Bonsack C, Montagrin Y, Favrod J, Gibellini S, Conus P
Département de psychiatrie du CHUV, faculté de biologie et médecine, université de Lausanne, site de Cery, 1008 Prilly, Suisse.
Encephale. 2007 Oct;33(5):819-26. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2006.08.001.
People suffering from psychiatric disorders abuse alcohol or illicit substances twice as frequently as the general population. This problem is even more frequent in the early phase of psychotic disorders where prevalence of substance abuse ranges, according to various studies, from 35 to 65% during first psychotic episode. Cannabis is currently the most frequently used substance, and although its impact is often minimised, many data suggest it constitutes a risk for psychosis at three levels: (a) possible toxic psychosis in healthy individuals, (b) relapse of positive symptoms in schizophrenia and (c) raises the risk of schizophrenia when used early during adolescence. Despite a persistent controversy regarding some of these findings, they have constituted a sufficient body of evidence to support the development of specific interventions for psychotic patients. Various authors have described the fundamental elements of such dual diagnosis treatments, and some intervention programs have recently been developed. However, their relative complexity and the long duration of such interventions are often not well adapted to patients with limited motivation and low level of insight. Moreover, many obstacles arise that complicate their application to early psychotic disorders: minimisation of deleterious effect of cannabis by young people, distrust linked to psychotic symptoms, cognitive disturbances, stigmatisation of psychiatry, and use of cannabis as a means to socialise with peers. It is therefore important to adapt interventions to the specific needs of such patients and particularly to adopt a realistic attitude, aiming at increasing motivation to change habits and minimising associated risks rather than total abstinence. Our objective is to develop a pragmatic, non-judgemental approach, based on motivational interviewing techniques that is adapted to early psychosis with comorbid cannabis abuse, aimed at reducing the risks associated with abuse. In this article, we describe the basic principles and various stages of a brief motivational intervention developed for the treatment of cannabis abusers, going through the early phase of a psychotic disorder. The conceptualisation of the intervention was based on an extensive literature review and our experience in the treatment of such patients, as well as in the treatment of alcohol abuse through motivational interview.
Our intervention uses motivational interviewing techniques (empathic, non-judgemental approach, aimed at developing insight regarding potential consequences of cannabis abuse through the exploration of both its positive and negative aspects) and can be adapted to the patient's stage of motivation for change. Its basic principles are: (a) to address questions related to psychosis and cannabis simultaneously; (b) to take into account cognitive dysfunction related to illness and treatment; (c) to adapt techniques of reflective listening; and (d) to structure the interview through frequent summaries and by considering successively the positive and negative aspects of cannabis. The intervention is composed of four sessions: (1) creation of an alliance and evaluation of the level of cannabis abuse; (2) development of motivation to change by increasing contradictions between patient's affirmations; (3) definition of objectives according to the level of motivation to change; and (4) adaptation of the subsequent intervention according to the degree of motivation to change.
A pilot study showed that this intervention can be implemented in the target population. It revealed that it facilitated the establishment of a trustful relationship, in the frame of which ambivalence regarding cannabis abuse could be explored. The fact that the therapist makes the first step, shows empathy and tries to understand patient's motivations to use cannabis, leads patients to expose their ambivalence with less reluctance and to become more aware of the possible links between cannabis and psychotic disorders.
This method is particularly well adapted to patients who are in a precontemplative stage. Additional studies are needed in order to evaluate its efficacy in terms of decrease in the risks related to cannabis abuse.
患有精神疾病的人滥用酒精或非法药物的频率是普通人群的两倍。在精神疾病的早期阶段,这个问题更为常见,根据各种研究,在首次精神病发作期间,物质滥用的患病率在35%至65%之间。大麻是目前最常使用的物质,尽管其影响常常被最小化,但许多数据表明它在三个层面构成了精神病风险:(a)健康个体中可能出现的中毒性精神病;(b)精神分裂症阳性症状的复发;(c)在青春期早期使用会增加患精神分裂症的风险。尽管关于其中一些发现存在持续的争议,但它们已构成了足够的证据支持为精神病患者开发特定干预措施。许多作者描述了这种双重诊断治疗的基本要素,最近也开发了一些干预项目。然而,它们相对复杂且干预时间长,往往不太适合动机有限和洞察力水平低的患者。此外,出现了许多障碍,使它们在早期精神病障碍中的应用变得复杂:年轻人将大麻的有害影响最小化、与精神病症状相关的不信任、认知障碍、精神病学的污名化以及将大麻用作与同龄人社交的手段。因此,使干预措施适应此类患者的特定需求非常重要,特别是要采取现实的态度,旨在增加改变习惯的动机并将相关风险最小化,而不是完全戒除。我们的目标是基于动机性访谈技术开发一种务实、无偏见的方法,该方法适用于伴有大麻滥用的早期精神病,旨在降低与滥用相关的风险。在本文中,我们描述了为治疗大麻滥用者而开发的简短动机性干预的基本原则和各个阶段,该干预贯穿精神病障碍的早期阶段。干预措施的概念化基于广泛的文献综述以及我们在治疗此类患者以及通过动机性访谈治疗酒精滥用方面的经验。
我们的干预使用动机性访谈技术(共情、无偏见的方法,旨在通过探索大麻滥用的积极和消极方面来提高对其潜在后果的洞察力),并且可以根据患者改变动机的阶段进行调整。其基本原则是:(a)同时处理与精神病和大麻相关的问题;(b)考虑与疾病和治疗相关的认知功能障碍;(c)调整反思性倾听技术;(d)通过频繁总结并依次考虑大麻的积极和消极方面来构建访谈。干预由四个环节组成:(1)建立联盟并评估大麻滥用程度;(2)通过增加患者陈述之间的矛盾来激发改变动机;(3)根据改变动机的水平确定目标;(4)根据改变动机的程度调整后续干预。
一项试点研究表明,这种干预可以在目标人群中实施。研究表明,它有助于建立信任关系,在此框架内可以探讨对大麻滥用的矛盾心理。治疗师迈出第一步、表现出同理心并试图理解患者使用大麻的动机,这一事实使患者更愿意暴露他们的矛盾心理,并更加意识到大麻与精神病障碍之间可能存在的联系。
这种方法特别适用于处于未考虑改变阶段的患者。需要进行更多研究以评估其在降低与大麻滥用相关风险方面的疗效。