hallucinogens

致幻剂
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    经典迷幻药和MDMA有丰富多彩的娱乐使用历史,两者最近都被重新评估为治疗精神疾病的工具。已经进行了几项研究来评估定期使用对认知的潜在长期影响,为迷幻药和摇头丸提供不同的结果。然而,迄今为止,在这些物质的急性影响期间,关于认知表现的知识很少。在这篇系统综述和荟萃分析中,我们研究了在急性药物作用和亚急性("余辉")窗口期间,迷幻药和MDMA对认知功能的影响.我们的定量分析表明,与MDMA相比,迷幻药会对急性认知表现产生不同的影响:迷幻药会损害注意力和执行功能,而MDMA主要影响记忆,让执行功能和注意力不受影响。我们的定性分析表明,在迷幻药的急性作用消退后至少24小时内,执行功能和创造力可能会增加,而MDMA没有观察到这样的结果。我们的发现可能有助于为娱乐环境提供减少伤害的建议,并有助于在治疗框架内促进使用迷幻药和MDMA的不同方法。
    Classic psychedelics and MDMA have a colorful history of recreational use, and both have recently been re-evaluated as tools for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. Several studies have been carried out to assess potential long-term effects of a regular use on cognition, delivering distinct results for psychedelics and MDMA. However, to date knowledge is scarce on cognitive performance during acute effects of those substances. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigate how cognitive functioning is affected by psychedelics and MDMA during the acute drug effects and the sub-acute (\"afterglow\") window. Our quantitative analyses suggest that acute cognitive performance is differentially affected by psychedelics when compared to MDMA: psychedelics impair attention and executive function, whereas MDMA primarily affects memory, leaving executive functions and attention unaffected. Our qualitative analyses reveal that executive functioning and creativity may be increased during a window of at least 24 h after the acute effects of psychedelics have subsided, whereas no such results have been observed for MDMA. Our findings may contribute to inform recommendations on harm reduction for recreational settings and to help fostering differential approaches for the use of psychedelics and MDMA within a therapeutic framework.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    癫痫发作是一种经常与使用迷幻药有关的不良事件,因此,涉及这些物质的研究倾向于排除既往有癫痫史的患者.这一点尤其重要,因为癫痫发作在患有精神疾病的人群中明显增加,迷幻辅助疗法正在研究中,作为一种有希望的治疗方法。为了确定当前有关经典迷幻药与癫痫发作之间关系的文献的范围,使用PRISMA-ScR(系统评价的首选报告项目和范围审查的Meta分析扩展)进行范围审查。搜索是在PubMed中进行的,WebofScience,谷歌学者,LILACS和Scielo,并包括动物和人体模型。共有16篇关于人类的出版物,11关于动物,被发现了。结果是异质的,但在全球范围内表明,在没有其他药物的情况下,迷幻药可能不会增加健康个体或动物的癫痫发作风险。然而,同时使用其他物质或药物,例如kambo或锂,可能会增加癫痫发作的风险。此外,这些结论是从缺乏足够外部有效性的数据中得出的,所以他们应该谨慎解释。还提供了未来的研究路径以及可能阐明经典迷幻药与癫痫发作之间关系的神经生物学基础的总结。
    Seizures are a concerning adverse event frequently associated with the use of psychedelics, and hence, studies involving these substances tend to exclude patients with past history of epilepsy. This is especially relevant because epileptic seizures are markedly increased in the population suffering from mental disorders, and psychedelic assisted therapy is being researched as a promising treatment for several of them. To determine the extent of the current literature on the relationship between classic psychedelics and seizures, a scoping review was performed using the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). The search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Google scholar, LILACS and Scielo, and both animal and human models were included. A total of 16 publications on humans, and 11 on animals, were found. The results are heterogeneous, but globally suggest that psychedelics may not increase the risk of seizures in healthy individuals or animals in the absence of other drugs. However, concomitant use of other substances or drugs, such as kambo or lithium, could increase the risk of seizures. Additionally, these conclusions are drawn from data lacking sufficient external validity, so they should be interpreted with caution. Future paths for research and a summary on possible neurobiological underpinnings that might clarify the relationship between classical psychedelics and seizures are also provided.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    服用迷幻药进行心理健康治疗,通常被称为“迷幻辅助治疗,“是一个广泛的术语,具有非常异构的实现。尽管人们对迷幻化合物用于精神疾病的临床应用越来越感兴趣,对于如何最好地将迷幻体验与循证心理治疗相结合,目前尚无共识.本系统综述及时评估了将心理治疗与迷幻药相结合的现有方法,并为最佳发展提供了明确的建议。优化,并将基于证据的心理治疗与迷幻管理相结合,以获得直接的科学推断和最大的治疗益处。
    Administration of psychedelics for mental health treatment, typically referred to as \"psychedelic-assisted therapy,\" is a broad term with a very heterogeneous implementation. Despite increasing interest in the clinical application of psychedelic compounds for psychiatric disorders, there is no consensus on how to best integrate the psychedelic experience with evidence-based psychotherapeutic treatment. This systematic review provides a timely appraisal of existing approaches to combining psychotherapy with psychedelics and provides clear recommendations to best develop, optimize, and integrate evidence-based psychotherapy with psychedelic administration for straightforward scientific inference and maximal therapeutic benefit.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:确定与安慰剂或非精神活性药物相比,psilocybin作为抗抑郁药的疗效。
    方法:系统评价和荟萃分析。
    方法:已发表文献的五个电子数据库(Cochrane中央对照试验登记册,Medline,Embase,科学引文索引和会议论文集引文索引,和PsycInfo)和四个未发表和国际文献数据库(ClinicalTrials.gov,世卫组织国际临床试验注册平台,ProQuest论文和论文全球,和PsycEXTRA),和手动搜索参考列表,会议记录,和摘要。
    提取了有关潜在治疗效果调节因素的信息,包括抑郁症类型(原发性或继发性),以前使用过迷幻药,psilocybin剂量,结果测量类型(临床医生评级或自我报告),和个人特征(例如,年龄,性)。数据使用随机效应荟萃分析模型进行综合,通过亚组分析和回归研究观察到的异质性和协变量的影响。对冲被用作治疗效果大小的量度,考虑小样本效应和纳入研究样本量之间的实质性差异。使用Cochrane的偏差风险2工具评估研究质量,使用GRADE指南评估汇总证据的质量.
    方法:使用经过验证的临床医生评分或自我报告量表,对具有临床显著抑郁症状和症状变化的成人进行独立治疗的随机试验。如果在实验和对照条件下都存在心理治疗成分,则包括指导性心理治疗的研究。患有抑郁症的参与者,无论合并症如何(例如,癌症)符合条件。
    结果:对436名参与者(228名女性参与者)的Meta分析,平均年龄36-60岁,在纳入的9项研究中,有7项研究显示,与对照治疗相比,裸盖菇素(Hedges\'g=1.64,95%置信区间(CI)0.55~2.73,P<0.001)对抑郁评分的变化有显著益处.亚组分析和分析显示具有继发性抑郁(对冲=3.25,95%CI0.97至5.53),用贝克抑郁量表(3.25、0.97至5.53)等自我报告抑郁量表进行评估,年龄和既往使用迷幻药(回归系数分别为0.16,95%CI0.08~0.24和4.2,1.5~6.9)与症状改善程度相关.所有研究的偏倚风险都很低,但是基线指标的变化与高度异质性和小研究偏差的统计学显著风险相关,导致证据评级的确定性较低。
    结论:在继发性抑郁症患者中,psilocybin的治疗效果明显更大,当使用自我报告量表来测量抑郁症的症状时,以及参与者以前使用过迷幻药。因此,需要进一步的研究来描绘预期效应的影响,缓和因素,和治疗递送对psilocybin作为抗抑郁药的疗效。
    背景:PROSPEROCRD42023388065。
    To determine the efficacy of psilocybin as an antidepressant compared with placebo or non-psychoactive drugs.
    Systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Five electronic databases of published literature (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index and Conference Proceedings Citation Index, and PsycInfo) and four databases of unpublished and international literature (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, and PsycEXTRA), and handsearching of reference lists, conference proceedings, and abstracts.
    Information on potential treatment effect moderators was extracted, including depression type (primary or secondary), previous use of psychedelics, psilocybin dosage, type of outcome measure (clinician rated or self-reported), and personal characteristics (eg, age, sex). Data were synthesised using a random effects meta-analysis model, and observed heterogeneity and the effect of covariates were investigated with subgroup analyses and metaregression. Hedges\' g was used as a measure of treatment effect size, to account for small sample effects and substantial differences between the included studies\' sample sizes. Study quality was appraised using Cochrane\'s Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the quality of the aggregated evidence was evaluated using GRADE guidelines.
    Randomised trials in which psilocybin was administered as a standalone treatment for adults with clinically significant symptoms of depression and change in symptoms was measured using a validated clinician rated or self-report scale. Studies with directive psychotherapy were included if the psychotherapeutic component was present in both experimental and control conditions. Participants with depression regardless of comorbidities (eg, cancer) were eligible.
    Meta-analysis on 436 participants (228 female participants), average age 36-60 years, from seven of the nine included studies showed a significant benefit of psilocybin (Hedges\' g=1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 2.73, P<0.001) on change in depression scores compared with comparator treatment. Subgroup analyses and metaregressions indicated that having secondary depression (Hedges\' g=3.25, 95% CI 0.97 to 5.53), being assessed with self-report depression scales such as the Beck depression inventory (3.25, 0.97 to 5.53), and older age and previous use of psychedelics (metaregression coefficient 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.24 and 4.2, 1.5 to 6.9, respectively) were correlated with greater improvements in symptoms. All studies had a low risk of bias, but the change from baseline metric was associated with high heterogeneity and a statistically significant risk of small study bias, resulting in a low certainty of evidence rating.
    Treatment effects of psilocybin were significantly larger among patients with secondary depression, when self-report scales were used to measure symptoms of depression, and when participants had previously used psychedelics. Further research is thus required to delineate the influence of expectancy effects, moderating factors, and treatment delivery on the efficacy of psilocybin as an antidepressant.
    PROSPERO CRD42023388065.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    近年来,随机疗法的复苏,使用非经典迷幻药(例如3,4-甲基二氧基甲基苯丙胺[MDMA])的安慰剂对照试验(RCT),和经典的迷幻药(例如psilocybin,麦角酰二乙胺[LSD],N,N-二甲基色胺[DMT/ayahuasca])与辅助治疗(AT)联合治疗精神疾病。迷幻AT中一个值得注意的方法论挑战,然而,是盲法程序的复杂性。缺乏有效的致盲可能会引入相当大的响应偏差,降低内部有效性,并妥协参与者的保留。本系统综述研究了使用迷幻药和安慰剂治疗精神疾病的RCT的设计和致盲技术。这项工作的目的是确定可能为进行迷幻药研究的未来RTC设计提供信息的因素。我们对PubMed进行了系统回顾,MEDLINE,CINAHL,Cochrane中央对照试验登记册(中央),Psycinfo,Embase,和WebofScience核心合集进行检查:(1)安慰剂选择,(2)研究设计,(3)盲法措施的完整性。16种出版物被确定为符合系统审查的标准。我们的发现表明,传统的安慰剂给药不足以控制预期混淆。因此,在设计涉及迷幻药的前瞻性临床研究时,限制人员脱盲和使用活性安慰剂的实验方法学是重要考虑因素.
    Recent years have seen a resurgence in randomized, placebo controlled trials (RCTs) utilizing non-classical psychedelics (e.g. 3,4-methyl enedioxy methamphetamine [MDMA]), and classical psychedelics (e.g. psilocybin, lysergic acid diethylamide [LSD], and N,N-dimethyltryptamine [DMT/ayahuasca]) in conjunction with assisted therapy (AT) for psychiatric disorders. A notable methodological challenge in psychedelic AT, however, is the complexity of blinding procedures. The lack of efficacious blinding can introduce considerable response bias, reduce internal validity, and compromise participant retention. This systematic review examines design and blinding techniques in RCTs utilizing psychedelics and placebo for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. The aim of this work is to identify factors that may inform future RTC design for conducting psychedelics research. We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Psycinfo, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection to examine: (1) placebo selection, (2) study design, and (3) integrity of blinding measures. Sixteen publications were identified as meeting the criteria for a systematic review. Our findings suggest that traditional placebo administration is insufficient to control for expectancy confounds. Consequently, experimental methodology that limits personnel unblinding and the use of an active placebo are important considerations when designing prospective clinical studies involving psychedelics.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    功能性癫痫发作(FS),最常见的功能性神经障碍(FND)亚型,导致严重的神经系统残疾并显著影响生活质量。以类似于癫痫发作的偶发性功能障碍为特征,FS与多种合并症同时发生,现有方法治疗效果不佳。非常需要新的治疗方法。值得注意的是,越来越多的证据支持迷幻辅助治疗(PAT)对几种精神疾病的安全性和有效性,促使研究这种疗效是否也扩展到神经系统疾病。这里,我们综合过去的实证研究结果和框架,为PAT治疗FS的潜力构建一个生物心理社会机制论证.在这样做的时候,我们强调FS是一个明确定义的队列,以进一步了解支持PAT的大规模神经机制.我们的综合是以复杂性科学观点为指导的,我们认为这可以提供对FS和PAT的独特机械见解,以及帮助桥接这两个领域。我们还利用这一观点提出了一种新的分析路线图,以识别FS诊断特异性和治疗成功的标志物。这项努力继续努力将临床神经病学与迷幻药物联系起来,并为迷幻神经病学的新领域铺平道路。
    Functional seizures (FS), the most common subtype of functional neurological disorder (FND), cause serious neurological disability and significantly impact quality of life. Characterized by episodic disturbances of functioning that resemble epileptic seizures, FS coincide with multiple comorbidities and are treated poorly by existing approaches. Novel treatment approaches are sorely needed. Notably, mounting evidence supports the safety and efficacy of psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT) for several psychiatric conditions, motivating investigations into whether this efficacy also extends to neurological disorders. Here, we synthesize past empirical findings and frameworks to construct a biopsychosocial mechanistic argument for the potential of PAT as a treatment for FS. In doing so, we highlight FS as a well-defined cohort to further understand the large-scale neural mechanisms underpinning PAT. Our synthesis is guided by a complexity science perspective which we contend can afford unique mechanistic insight into both FS and PAT, as well as help bridge these two domains. We also leverage this perspective to propose a novel analytic roadmap to identify markers of FS diagnostic specificity and treatment success. This endeavor continues the effort to bridge clinical neurology with psychedelic medicine and helps pave the way for a new field of psychedelic neurology.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    证据表明,MDMA辅助心理治疗(MDMA-AP)具有治疗精神疾病的潜力。我们对不同适应症的MDMA-AP的副作用进行了首次全面的系统评价和荟萃分析。我们还评估了已发表的MDMA-AP试验中副作用报告的质量。PubMed,EMBASE,PsycINFO,系统地搜索了MEDLINE和Cochrane对照试验中央登记册(CENTRAL)。包括2期和3期MDMA-AP研究;1期研究,在没有心理治疗的情况下评估MDMA,不是。根据CONSORTHarms2022指南评估副作用报告的质量。我们还将出版物中报告的不良事件数量与ClinicalTrial.gov登记册中记录的不良事件数量进行了比较。包括13项研究,其中8位参与了荟萃分析。在第二阶段的研究中,相对于对照条件,MDMA-AP与用药期间(OR=1.67,95CI(1.12,2.49))和用药后7天(OR=1.59,95CI(1.12,2.24))出现任何副作用的几率增加相关。在第三阶段的研究中,与安慰剂辅助心理治疗相比,MDMA-AP与治疗期间发生任何不良事件的几率增加相关(OR=3.51,95CI(2.76,4.46))。大多数RCT被认为具有高偏倚风险。根据等级框架,证据的确定性被评为非常低至中等。没有纳入的RCT充分遵守CONSORTHarms2022建议,报告率也很低。与安慰剂相比,MDMA-AP与副作用的几率增加有关,主要是短暂的,严重程度为轻度或中度。然而,现有证据中已发现的局限性表明,需要进一步调查以更好地表征MDMA-AP的安全性并指导实施.
    Evidence suggests that MDMA-assisted psychotherapy (MDMA-AP) has therapeutic potential for treatment of psychiatric illness. We conducted the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the side effects of MDMA-AP across indications. We also assessed the quality of side effects-reporting in published trials of MDMA-AP. PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were systematically searched. Phase 2 and 3 MDMA-AP studies were included; Phase 1 studies, which assessed MDMA without psychotherapy, were not. Quality of side effects-reporting was assessed against the CONSORT Harms 2022 guidelines. We also compared numbers of adverse events reported in publications to those recorded in ClinicalTrial.gov registers. Thirteen studies were included, with eight contributing to the meta-analysis. In Phase 2 studies, MDMA-AP was associated with increased odds of any side effect during medication sessions (OR = 1.67, 95%CI (1.12, 2.49)) and in the 7 days following (OR = 1.59, 95%CI (1.12, 2.24)) relative to control conditions. In Phase 3 studies, MDMA-AP was associated with increased odds of any adverse event during the treatment period relative to placebo-assisted psychotherapy (OR = 3.51, 95%CI (2.76, 4.46)). The majority of RCTs were rated as having high risk of bias. Certainty of the evidence was rated as very low to moderate according to the GRADE framework. No included RCT had adequate adherence to the CONSORT Harms 2022 recommendations and reporting rates were also low. Compared to placebo, MDMA-AP was associated with increased odds of side effects, which were largely transient and mild or moderate in severity. However, identified limitations in existing evidence indicate that further investigation is needed to better characterize the safety profile of MDMA-AP and guide implementation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    由迷幻物质辅助的心理治疗在精神疾病的治疗中显示出有希望的结果。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是评估人类受试者的安全性数据。我们在MEDLINE上进行了搜索,2000年至2022年之间的Embase和PsycINFO数据库。迷幻药给药后,计算了不同剂量范围之间以及急性期和亚急性期之间的标准化平均差异,以获取心血管数据。计算严重不良事件和常见副作用的风险差异。这项荟萃分析包括30项研究。超过1000次迷幻药给药只有9次严重不良事件(急性期1次,急性期8次)。在急性期没有自杀未遂,3名参与者在急性期后进行了自我伤害。心率升高的风险增加,所有剂量范围类别的收缩压和舒张压,以及在急性期恶心的风险增加。其他常见的副作用包括头痛,焦虑,注意力或食欲下降。这项荟萃分析表明,迷幻药耐受性良好,在具有适当纳入标准的受控环境中,出现严重不良事件的风险较低。
    Psychotherapies assisted by psychedelic substances have shown promising results in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate safety data in human subjects. We carried out a search on MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO databases between 2000 and 2022. Standardized mean differences between different dose ranges and between acute and subacute phases were calculated for cardiovascular data after psychedelic administration. Risk differences were calculated for serious adverse events and common side effects. Thirty studies were included in this meta-analysis. There were only nine serious adverse events for over 1000 administrations of psychedelic substances (one during the acute phase and 8 during the post-acute phase). There were no suicide attempts during the acute phase and 3 participants engaged in self-harm during the post-acute phase. There was an increased risk for elevated heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure for all dose range categories, as well as an increased risk of nausea during the acute phase. Other common side effects included headaches, anxiety, and decreased concentration or appetite. This meta-analysis demonstrates that psychedelics are well-tolerated, with a low risk of emerging serious adverse events in a controlled setting with appropriate inclusion criteria.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    我们旨在系统地回顾和荟萃分析迷幻药的有效性和安全性[psilocybin,ayahuasca(活性成分DMT),LSD和MDMA]治疗各种精神障碍的症状。WebofScience,Embase,EBSCO,截至2024年2月,PubMed进行了搜索,最终收录了126篇文章。结果表明,psilocybin有最多的文章治疗情绪障碍(N=28),其次是ayahuasca(N=7)和LSD(N=6)。总的来说,迷幻药对抑郁症和焦虑症等精神障碍有治疗作用。具体来说,psilocybin(Hedges\'g=-1.49,95%CI[-1.67,-1.30])在四种迷幻药中显示出最强的治疗效果,其次是ayahuasca(对冲=-1.34,95%CI[-1.86,-0.82]),MDMA(对冲=-0.83,95%CI[-1.33,-0.32]),和LSD(对冲=-0.65,95%CI[-1.03,-0.27])。少量证据也支持迷幻药改善烟草成瘾,饮食失调,睡眠障碍,边缘性人格障碍,强迫症,和身体畸形。迷幻药最常见的不良事件是头痛。近三分之一的文章报告说,没有参与者报告持续的不良反应。我们的分析表明,迷幻药可以减少负面情绪,并对其他精神障碍有潜在疗效,如物质使用障碍和创伤后应激障碍。
    We aim to systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness and safety of psychedelics [psilocybin, ayahuasca (active component DMT), LSD and MDMA] in treating symptoms of various mental disorders. Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and PubMed were searched up to February 2024 and 126 articles were finally included. Results showed that psilocybin has the largest number of articles on treating mood disorders (N = 28), followed by ayahuasca (N = 7) and LSD (N = 6). Overall, psychedelics have therapeutic effects on mental disorders such as depression and anxiety. Specifically, psilocybin (Hedges\' g = -1.49, 95% CI [-1.67, -1.30]) showed the strongest therapeutic effect among four psychedelics, followed by ayahuasca (Hedges\' g = -1.34, 95% CI [-1.86, -0.82]), MDMA (Hedges\' g = -0.83, 95% CI [-1.33, -0.32]), and LSD (Hedges\' g = -0.65, 95% CI [-1.03, -0.27]). A small amount of evidence also supports psychedelics improving tobacco addiction, eating disorders, sleep disorders, borderline personality disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and body dysmorphic disorder. The most common adverse event with psychedelics was headache. Nearly a third of the articles reported that no participants reported lasting adverse effects. Our analyses suggest that psychedelics reduce negative mood, and have potential efficacy in other mental disorders, such as substance-use disorders and PTSD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号