Mindfulness-based interventions for substance use disorders

Transformative Effects of Mindfulness Meditation Training on the Dynamic Reconfiguration of Executive and Default Mode Networks in Internet Gaming Disorder

Background

Internet gaming disorder (IGD) is a pervasive global mental health issue, and finding effective treatments for the disorder has been challenging. Mindfulness meditation (MM), recognized for its holistic approach that involves integrating mental and physical facets, holds promise for addressing the multifaceted nature of addiction. Nevertheless, the effect of MM on IGD and its associated neural networks, particularly in terms of their dynamic characteristics, remains elusive.

Methods

A total of 61 eligible participants with IGD (30 in the MM group, 31 in the progressive muscle relaxation [PMR] group) completed the experimental protocol, which involved pretest, an 8-session MM/PMR training regimen, and posttests. The 142 brain regions of interest were categorized into 5 brain networks using dynamic network reconfiguration analysis based on Shen's functional template. A comparative analysis of network dynamic features, including recruitment and integration coefficients, was performed across different groups and tests using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging data.

Results

While clinically nonspecific effects were observed in the PMR group, the MM group exhibited a significant reduction in addiction severity and cravings. In the dynamic brain network, MM training increased the recruitment coefficient within the frontoparietal network (FPN) and basal ganglia network (BGN) but decreased it within the default mode network (DMN). Furthermore, MM training increased the integration coefficient in the FPN-DMN and DMN-limbic network (LN).

Conclusions

MM has demonstrated pronounced efficacy in treating IGD. MM may enhance top-down control functions, cognitive and emotional functions, and reward-system processing, potentially through the reconfiguration of the FPN-DMN pathway, DMN-LN pathway, and BGN.

The Mediating Role of Mindfulness Between Impulsive Sensation Seeking and Readiness for Change Among Clients With Substance Use Disorders

OBJECTIVE

Examine the mediating role of mindfulness between impulsive sensation seeking and readiness for change.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional descriptive correlational study was conducted.

METHODS

A convenient sample of 200 clients with substance use disorders was recruited. Data were collected using the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, the Impulsive Sensation Seeking scale, and the Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale.

RESULTS

A significant positive correlation was found between mindfulness and readiness for change (r = 0.174, p = 0.014), and a significant negative correlation between readiness for change and impulsive sensation seeking (r = -0.219, p = 0.002). Impulsivity (mean percent score = 80.25%) and sensation-seeking traits (mean percent score = 78.73%) negatively impacted readiness for change. Mindfulness partially mediated the relationship between impulsive sensation seeking and readiness for change (indirect effect = -0.056, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Mindfulness-based interventions show potential to enhance readiness for change by mitigating impulsivity. Addressing the interplay between impulsive sensation seeking, mindfulness, and readiness for change may promote recovery in clients with substance use disorders. While sustained recovery was not longitudinally assessed, findings suggest pathways for future investigation.

NURSING IMPLICATIONS

Psychiatric nurses must incorporate mindfulness interventions, regular assessments of impulsivity, and tailored care plans in their care for clients with substance use disorders. Educating patients on mindfulness benefits and providing continuous support through the change process might improve substance use disorders treatment outcomes. By integrating these strategies, psychiatric nurses can significantly enhance the effectiveness of substance use disorders treatments.

Combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a mental disorder characterised by a strong desire to consume alcohol and impaired control of alcohol use, with devastating consequences. Many people with AUD do not respond to psychosocial or pharmacological interventions when these are provided alone. Combining these interventions may improve the response to treatment, though evidence remains limited.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for the treatment of AUD in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in November 2023, without language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions versus pharmacological or psychosocial interventions alone, or no intervention/treatment as usual (TAU), in adults with AUD. Our primary outcomes were continuous abstinent participants, frequency of use (measured as heavy drinkers, percentages of abstinent days, heavy-drinking days), amount of use (number of drinks per drinking day), adverse events, serious adverse events, dropouts from treatment, and dropouts due to adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's RoB 1 tool, performed random-effects meta-analyses, and evaluated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 RCTs (4746 participants). The most studied pharmacological and psychosocial interventions were naltrexone (81.0%) and cognitive behavioural therapy (66.7%), respectively. Most participants were men (74%), aged about 44 years, with AUD, without comorbid mental disorders or other substance use disorders; 15 RCTs detoxified participants before treatment. We judged 28.5% of the studies as at low risk of bias for random sequence generation, allocation concealment, performance bias for objective and subjective outcomes, and detection bias for subjective outcomes; all studies were at low risk of detection bias for objective outcomes; 85.7% of studies were at low risk of attrition bias; 14.2% of studies were at low risk of reporting bias. 1) Compared to psychosocial intervention alone, combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions probably reduce the number of heavy drinkers (above the clinically meaningful threshold (MID) of 2%; absolute difference (AD) -10%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -18% to -2%; risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.97; 8 studies, 1609 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). They may increase continuous abstinent participants (MID 5%; AD 5%, 95% CI 1% to 11%; RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.34; 6 studies, 1184 participants; low-certainty evidence). They probably have little to no effect on: • the rate of abstinent days (MID 8%; mean difference (MD) 4.16, 95% CI 1.24 to 7.08; 10 studies, 2227 participants); • serious adverse events (MID 1%; AD -2%, 95% CI -3% to 0%; RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.12; 4 studies; 524 participants); • dropouts from treatment (MID 10%; AD -3%, 95% CI -5% to 0%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.01; 15 studies, 3021 participants); and • dropouts due to adverse events (MID 5%; AD 2%, 95% CI 0% to 5%; RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.52; 8 studies, 1572 participants) (all moderate-certainty evidence). They may have little to no effect on: • heavy-drinking days (MID 5%; MD -3.49, 95% CI -8.68 to 1.70; 4 studies, 470 participants); • number of drinks per drinking day (MID 1 drink; MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.16 to 0.01; 7 studies, 805 participants); and • adverse events (MID 30%; AD 17%, 95% CI -5% to 46%; RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.68; 4 studies, 508 participants) (all low-certainty evidence). 2) Compared to pharmacological intervention alone, combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions may have little to no effect on: • the rate of abstinent days (MID 8%; MD -1.18, 95% CI -4.42 to 2.07; 2 studies, 1158 participants); and • dropouts from treatment (MID 10%; AD 1%, 95% CI -10 to 14%; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.47; 3 studies, 1246 participants) (all low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about their effect on: • continuous abstinent participants (MID 5%; AD 3%, 95% CI -5% to 18%; RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.40; 1 study, 241 participants); • the number of heavy drinkers (MID 2%; AD 2%, 95% CI -4% to 8%; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.12; 1 study, 917 participants); • the number of drinks per drinking day (MID 1 drink; MD -2.40, 95% CI -3.98 to -0.82; 1 study, 241 participants); and • dropouts due to adverse events (MID 5%; AD -1%, 95% CI -3% to 6%; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.72; 2 studies, 1165 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). 3) We are uncertain about the effect of combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions, when compared to TAU, on: • the number of heavy drinkers (MID 2%; AD -5%, 95% CI -13% to 2%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.03; 1 study, 616 participants); • the rate of abstinent days (MID 8%; MD 3.43, 95% CI -1.32 to 8.18; 1 study, 616 participants); • dropouts from treatment (MID 10%; AD 0%, 95% CI -10% to 15%; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.65; 2 studies, 696 participants); and • dropouts due to adverse events (MID 5%; AD 3%, 95% CI 0% to 15%; RR 2.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 12.67; 1 study, 616 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). The certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low, downgraded mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As implications for practice, our findings indicate that adding pharmacological to psychosocial interventions is safe and helps people with AUD recover. These conclusions are based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence. Given the few studies and very low-certainty evidence, any benefits of adding psychosocial to pharmacological interventions or comparing the combined intervention to TAU are less clear. As implications for research, further studies should investigate the effects of the combined intervention compared to pharmacotherapy or TAU.

Mind it! A mindfulness-based group psychotherapy for substance use disorders in adolescent inpatients

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is the most frequent reason for psychiatric inpatient substance use disorder (SUD) treatment among 15-19-year-olds in Germany. Despite effective treatment programs, relapse rates remain high. Thus, existing multi-component programs (TAU) need to be enhanced with SUD-specific elements. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) seem promising as they can positively influence SUD-related behaviors (e. g. craving). Given limited research in adolescents, this randomized controlled trial investigated the extent to which MBI-based group therapy (Mind it!) as an add-on treatment to TAU led to fewer cannabis use days after 6 months in 84 adolescent inpatients with CUD. Additionally, craving, severity of CUD, and changes in mindfulness were monitored (pre-, post-, and follow-up (FU) assessments). The results revealed a significant reduction in cannabis use days in both groups at 6-month FU (d = - 0.72 and = - 0.75). Although minor additional benefits of Mind it! were evident post-treatment, specifically reduction of craving and SUD severity, by the 6-month mark, TAU exhibited a more substantial decrease in SUD severity (d = 0.78), and reward craving (d = 0.28) compared to Mind it!. Regarding self-regulation skills (mindfulness), Mind it! demonstrated superiority over TAU after 6-month FU (d = 0.27). Therapists judged the MBI as feasible. (Serious) adverse events were unrelated to Mind it!. There was a systematic dropout among Mind it! participants. Primarily, the results emphasize the effectiveness of TAU in reducing cannabis use. MBI also seem feasible for youth, but results remain inconsistent and unstable over time. Importantly, enhanced adherence to reduce dropouts is needed.Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00014041. Registered on 17 April 2018.

Virtual reality-based Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE-VR) as an adjunct to medications for opioid use disorder: a Phase 1 trial

INTRODUCTION

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the most effective interventions for this condition, yet many patients discontinue treatment. Though adjunct psychosocial treatments are recommended to increase retention and reduce relapse, the scarcity of trained providers hinders access to and utilization of evidence-based interventions. We conducted a Phase 1 study to assess the feasibility of a virtual reality-delivered Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE-VR) intervention for patients receiving MOUD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients receiving buprenorphine or methadone for OUD (N = 34) were scheduled for 8 weekly sessions of MORE-VR. Enrollment and retention rates were analyzed. Participants reported on the usability and acceptability of MORE-VR, opioid use, and craving and affect before and after each VR session. Heart rate was monitored during one session of MORE-VR.

RESULTS

Twenty-three participants completed four or more MORE-VR sessions (minimum recommended intervention dose). Participants reported high usability and acceptability of MORE-VR, which had an excellent safety profile. Illicit opioid use decreased significantly from pre- to post-treatment (F = 4.44, p=.04). We observed a significant within-session decrease in opioid craving (F = 39.3, p<.001) and negative affect (F = 36.3, p<.001), and a significant within-session increase in positive affect (F = 23.6, p<.001). Heart rate shifted during cue-exposure and mindfulness practices (F = 6.79, p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

High retention, usability and acceptability rates and low adverse events demonstrated that MORE-VR is a feasible, engaging, and safe intervention. Our findings show that MORE-VR can be delivered as an adjunctive intervention to MOUD and suggest that MORE-VR may improve OUD treatment outcomes and modulate autonomic responses. MORE-VR's efficacy will be tested in a subsequent Phase 2 trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05034276; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05034276.

The Nexus of Aging and Substance Use: A Scoping Review of Therapeutic Modalities for Geriatric Substance Use Disorders

The insidious grip of substance use disorders (SUDs) manifests as a ubiquitous public health crisis, indiscriminately affecting individuals across the spectrum of age, gender, and socioeconomic status. While advancements in treatment offer a glimmer of hope, millions continue to grapple with the debilitating physical, psychological, and social consequences of addiction, particularly those involving alcohol and opioids. This crisis is further exacerbated by the alarming rise of SUDs among older adults. As the global population undergoes a process of demographic senescence, the escalating prevalence of SUDs in this demographic underscores the urgent need for nuanced interventions. This review explores the therapeutic landscape for managing SUDs in older adults, evaluating pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment modalities. A detailed literature search was conducted using databases like PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus, and studies were selected based on their relevance to therapeutic interventions for older adults with SUDs, encompassing pharmacological and non-pharmacological modalities. The synthesized results provide an extensive overview of contemporary therapeutic approaches. The findings indicate that pharmacological interventions demonstrate varied effectiveness in managing opioid and alcohol use disorders, with each drug offering distinct benefits and limitations regarding safety, tolerability, and patient adherence. Non-pharmacological interventions provide critical psychological and social support, often requiring adaptations to meet elderly patients' needs effectively. Integrated care models, which combine pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments, emerge as the most effective approach, addressing the comprehensive needs of elderly patients by leveraging multidisciplinary teams, centralized service access, and coordinated, patient-centered care. Implementing these models, however, requires overcoming significant resource and coordination challenges. Indeed, the confluence of a burgeoning geriatric population and escalating rates of SUDs necessitates the development and implementation of granular and integrated care protocols specifically designed for older adults. By employing such a targeted approach, optimism can be cultivated and the quality of life enhanced for this vulnerable and often overlooked segment of society. This ensures the fight against addiction extends its reach, leaving no one behind.

A bibliometrics review of the journal mindfulness: science mapping the literature from 2012 to 2022

This study conducts a bibliometric analysis using the Web of Science database on 1,950 articles published in the journal Mindfulness from 2012 to 2022. By constructing a knowledge graph, the research delineates the evolution, stages of development, and emerging trends in the field of mindfulness. Significant growth in the annual publication volume has been observed since 2012, with the research progression segmented into three distinct phases. The United States has emerged as a pivotal contributor to the field, dominating in terms of publication volume, researcher involvement, and institutional contributions. Through the application of keyword co-occurrence and reference co-citation analysis, five principal clusters were identified, focusing on mindfulness, meditation, depression, stress, and self-compassion, underscoring these as focal research areas. Furthermore, the exploration of mindfulness within the educational sphere in Taiwan is still nascent, signaling a critical need for bolstered research support in diverse thematic domains.

Psychosocial factors associated with overdose subsequent to Illicit Drug use: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Psychological and social status, and environmental context, may mediate the likelihood of experiencing overdose subsequent to illicit drug use. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesise psychosocial factors associated with overdose among people who use drugs.

METHODS

This review was registered on Prospero (CRD42021242495). Systematic record searches were undertaken in databases of peer-reviewed literature (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cinahl) and grey literature sources (Google Scholar) for work published up to and including 14 February 2023. Reference lists of selected full-text papers were searched for additional records. Studies were eligible if they included people who use drugs with a focus on relationships between psychosocial factors and overdose subsequent to illicit drug use. Results were tabulated and narratively synthesised.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included in the review, with 150,625 participants: of those 3,383-4072 (3%) experienced overdose. Twenty-one (81%) studies were conducted in North America and 23 (89%) reported polydrug use. Psychosocial factors associated with risk of overdose (n = 103) were identified and thematically organised into ten groups. These were: income; housing instability; incarceration; traumatic experiences; overdose risk perception and past experience; healthcare experiences; perception of own drug use and injecting skills; injecting setting; conditions with physical environment; and social network traits.

CONCLUSIONS

Global rates of overdose continue to increase, and many guidelines recommend psychosocial interventions for dependent drug use. The factors identified here provide useful targets for practitioners to focus on at the individual level, but many identified will require wider policy changes to affect positive change. Future research should seek to develop and trial interventions targeting factors identified, whilst advocacy for key policy reforms to reduce harm must continue.

Evaluation of the multimodal DELTA therapy for adolescents with substance use disorders: an exploratory pilot trial

Background

In order to address the lack of manualized treatment programs for adolescents with substance use disorders (SUDs), we developed a manualized group intervention (DELTA). DELTA focusses on substance use reduction and abstinence as well as alleviation of SUD symptoms via additional modules for co-occurring disorders. The goal of this exploratory trial was to assess if DELTA can be conducted in adolescent SUD patients and if participation is related to reductions in substance use, SUD-related problems, and further psychopathologies.

Method

We recruited adolescents at a psychiatric outpatient unit, which were then allocated to either DELTA intervention group (N = 85) or to a waiting-list control group (WL, N = 61) based on parental decision to start a therapy or not. Self-report measures were used as primary outcomes (substance use via interview, use-related problems via DUDIT-Drug Use Disorder Identification Test) and secondary outcomes (psychopathologies via YSR-Youth Self Report). T-tests and Pearson correlations were used to analyze between-group differences across time.

Results

On average, participants attended M = 7.7 (SD = 5.1) of the 16 sessions. Substance use and use-related problems regarding all substances but nicotine was decreased after the intervention, with small to medium not significant effects in favor of DELTA. Self-reported psychopathologies were also reduced at follow-up, with non-significant advantages for DELTA.

Conclusion

DELTA showed small effects on SUD-related and depression-related variables. However, the interpretation is limited by the small sample size. Nonetheless, the DELTA intervention is viable in SUD outpatient treatment and will be further evaluated.Clinical trial registration: The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov under NCT03444974. Registered February, 26th 2018 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03444974).

Mindfulness interventions for craving reduction in substance use disorders and behavioral addictions: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

High-quality evidence is still required to affirm the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) in craving reduction. MBIs may be particularly appropriate for this purpose given the neurobiological mechanisms of addiction with automatic behavior in response to the negative affect. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to study the efficacy of MBIs in craving reduction and to synthetize the newly published data.

METHODS

We searched four databases and three clinical trial registries for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to August 2023, including studies with MBIs in all types of substance use disorders or behavioral addictions. We chose as our outcome of interest the change from the baseline of craving measures at posttreatment. Standardized mean difference was used as an effect size estimator.

RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs with 1228 participants. The overall effect size was estimated at -0.70 (95% CI -1.15, -0.26) in favor of MBIs.

CONCLUSION

Due to the high inconsistency (I2 = 92%), we were unable to conclude that there is a medium to large effect size. Overall risk of bias was high for most studies, and the GRADE approach detected a low quality of evidence. Previous clinical and fundamental research suggest that MBIs have a promising potential in addiction medicine. However, further investigation of whether MBIs effectively reduce craving is needed, and innovative solutions for resolving methodological limitations in MBI research are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration ID CRD42020221141.

Is Mindfulness Associated With Safer Cannabis Use? A Latent Profile Analysis of Dispositional Mindfulness Among College Students Who Use Cannabis

Objectives

Previous research cites mindfulness as a protective factor against risky substance use, but the specific association between dispositional mindfulness (DM) and cannabis use has been inconsistent. Despite known heterogeneity of DM facets across college students, much of the prior research in this area has relied on variable-centered approaches. Only a handful of prior studies within the cannabis literature have utilized person-centered approaches, and only one has specifically examined unique profiles of dispositional mindfulness in relation to patterns of use among college students.

Method

The present study used latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify subtypes of DM and their relationships with cannabis use behaviors (i.e., hazardous use and consequences of use) in a sample of 683 U.S. college students who endorsed past-month cannabis use and participated in an online survey of substance use behaviors, hypothesizing that a three-profile model would be replicated. We also examined whether age and prior experience with mindfulness predicted DM profile membership (hypothesizing that these variables would differentially predict membership) and explored mean differences in alcohol use across profiles.

Results

LPA results revealed three discrete profiles of DM: non-judgmentally aware, judgmentally observing, and moderate traits. Participants in the non-judgmentally aware profile were less likely to have prior mindfulness experience than the other profiles, but age did not predict profile membership. Judgmentally observing had more hazardous cannabis use and consequences than the other profiles, and no mean differences emerged on alcohol use.

Conclusions

These results build upon the only known study that investigated how DM relates to cannabis use. Further research is needed to elucidate this relationship, which can inform the application of mindfulness interventions for hazardous cannabis use in college students.

Pre-registration

This study was not pre-registered.

Combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for alcohol use disorder

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To assess the efficacy and safety of combined pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for the treatment of alcohol use disorder.

A common factors perspective on mindfulness-based interventions

Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have entered mainstream Western culture in the past four decades. There are now dozens of MBIs with varying degrees of empirical support and a variety of mindfulness-specific psychological mechanisms have been proposed to account for the beneficial effects of MBIs. Although it has long been acknowledged that non-specific or common factors might contribute to MBI efficacy, relatively little empirical work has directly investigated these aspects. In this Perspective, I suggest that situating MBIs within the broader psychotherapy research literature and emphasizing the commonalities rather than differences between MBIs and other treatments might help guide future MBI research. To that end, I summarize the evidence for MBI efficacy and several MBI-specific psychological mechanisms, contextualize MBI findings within the broader psychotherapy literature from a common factors perspective, and propose suggestions for future research based on innovations and challenges occurring within psychotherapy research.

Mindfulness-based psychological interventions for improving mental well-being in medical students and junior doctors

BACKGROUND

Mindfulness interventions are increasingly popular as an approach to improve mental well-being. To date, no Cochrane Review examines the effectiveness of mindfulness in medical students and junior doctors. Thus, questions remain regarding the efficacy of mindfulness interventions as a preventative mechanism in this population, which is at high risk for poor mental health.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychological interventions with a primary focus on mindfulness on the mental well-being and academic performance of medical students and junior doctors.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and five other databases (to October 2021) and conducted grey literature searches.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of mindfulness that involved medical students of any year level and junior doctors in postgraduate years one, two or three. We included any psychological intervention with a primary focus on teaching the fundamentals of mindfulness as a preventative intervention. Our primary outcomes were anxiety and depression, and our secondary outcomes included stress, burnout, academic performance, suicidal ideation and quality of life.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods as recommended by Cochrane, including Cochrane's risk of bias 2 tool (RoB2).  MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 studies involving 731 participants in quantitative analysis.  Compared with waiting-list control or no intervention, mindfulness interventions did not result in a substantial difference immediately post-intervention for anxiety (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.09, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.52; P = 0.67, I² = 57%; 4 studies, 255 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Converting the SMD back to the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale 21-item self-report questionnaire (DASS-21) showed an estimated effect size which is unlikely to be clinically important. Similarly, there was no substantial difference immediately post-intervention for depression (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.31; P = 0.62, I² = 0%; 4 studies, 250 participants; low-certainty evidence). Converting the SMD back to DASS-21 showed an estimated effect size which is unlikely to be clinically important. No studies reported longer-term assessment of the impact of mindfulness interventions on these outcomes.  For the secondary outcomes, the meta-analysis showed a small, substantial difference immediately post-intervention for stress, favouring the mindfulness intervention (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.13; P < 0.05, I² = 33%; 8 studies, 474 participants; low-certainty evidence); however, this difference is unlikely to be clinically important. The meta-analysis found no substantial difference immediately post-intervention for burnout (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.00; P = 0.05, I² = 0%; 3 studies, 91 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The meta-analysis found a small, substantial difference immediately post-intervention for academic performance (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.14; P < 0.05, I² = 0%; 2 studies, 79 participants; very low-certainty evidence); however, this difference is unlikely to be clinically important. Lastly, there was no substantial difference immediately post-intervention for quality of life (mean difference (MD) 0.02, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.32; 1 study, 167 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for three pre-specified outcomes of this review: deliberate self-harm, suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviour. We assessed the certainty of evidence to range from low to very low across all outcomes. Across most outcomes, we most frequently judged the risk of bias as having 'some concerns'. There were no studies with a low risk of bias across all domains.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of mindfulness in our target population remains unconfirmed. There have been relatively few studies of mindfulness interventions for junior doctors and medical students. The available studies are small, and we have some concerns about their risk of bias. Thus, there is not much evidence on which to draw conclusions on effects of mindfulness interventions in this population. There was no evidence to determine the effects of mindfulness in the long term.

Mindfulness-based interventions for substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly prevalent and associated with a substantial public health burden. Although evidence-based interventions exist for treating SUDs, many individuals remain symptomatic despite treatment, and relapse is common.Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have been examined for the treatment of SUDs, but available evidence is mixed.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of MBIs for SUDs in terms of substance use outcomes, craving and adverse events compared to standard care, further psychotherapeutic, psychosocial or pharmacological interventions, or instructions, waiting list and no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to April 2021: Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We searched two trial registries and checked the reference lists of included studies for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs testing a MBI versus no treatment or another treatment in individuals with SUDs. SUDs included alcohol and/or drug use disorders but excluded tobacco use disorders. MBIs were defined as interventions including training in mindfulness meditation with repeated meditation practice. Studies in which SUDs were formally diagnosed as well as those merely demonstrating elevated SUD risk were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty RCTs met our inclusion criteria, with 35 RCTs involving 2825 participants eligible for meta-analysis. All studies were at high risk of performance bias and most were at high risk of detection bias. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) versus no treatment Twenty-four RCTs included a comparison between MBI and no treatment. The evidence was uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to no treatment on all primary outcomes: continuous abstinence rate (post: risk ratio (RR) = 0.96, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.14, 1 RCT, 112 participants; follow-up: RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.01, 1 RCT, 112 participants); percentage of days with substance use (post-treatment: standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.05, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.47, 4 RCTs, 248 participants; follow-up: SMD = 0.21, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.54, 3 RCTs, 167 participants); and consumed amount (post-treatment: SMD = 0.10, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.52, 3 RCTs, 221 participants; follow-up: SMD = 0.33, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.66, 2 RCTs, 142 participants). Evidence was uncertain for craving intensity and serious adverse events. Analysis of treatment acceptability indicated MBIs result in little to no increase in study attrition relative to no treatment (RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, 21 RCTs, 1087 participants). Certainty of evidence for all other outcomes was very low due to imprecision, risk of bias, and/or inconsistency. Data were unavailable to evaluate adverse events. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) versus other treatments (standard of care, cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, support group, physical exercise, medication) Nineteen RCTs included a comparison between MBI and another treatment. The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to other treatments on continuous abstinence rate at post-treatment (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.44, 1 RCT, 286 participants) and follow-up (RR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.16, 1 RCT, 286 participants), and on consumed amount at post-treatment (SMD = -0.42, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.39, 1 RCT, 25 participants) due to imprecision and risk of bias. The evidence suggests that MBIs reduce percentage of days with substance use slightly relative to other treatments at post-treatment (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.03, 5 RCTs, 523 participants) and follow-up (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.17, 3 RCTs, 409 participants). The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to other treatments on craving intensity due to imprecision and inconsistency. Analysis of treatment acceptability indicated MBIs result in little to no increase in attrition relative to other treatments (RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.26, 14 RCTs, 1531 participants). Data were unavailable to evaluate adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with no treatment, the evidence is uncertain regarding the impact of MBIs on SUD-related outcomes. MBIs result in little to no higher attrition than no treatment. In comparison with other treatments, MBIs may slightly reduce days with substance use at post-treatment and follow-up (4 to 10 months). The evidence is uncertain regarding the impact of MBIs relative to other treatments on abstinence, consumed substance amount, or craving. MBIs result in little to no higher attrition than other treatments. Few studies reported adverse events.