Search

Background: Methamphetamine use disorder (MUD) associates with cognitive impulsivity deficits. However, few studies have examined longitudinal changes in cognition, and it remains unclear if defici...

Engagement with face-to-face psychosocial interventions is often compromised in people using methamphetamine (MA), in the context of high rates of polysubstance use, mental health disorders, cognitive impairment and geographic isolation. Technology-mediated interventions offer flexible ways of engaging with treatment and are readily accessible. This mini-review evaluates evidence from eight studies for the effectiveness of telephone, mHealth (text-messaging and apps) and computer-based interventions for MA use. Two papers from one telephone counselling study showed a small improvement in MA-related outcomes, particularly for individuals in active use. However, a directive counselling style was associated with a higher likelihood of MA use during recovery for those higher in resistance to authority. Text-messaging interventions generally showed small but significant reductions in MA use in non-treatment seekers. When compared, there was no significant difference in level of MA use reduction between interactive, automated and self-monitoring text messages. Studies in other modalities (smartphone app, one trial; computer-based interventions, two trials) did not confer statistically significant reductions in MA use, though were likely impacted by app design and participant characteristics. Preliminary findings hint at the potential effectiveness of telephone counselling in aftercare and the capacity for text-messaging to reach those who are not in treatment. Given the small amount of existing literature, this review discusses the potential value of emerging interventions, the importance of adapting interventions to the characteristics of people who use MA and suggests specific directions for research in each technology modality.

Amphetamines and cocaine are the most used illicit stimulants globally. Repeated use of cocaine and amphetamines (particularly the strongest, most harmful form “methamphetamine”) can result in stimulant use disorder and long-term neuroadaptations in frontal-striatal circuits. This chapter reviews the cognitive deficits associated with stimulant use disorders (i.e., cocaine and methamphetamine), including long-term cognitive effects and links between cognitive function and treatment outcomes. People with cocaine use disorder, compared with healthy controls, have moderate cognitive deficits in attention, verbal memory, working memory, and impulsivity. People with methamphetamine use disorder, compared with controls, have moderate cognitive deficits in verbal memory, working memory, impulsivity/executive functions, and social cognition. Longitudinal evidence suggests that attention and memory deficits recover to normal levels after long-term abstinence. Conversely, executive dysfunction seems to be more stable across intermediate and long-term abstinence. There is strong evidence of specific domains of cognition predicting treatment outcomes in individuals with stimulant use disorders, particularly between attention and outcomes of psychological treatments (e.g., cognitive behavioral therapy) and between impulsivity and decision-making deficits and drug relapse. The cognitive assessment of people with stimulant use disorders should focus on the domains of attention, verbal memory, working memory and executive functions, and impulsivity/decision-making. Assessment of attention, verbal memory, working memory, and executive functions can be particularly useful for characterizing long-term cognitive deficits, whereas assessment of working memory, executive functions, and impulsivity/decision-making can be particularly useful for predicting clinical outcomes.

Introduction: The cognitive profiles of people with methamphetamine use disorder are characterized by impulsivity and impairment in social cognition. However, previous studies have not fully accounted for the presence and impact of co-occurring mental health problems on these domains. For instance, psychotic symptoms are commonly experienced by people who use methamphetamine and may influence cognitive performance. We aimed to examine decision making and emotion recognition in individuals with methamphetamine use, compared to healthy controls, to map the nature and degree of impairments in relation to the presence of psychotic symptoms. Method: In this naturalistic study, we assessed reward-based decision-making and facial emotion recognition across three groups, methamphetamine-using individuals with (MAP, n = 29) and without psychotic symptoms (MNP, n = 70), and healthy controls (HC, n = 32). Results: In comparison to healthy controls, methamphetamine-using individuals presented with poorer performance on tasks of decision-making and emotion recognition. Emotion recognition was impaired across all methamphetamine-using individuals, with significantly poorer recognition of anger and sadness in those with psychotic symptoms. Conclusion: We found specific impairments in emotion recognition in relation to psychotic symptoms in people who use methamphetamine regularly. This builds on previous evidence on cognitive profiles in methamphetamine use disorder, highlighting the need to assess co-morbid mental health and psychotic symptoms. Our finding that methamphetamine-using individuals with psychotic symptoms present with particular difficulties recognizing anger has implications for frontline clinicians.

Background and aims Methamphetamine dependence is associated with heightened impulsivity and diminished quality of life, but the link between impulsivity and changes in quality of life during treatment has not been examined. We aimed to investigate how different elements of impulsivity predict change in quality of life in the 6 weeks after engaging in treatment. Design Longitudinal, observational cohort study. Setting Public and private detoxification and rehabilitation facilities in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Participants One hundred and eight individuals with methamphetamine dependence (81 male) tested within 3 weeks of commencing treatment; 80 (74%) were followed-up at 6 weeks. Measurements The Continuous Performance Test-2 measured impulsive action (cognitive and motor impulsivity); the Delay Discounting Task measured impulsive choice. Quality of life was measured with the World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale-Brief, which includes social, psychological, physical and environment domains. Control variables included age, gender, estimated IQ, depression severity score, methamphetamine dependence severity score, cannabis dependence severity score and treatment modality. Findings We found that all three forms of impulsivity were significant predictors of change in the social domain: motor impulsivity (β = -0.54, P = 0.013), cognitive impulsivity (β = -0.46, P = 0.029) and impulsive choice (β = -0.26, P = 0.019). Change in the psychological domain was predicted significantly by motor impulsivity (β = -0.45, P = 0.046). Control variables of age and depression were associated significantly with changes in the physical domain. Conclusions In Australian methamphetamine-dependent individuals, elevated impulsivity predicts lower improvement of social and psychological quality of life in the first 6-9 weeks of treatment.

Background Early treatment motivation is a meaningful predictor of clinical outcomes in the context of methamphetamine dependence (MD). Cognitive deficits associated with MD can have a significant impact on motivational fluctuations during early treatment. We specifically examined if sustained attention and effort-based decision-making predict early treatment motivation change in individuals with MD. We hypothesised that both variables would be significant predictors of individual differences in treatment motivation change. Methods We conducted a longitudinal, observational, cohort study on individuals with MD (N = 72, Age, M = 31.1, SD = 7.3, 29% female). Participants were assessed with cognitive tests of sustained attention (continuous performance test) and effort-based decision-making (effort expenditure for rewards task) within three weeks of entering treatment and rated their treatment motivation at baseline and at follow up six weeks later (n = 50). Multiple regression was used to examine the predictive value of cognitive variables after controlling for nuisance variables. Results Cognitive measures significantly predicted change in treatment motivation after accounting for nuisance variables, F(5,43) = 2.89, p = .025. Analysis of individual predictors showed that sustained attention, but not decision-making, was a significant negative predictor of improvement in treatment motivation (β = −0.34, p = .015). Conclusions Poorer attentional function was associated with limited improvement in motivation during early treatment. These findings help to characterise cognitive predictors of treatment motivation and suggest directions for tailored treatment programs. Individuals entering treatment with attentional deficits may benefit from adjustments to therapy and/or cognitive remediation.

High impulsivity and poor executive function are characteristic of methamphetamine use disorder. High arousal in the impulsive system has been proposed to compromise the executive system's regulating ability (i.e. the dual-systems model). While interaction between these variables may partly explain poor treatment outcomes associated with methamphetamine use disorder, previous research has tended to examine each factor separately. We investigated whether high impulsivity (measured with an impulsive choice task) and poor executive function (measured with a working memory task) predict methamphetamine use (determined by hair sample) in the 6 weeks following treatment commencement. We also investigated whether impulsive choice moderates the relationship between working memory and methamphetamine use. One hundred and eight individuals with methamphetamine use disorder (75 percent male) were tested within 3 weeks of commencing treatment; 80 (74 percent) were followed up 6 weeks following baseline testing. Cognitive measures significantly predicted drug use after controlling for nuisance variables. Working memory was a significant predictor, while impulsive choice was not. The interaction model included working memory as a predictor and impulsive choice as a moderator. This model was significant, as was the interaction term. Working memory significantly predicted levels of methamphetamine use in early treatment, and impulsive choice moderated this relationship. Those with working memory deficits are particularly vulnerable to using greater amounts of methamphetamine. As working memory increased methamphetamine use decreased among individuals with low/medium delay discounting. Pre-treatment cognitive testing may identify patients at high risk, while remediation of working memory function may be a treatment target for reducing methamphetamine use.