OBJECTIVE: Evidence suggests that abstinent opioid users have abnormal emotional response to natural reinforcing stimuli, but little is known about the emotional response of subjects currently using heroin. Abnormal emotional experience could underlie poor sensitivity to negative events related to heroin use and reduced ability to consider alternative reinforcers to help overcome addiction. In this paper, we will assess the subjective response of current and abstinent heroin users exposed to emotionally competent positive and negative stimuli. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We administered the "Clinical Instrument for Emotional Response Evaluation" (including neutral, pleasant, and unpleasant images from the International Affective Picture System) to 22 current opioid users enrolled in a clinical trial using controlled prescribed heroin and 41 abstinent opioid users enrolled in residential treatment. The dependent variable was their subjective response to the images measured with the Self-Assessment Manikin, a scale designed to rate the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) images in the three dimensions of emotion: valence, arousal, and dominance. We compared these ratings with IAPS normative values for healthy participants. RESULTS: Significant group x emotional condition interactions were found in the arousal dimension. Post-hoc tests showed that compared to healthy participants, both current and abstinent heroin users had greater emotional response to neutral images and lower response to pleasant images. Furthermore, current opioid users had higher emotional response to unpleasant images when compared to healthy participants and lower response to pleasant images when compared to abstinent users. CONCLUSIONS: Current opioid users have abnormal emotional experience, characterized by heightened response to unpleasant stimuli and blunted response to pleasant stimuli.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Evidence suggests that abstinent opioid users have abnormal emotional response to natural reinforcing stimuli, but little is known about the emotional response of subjects currently using heroin. Abnormal emotional experience could underlie poor sensitivity to negative events related to heroin use and reduced ability to consider alternative reinforcers to help overcome addiction. In this paper, we will assess the subjective response of current and abstinent heroin users exposed to emotionally competent positive and negative stimuli. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We administered the "Clinical Instrument for Emotional Response Evaluation" (including neutral, pleasant, and unpleasant images from the International Affective Picture System) to 22 current opioid users enrolled in a clinical trial using controlled prescribed heroin and 41 abstinent opioid users enrolled in residential treatment. The dependent variable was their subjective response to the images measured with the Self-Assessment Manikin, a scale designed to rate the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) images in the three dimensions of emotion: valence, arousal, and dominance. We compared these ratings with IAPS normative values for healthy participants. RESULTS: Significant group x emotional condition interactions were found in the arousal dimension. Post-hoc tests showed that compared to healthy participants, both current and abstinent heroin users had greater emotional response to neutral images and lower response to pleasant images. Furthermore, current opioid users had higher emotional response to unpleasant images when compared to healthy participants and lower response to pleasant images when compared to abstinent users. CONCLUSIONS: Current opioid users have abnormal emotional experience, characterized by heightened response to unpleasant stimuli and blunted response to pleasant stimuli.
Authors: Francisco Aguilar de Arcos; Antonio Verdejo-García; María Isabel Peralta-Ramírez; María Sánchez-Barrera; Miguel Pérez-García Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2004-12-29 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: H Garavan; J Pankiewicz; A Bloom; J K Cho; L Sperry; T J Ross; B J Salmeron; R Risinger; D Kelley; E A Stein Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: M R Daglish; A Weinstein; A L Malizia; S Wilson; J K Melichar; S Britten; C Brewer; A Lingford-Hughes; J S Myles; P Grasby; D J Nutt Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: C Martin-Soelch; A F Chevalley; G Künig; J Missimer; S Magyar; A Mino; W Schultz; K L Leenders Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 3.386
Authors: D V Sheehan; Y Lecrubier; K H Sheehan; P Amorim; J Janavs; E Weiller; T Hergueta; R Baker; G C Dunbar Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 1998 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: María José Fernández-Serrano; Laura Moreno-López; Miguel Pérez-García; María I Viedma-Del Jesús; María B Sánchez-Barrera; Antonio Verdejo-García Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2011-04-12 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Lorenzo Somaini; Matteo Manfredini; Mario Amore; Amir Zaimovic; Maria Augusta Raggi; Claudio Leonardi; Maria Lidia Gerra; Claudia Donnini; Gilberto Gerra Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2011-07-20 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: Scott J Moeller; Greg Hajcak; Muhammad A Parvaz; Jonathan P Dunning; Nora D Volkow; Rita Z Goldstein Journal: Brain Date: 2012-11-12 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Francesco Versace; Cho Y Lam; Jeffrey M Engelmann; Jason D Robinson; Jennifer A Minnix; Victoria L Brown; Paul M Cinciripini Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2011-10-04 Impact factor: 4.280