Psychosis
Study register · detail Systematic Review · Psychosis · 2021

Preventive interventions targeting cannabis use and related harms in people with psychosis: A systematic review.

No benefit demonstrated GRADE High 13 citations
Samplek = 5 Studien
Durationunclear
ControlControl conditions
EndpointCannabis use
Blindingunklar
DesignSystematic Review
Key finding

None of the five included studies showed clear efficacy of preventive interventions in reducing cannabis use in people with psychosis.

Summary

Systematic review of preventive interventions for cannabis use in psychosis patients; k=5 controlled studies (from 11.460 screened). No study showed clear efficacy in reducing cannabis use; no study measured cannabis-associated harms. All included studies had a high risk of bias.

P
PopulationPeople with psychosis who use cannabis
I
InterventionPreventive interventions to reduce cannabis use
C
ControlControl conditions (controlled studies)
O
OutcomeNone of the included studies showed clear efficacy of preventive interventions in reducing cannabis use; cannabis-related harms were not measured in any study
Confidence in the evidence
High

The highest of four GRADE levels, the effect estimate is very reliable.

Quality profile
Sample size
Blinding
Effect size No benefit
Citations / year
Authors
Coronado-Montoya S, Morissette F, Abdel-Baki A, Fischer B, Cote J, Ouellet-Plamondon C, Tremblay L, Jutras-Aswad D
DOI 10.1111/eip.13081
Design: Systematic Review
Share
Abstract
Aim: While most users will not experience severe adverse health outcomes from cannabis, it can be associated with negative outcomes in people with psychosis. People with psychosis who use cannabis have more severe psychiatric symptoms, higher rates of hospitalization, and diminished psychosocial functioning compared to those who do not use cannabis. Most studies of people with psychotic disorders have focused on cannabis use treatments and only a few on preventive interventions for cannabis. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of preventive interventions focusing on cannabis use for people with psychosis. Methods: We searched CINAHL Plus, EBM reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycInfo and PubMed databases for controlled studies assessing the effects of preventive interventions on cannabis use and related harms in people with psychosis. We conducted the search using a combination of the following concepts: cannabis, psychosis, intervention and prevention. Risk of bias was assessed. Results: The search yielded 11 460 unique studies. Of these, five studies met our eligibility criteria. None of the studies demonstrated clear efficacy of prevention interventions in reducing cannabis use, and none measured cannabis-related harms. All studies had high risk of bias. Conclusion: The small number of studies and the considerable risk of bias made it difficult to conclude whether any of the existing interventions were promising. With increased acceptance and accessibility of cannabis due to liberalizing cannabis policies, it is imperative to improve the evidence base for preventive interventions, in particular their effectiveness in decreasing the risk of cannabis-related harms in people with psychosis.

The impediment to action advances action. — Marcus Aurelius