DOI 10.3390/healthcare13243210
Substance-Specific Treatment Responses and Resistance Patterns in Induced Psychoses: A Scoping Review of Antipsychotic Efficacy.
Аннотация
Objective
To scope the available literature on antipsychotic treatment in substance-induced psychotic disorders, summarize evidence across substance categories, and highlight priorities for future research.
Methods
This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library (January 1985-August 2025) identified studies examining antipsychotic treatment in cannabis-, stimulant-, and hallucinogen-induced psychoses. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data using a standardized form. Given marked heterogeneity, findings were synthesized descriptively.
Results
Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria: 3 randomized controlled trials (17.6%), 10 observational studies (58.8%), and 4 case series (23.5%). Most evidence involved cannabis-induced (n = 7) and methamphetamine-induced (n = 6) psychosis. Randomized trials showed comparable efficacy between risperidone and haloperidol for cannabis-induced psychosis, and between quetiapine and haloperidol for methamphetamine-induced psychosis. Case series suggested potential benefits of third-generation antipsychotics such as lurasidone and cariprazine. No controlled studies were identified for cocaine- or hallucinogen-induced psychoses.
Conclusions
Evidence for antipsychotic treatment in substance-induced psychoses remains scarce and uneven. While conventional antipsychotics appear effective for cannabis- and methamphetamine-related presentations, other substances remain virtually unstudied. Substantial evidence gaps and limited methodological quality highlight urgent research needs.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.