The association between cannabis abuse and dependence and childhood physical and sexual abuse: evidence from an offspring of twins design
The association between cannabis abuse and dependence and childhood physical and sexual abuse: evidence from an offspring of twins design
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02210.x
复制
发表时间：
2008-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
Bucholz, Kathleen Keenan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Duncan, Alexis E.;Sartor, Carolyn E.;Bucholz, Kathleen Keenan
目的本研究探讨儿童期身体虐待（CPA）和性虐待（CSA）与青少年和年轻人大麻滥用和依赖的发展之间的关联，同时控制遗传和环境风险因素。为了控制与父亲药物依赖相关的家族风险差异，可能混淆CSA和CPA与大麻滥用/依赖之间的关系，我们根据父亲和叔叔的物质使用依赖（SUD）状态创建了四个组，反映了后代不同程度的遗传和环境风险：（i）高遗传，高环境风险;（ii）高遗传，低环境风险;（iii）高遗传，低环境风险。（iii）中等遗传、低环境风险;及（iv）低遗传、低环境风险。研究对象：美国退伍军人双胞胎父亲的同卵和异卵的青少年和年轻成年后代（n = 819）。通过半结构化电话访谈收集CPA和CSA、DSM-IV后代大麻滥用/依赖、其他SUD和精神病理学以及母亲和父亲SUD和精神病理学的数据。结果-百分之二十三的后代样本满足大麻滥用/依赖的终身标准和8.55%和12.82%的CSA和CPA，分别报告。在控制遗传和家族环境风险以及后代性别、酒精滥用和依赖以及品行障碍后，暴露于CSA但不暴露于CPA的后代与未经历CSA的后代相比，发展大麻滥用/依赖的风险显著更大（风险比= 2.16; 95%置信区间= 1.48-3.16）。结论这些结果表明，除了遗传和家庭环境的风险，有一个药物依赖的父亲，CSA对大麻滥用/依赖的发展有影响。
Aim This study examines the association between childhood physical abuse (CPA) and sexual abuse (CSA) and the development of cannabis abuse and dependence among adolescents and young adults while controlling for genetic and environmental risk factors. Design To control for familial risk differences related to paternal drug dependence that might confound the relationship between CSA and CPA and cannabis abuse/dependence, we created four groups based on father's and uncle's substance use dependence (SUD) status reflecting different degrees of genetic and environmental risks to offspring: (i) high genetic, high environmental risk; (ii) high genetic, low environmental risk; (iii) medium genetic, low environmental risk; and (iv) low genetic, low environmental risk. Participants Adolescent and young adult offspring of monozygotic and dizygotic US military veteran twin fathers (n = 819). Measurements Data on CPA and CSA, DSM-IV offspring cannabis abuse/dependence, other SUD and psychopathology and maternal and paternal SUD and psychopathology were collected via semi-structured telephone interview. Findings Twenty-three per cent of the offspring sample met life-time criteria for cannabis abuse/dependence and 8.55% and 12.82% reported CSA and CPA, respectively. Offspring exposed to CSA, but not CPA, were at significantly greater risk of developing cannabis abuse/dependence compared to those who had not experienced CSA (hazard ratio = 2.16; 95% confidence interval = 1.48-3.16) after controlling for genetic and familial environmental risk and offspring gender, alcohol abuse and dependence and conduct disorder. Conclusions These results indicate that there are effects of CSA on development of cannabis abuse/dependence in addition to the genetic and familial environmental risk imparted by having a drug-dependent father.