussion continued until consensus was reached and changes were made (Lechner et al, 2013). …”