Resume
4.1C Addiction Summary
- Cours
- Établissement
This is a summary of 4.1 addiction. I added tables to summarise the main points which really helped me for the exam, I hope it helps you too!
[Montrer plus]
Vendeur
S'abonner
eurpsychology
Avis reçus
Aperçu du contenu
Week 1 – Part 1: Course:Reading 1: Martin – Historical and cultural perspectives on substance use and substance use
disorders:
• INTRO
o SUD = substance use disorders
o Diagnostic criteria for these have been refined since mid-20th century until now
§ Controversial
§ Culture plays a role in this – affects how we define/perceive it
o Modern theory of nature of substance dependence = chronic substance use can
produce neuroadaptations in brain (reward, motivation…) à lead to compulsion
• PSYCHOACTIVE SUBSTANCE USE: HISTORY, PATTERNS, CULTURAL VARIATION
• History of substance use:
o These have been used for millennia (alcohol, opium, cannabis…) – seen in bible, Greek
myths… - spread with war, trade, migration
• Patterns of substance use:
o Use ≠ SUD
o No drug is identical but they all lead to similar outcome
§ Many ways to classify them -> clinical, chemical…
o Mainly affect the CNS – different ways of taking them affects addiction risk, speed of
absorption
§ Lungs = fastest absorption – then blood & intestine
§ Culture affects what we see as a problematic level of use (daily alcohol in West
in fine)
o Quantity = amount used in one episode (e.g., 3 shots, 1g)
§ Hard to tell for some cause of uncertainty on purity of the drug
§ V important to differentiate quantity & frequency (1 drink/day vs 7/week)
o SPU = simultaneous polydrug use à mixing drugs – often on purpose
§ To get a desired effect (cannabis & alcohol)
§ Reduce the effect of another drug (nicotine & alcohol)
§ Increased social problems linked to this + overdose L
• Cultural variation in substance use patterns:
o Cultural norms = affect view/behavior around drugs
§ Can also vary in subcultures
o Norms = abstinence – pattern – contexts – purpose
§ Can help regulate use
§ Wasn’t seen as bad until it was linked to lower classes & criminality in past
o Level of use in country ≠ drug control policy (US vs NL) – could be geographical
location – biological differences in effect of drug across race/ethnicity (e.g., alcohol in
Asians)
§ General predictors across cultures (male, higher class)
History - Been used for ages + spread with trade/war/migration
Pattern - Different ways of taking them (affects absorption speed) – CNS
- Quantity = amount used in 1 episode – frequency = how often (both important)
- SPU = mixing drugs -> increased problems – overdose L
Culture - Norms (pattern, context, purpose, abstinence) affects view & behavior around drugs
- Level of use not closely linked to control policy -> norms; geography; biology
• HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS:
• Historical developments in understanding & classifying mental disorders:
o Understanding of SUD has changed over time
1
, o Questions around how to define a mental disorder
o Mental illness = happens within an individual – some functioning has gone wrong
§ Causes harm/distress (not caused by society)
• Historical description of substance problems:
o Substance use’s social/health problems described by many activists in past
§ Not well understood until the concept of addiction came up (discovered with
alcohol – a patient couldn’t stop despite the complaints from it)
o Controversies over these “self-induced” disorders vs ones without control
• Jellinek’s description of alcoholism syndromes:
o Described it negatively – emphasis on illness progression
o 4 phases:
§ Pre-alcoholic -> drinking is socially motivated – relief drinking & tolerance
§ Prodromal phase -> drinking to escape problems – drink a lot, large amounts,
shame from drinking, chronic hangovers…
§ Crucial phase -> loss of control, morning drinking, loss of relationships…
§ Chronic phase -> no self-control – just deterioration until death
o Alpha (drink with prblm) – beta (no prblm) – gamma – delta – epsilon alcoholism
§ This classification was wrong but v influential (description of clinical signs)
• DSM-I & DSM-II SUD criteria:
o DSM-I = 1952 – mainly cause of mental health problems cause by WW2
o Alcoholism = severe enough to cause social, psychological, or physical impairment
§ Daily drinking was often necessary for functioning
o DSM-II = episodic excessive drinking (4 or more episodes/year); habitual excessive
drinking (over 12 episodes a year); alcohol addiction (constant, withdrawal symptoms,
no control)
• The alcohol dependence syndrome:
o Attempt to define the core of the illness (no cultural influence)
§ Tolerance – withdrawal – use to avoid withdrawal – compulsion use – salience
of use – stereotypes use patterns – rapidly going back to addiction after stop
• DSM-III SUD criteria:
o Moved to SUD (≠ personality disorder)
§ Focus on core > social aspect of it
• DSM-III-R SUD criteria:
o Continued use despite social consequences – no criterion is necessary/sufficient
o Abuse < dependence (unsure if part of the same)
• Research on alcohol dependence subtypes:
o Hard to agree on – but 2 types of persons with alcohol dependence
§ Type I/A/essential/affiliative/apollonian à moderate heritability – gradual
onset – moderately abusive drinking – same F/M ratio
§ Type II/B/reactive/schizoid/Dionysian à high heritability – early onset –
antisocial traits – under controlled drinking – more M > F (2:1)
o Higher prevalence of type A > B – can be seen as severity levels
§ Most people show a mix of these
- Substance use problems not well understood until addiction came up
Jellinek - Focus on progression of illness (phases + “species”/types)
DSM - I) Causes social/psych/physical impairment
- II) Added severity categories
- III) Abuse < dependence – bring focus to core (> social aspect)
Subtypes - A = meh heritability + later onset – B = high heritability + early onset
- More about severity levels – really a mix of both
2
, • CULTURAL PERPSECTIVES ON SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS:
o Role of culture in defining the illness – determines need for intervention
§ Universalistic approach = focus on common elements across cultures
• Allows cross-cultural comparison
§ Relativistic approach = influence of culture – can lead to CBS (culture-bound
syndromes)
• Seen in Jellinek’s species (some more common in certain cultures)
§ L Unsure if prevalence dif between countries is true or just cultural difference
o Differences in concepts/diagnoses/individual criteria
§ Some symptoms are culture bound (e.g., driving after drinking)
§ Cultures with similar norms have similar description of addiction
• Drinking = lower amount seen as addiction in India (≠Greece)
• Social acceptability – familiarity – social class linked to drug
o (e.g., opium in China – eating in upper class vs smoking in low)
o !!! V important to take culture into account when diagnosing/treating someone
Culture - Role in defining addiction + treatment + diagnosis
- Similar cultural norms lead to similar description of addiction
Approaches - Universalistic = focus on common elements across cultures
- Relativistic = influence of culture – can lead to CBS (culture bound syndrome)
• CURRENT DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEMS FOR SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS:
• Diagnostic criteria for SUD in the International Classification of Diseases:
o First mentioned in ICD-8 (1967)
o ICD-10 = 2 types of SUD
§ Substance dependence (3 or more/6 – over 12 months – tolerance; craving;
withdrawal; low self-control; harmful use; much time spent)
§ Harmful use (pattern of use causing physical or psych damage)
• Harmful use is ≠ DSM def
• DSM-IV SUD criteria:
o Use of addiction constructs (tolerance, withdrawal, neg consequences…)
§ Abuse (at least 1/4 criteria) -> role impairment; hazardous use; legal problems;
social problems
§ Dependence (at least 3/7 criteria) over 12 months -> tolerance; withdrawal;
larger/longer; quit/cut down; much time spent using; reduced activity;
psych/physical problems; craving
o This was based on little data (little time since DSM-IIIR)
• Limitations of DSM-IV SUD diagnostic algorithms:
o No accepted understanding of substance abuse
§ Low agreement on who qualifies for substance abuse diagnosis
o Criterion for abuse & dependence have overlapping content
§ Debate over social for abuse vs physiologic for dependence (mix of both)
o Not bad enough to be a mental disorder (no mention of genetics – don’t mention age
of onset)
o Factor analyses suggest more of a general substance problem (≠ abuse + dependence)
o Some don’t fit into any of the two but still should be diagnosed
o à This all led to removal of substance abuse
ICD - 2 types = substance dependence + harmful use
DSM - Abuse vs dependence (no mention of harmful use)
Limitations - No clear def of abuse – abuse vs dependence is hard to differentiate – general
substance problem – few things not mentioned
3
, • SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS IN DSM-5
o SUD in different substance classes
o Symptoms = all dependence symptoms + 3 of the abuse symptoms + craving
§ Diagnosed if 2+/11
• DSM-5 uses a single SUD for each drug class:
o No more abuse vs dependence -> just one SUD per drug class
• SUD is defined by a diagnostic threshold of 2+/11 symptoms:
o Should avoid false-positive + judge importance of treating substance problems at
certain level of severity (& personal/societal costs for this)
§ May be too lenient?
• Issues of SUD terminology:
o Discussion over using term “dependence” (more biological) vs “addiction” (can be
seen as more negative)
§ Ended up with … use disorder
• Revising, adding, and deleting individual criteria in DSM-5:
o Added craving in DSM-5 + cannabis withdrawal + removed legal problems
§ No revision of DSM-IV dependence when Qs around it
§ Talk about consumption criterion (frequency) – but too influenced by culture
• DSM-5 made steps toward integrating categorical & dimensional approaches to SUD diagnoses:
o Dimensional approach = severity threshold
§ Good to make decisions on treatment + see those not diagnosed with symptom
§ Mild – moderate – severe levels
• Noncriterion features of substance problems not in DSM-5 but interest to researchers:
o Some other signs/symptoms/correlates/risk factors à can be linked to dependence;
linked to other disorders
§ Some are v important to look into with patient (legal, interpersonal…)
DSM-5 - Combined dependence & abuse (use symptoms of all - legal + craving)
- 2+/11 symptoms for diagnosis – no consumption criterion
- 3 severity levels
• MODERN UNDERSTANDING OF SUBSTANCE DEPENDENCE:
o Modern theories = focus on how substance use leads to neuroadaptations in brain
systems linked to reward, motivation…
§ This is a culturally universal way of understanding addiction
o -> Reward circuit (mesolimbic dopamine tract) -> repeated substance use can ‘hijack’
the reward system – leading to cravings
§ Also adaptations with tolerance -> leads to seeking more of the substance
§ Withdrawal symptoms
Modern theory - Focus on biology
- Neuroadaptations caused by substance use = affect reward, motivation,
affective regulation, inhibition, tolerance/withdrawal
à Leads to increased substance use
- Future biological marker of SUDs? -> would need pre-addiction neuroimaging (as a supplement J)
- New psychoactive drugs? -> yes v likely – need to keep track of this
- Globalization & economic expansion? -> can lead to higher drug use – higher SUD risk
4
Les avantages d'acheter des résumés chez Stuvia:
Qualité garantie par les avis des clients
Les clients de Stuvia ont évalués plus de 700 000 résumés. C'est comme ça que vous savez que vous achetez les meilleurs documents.
L’achat facile et rapide
Vous pouvez payer rapidement avec iDeal, carte de crédit ou Stuvia-crédit pour les résumés. Il n'y a pas d'adhésion nécessaire.
Focus sur l’essentiel
Vos camarades écrivent eux-mêmes les notes d’étude, c’est pourquoi les documents sont toujours fiables et à jour. Cela garantit que vous arrivez rapidement au coeur du matériel.
Foire aux questions
Qu'est-ce que j'obtiens en achetant ce document ?
Vous obtenez un PDF, disponible immédiatement après votre achat. Le document acheté est accessible à tout moment, n'importe où et indéfiniment via votre profil.
Garantie de remboursement : comment ça marche ?
Notre garantie de satisfaction garantit que vous trouverez toujours un document d'étude qui vous convient. Vous remplissez un formulaire et notre équipe du service client s'occupe du reste.
Auprès de qui est-ce que j'achète ce résumé ?
Stuvia est une place de marché. Alors, vous n'achetez donc pas ce document chez nous, mais auprès du vendeur eurpsychology. Stuvia facilite les paiements au vendeur.
Est-ce que j'aurai un abonnement?
Non, vous n'achetez ce résumé que pour 10,49 €. Vous n'êtes lié à rien après votre achat.
Peut-on faire confiance à Stuvia ?
4.6 étoiles sur Google & Trustpilot (+1000 avis)
67232 résumés ont été vendus ces 30 derniers jours
Fondée en 2010, la référence pour acheter des résumés depuis déjà 14 ans