DSM-5 substance use disorder: how conceptual missteps weakened the foundations of the addictive disorders field

2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (5) ◽  
pp. 327-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. C. Wakefield
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-204
Author(s):  
Juliette Salles ◽  
Nathalie Mariaux ◽  
Nicolas Franchitto ◽  
Sandrine Sourdet ◽  
Christophe Arbus

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
D. Shmulewitz ◽  
M. Stohl ◽  
E. Greenstein ◽  
S. Roncone ◽  
C. Walsh ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although the DSM-5 was adopted in 2013, the validity of the new substance use disorder (SUD) diagnosis and craving criterion has not been investigated systematically across substances. Methods Adults (N = 588) who engaged in binge drinking or illicit drug use and endorsed at least one DSM-5 SUD criterion were included. DSM-5 SUD criteria were assessed for alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, and opioids. Craving was considered positive if “wanted to use so badly that could not think of anything else” (severe craving) or “felt a very strong desire or urge to use” (moderate craving) was endorsed. Baseline information on substance-related variables and psychopathology was collected, and electronic daily assessment queried substance use for the following 90 days. For each substance, logistic regression estimated the association between craving and validators, i.e. variables expected to be related to craving/SUD, and whether association with the validators differed for DSM-5 SUD diagnosed with craving as a criterion v. without. Results Across substances, craving was associated with most baseline validators (p values<0.05); neither moderate nor severe craving consistently showed greater associations. Baseline craving predicted subsequent use [odds ratios (OR): 4.2 (alcohol) – 234.3 (heroin); p's ⩽ 0.0001], with stronger associations for moderate than severe craving (p's < 0.05). Baseline DSM-5 SUD showed stronger associations with subsequent use when diagnosed with craving than without (p's < 0.05). Conclusion The DSM-5 craving criterion as operationalized in this study is valid. Including craving improves the validity of DSM-5 SUD diagnoses, and clinical relevance, since craving may cause impaired control over use and development and maintenance of SUD.


Author(s):  
Myrna M. Weissman ◽  
John C. Markowitz ◽  
Gerald L. Klerman

This chapter includes an overview of the use of IPT for patients with substance abuse (e.g., alcohol, opiates, cocaine, and nicotine) and addictive disorders. The available data do not allow us to recommend IPT as a treatment for patients with a substance use disorder. There have been several negative IPT trials in this population, and in this setting IPT has been found to be no better than a control condition. However, some small studies in process are more optimistic for its use in narrowly defined samples. Based on the published literature, approaches other than IPT that focus on sobriety or relapse prevention may be preferable for patients with substance use disorders. IPT has never been intended as a treatment for all patients with all conditions, and substance abuse may be an area where its application has limited utility.


2020 ◽  
Vol 212 ◽  
pp. 108036
Author(s):  
Charlotte Kervran ◽  
Dvora Shmulewitz ◽  
Fuschia Serre ◽  
Malki Stohl ◽  
Cécile Denis ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 278-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain D. Smith

SummaryThe expansion of the concept of addiction to include non-chemical dependency, and the proposed reclassification of substance-related disorders in DSM-5 under ‘substance use and addictive disorders' are developments that require cautious appraisal.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document