The role of impulsive behavior in drug abuse

Abstract

Impulsivity expressed as impulsive choice or inhibitory failure plays a role in several key transition phases of drug abuse. There is evidence to support all three nonexclusive hypotheses. Increased levels of impulsivity lead to acquisition of drug abuse (H1) and subsequent escalation or dysregulation of drug intake. Drugs of abuse may increase impulsivity (H2), which is an additional contributor to escalation/dysregulation. Abstinence, relapse, and treatment may be influenced by both H1 and H2. In addition, there is a relationship between impulsivity and other drug abuse vulnerability factors, such as sex, hormonal status, reactivity to nondrug rewards, and early environmental experiences that may impact drug intake during all phases of addiction (H3). Relating drug abuse and impulsivity in phases of addiction via these three hypotheses provides a heuristic model from which future experimental questions can be addressed.

μ-Opioid Receptors in the Nucleus Accumbens Shell Region Mediate the Effects of Amphetamine on Inhibitory Control But Not Impulsive Choice

“…Moreover, opioid receptors mediate the effects of amphetamine on DA release and behavioral measures including locomotion, reward, and amphetamineinduced reinstatement of amphetamine seeking (Trujillo et al, 1991;Hooks et al, 1992;Schad et al, 1995;JayaramLindström et al, 2004JayaramLindström et al, , 2008Häggkvist et al, 2009). Particularly the latter finding is of interest in view of the close interrelationship between impulsivity and relapse vulnerability (Perry and Carroll, 2008;Verdejo-García et al, 2008). Thus, opioid receptor antagonists might be effective antirelapse agents because of their beneficial effects on impulsivity.…”

Impulsividad en varones con prescripción de benzodiacepinas y metadona en prisión

“…Distintos modelos teóricos sobre adicción han señala-do la impulsividad como un marcador de vulnerabilidad de gran relevancia en la explicación de los procesos adictivos, tanto para explicar el inicio como el mantenimiento del consumo de drogas (Adan, 2002, Arce y Santisteban, 2006Cano-Cervantes, Araque-Serrano, y Cándido-Ortiz, 2011;Cortés-Tomás, Giménez-Costa, Motos-Sellés, y Cadaveira-Mahía, 2014;Gullo, Loxton, y Dawe, 2014;Navas, Torres, Cándido, y Perales, 2014;Pattij y De Vries, 2013). El estudio de la impulsividad ha venido marcado por la utilización de al menos dos abordajes relativamente independientes: (i) estudio de la impulsividad cognitiva, a través del uso de pruebas neuropsicológicas y (ii) estudio de la impulsividad como rasgo de personalidad, a través del uso de medidas de autoinforme (Dougherty, Mathias, Marsh-Richard, Nouvion, y Dawes, 2008;Evenden, 1999;Perry y Carroll, 2008). Dentro de este segundo abordaje, existen dos propuestas teóricas fundamentales.…”

Is there an impatience genotype leading to non-adherence to long-term therapies?

“…It is therefore possible to quantify the level of impulsivity of human individuals: some are more impatient, which means that people discount the future to a greater or lesser extent [13]. This level of impulsivity is associated with some pathogenic behaviours; the k value of the hyperbolic function describing impulsivity during a monetary choice has been found to be higher in different forms of addiction (smoking [14], alcohol habits [15], addictions to various kinds of drugs [16]), and, recently, in depressive patients [17] and obese women [18].…”

“…The application of this conceptual framework has considerable support in the field of addiction (as reviewed [9,11,16,19,27,28]). Is it relevant to the general issue of patient nonadherence to their medical prescriptions?…”

“…By the end of the dinner (t2), the curves describing the force of my desires have crossed, producing a preference reversal [26]. Rationally, I order the dessert Carroll [16]), which is itself associated with patient adherence: for instance, diabetic patients who smoke are less adherent to recommendations concerning bloodglucose monitoring and exercise and skip more medical appointments than non-smokers [30]; by contrast nonsmokers accept a complex treatment more easily [31]. Smokers are less adherent to bisphosphonate therapy [32].…”