State of the art in treating cannabis dependence: what works, what does not, and what is needed

Fewer than 20% of treated individuals achieved long-term abstinence, but combination therapies starting with motivational interviewing and adding cognitive-behavioral skills showed the best results.

Danovitch, Itai et al.·The Psychiatric clinics of North America·2012·Moderate EvidenceReview
RTHC-00553ReviewModerate Evidence2012RETHINKTHC RESEARCH DATABASErethinkthc.com/research

Quick Facts

Study Type
Review
Evidence
Moderate Evidence
Sample
Not reported

What This Study Found

This comprehensive review painted a sobering but nuanced picture of cannabis dependence treatment. Long-term abstinence rates in clinical trials were below 20%, and most people who could benefit from treatment never received it.

The most effective approaches combined motivational enhancement therapy with cognitive-behavioral coping skills and contingency management (incentive-based programs). Among adolescents, engaging families and community stakeholders added substantial value.

A meta-analysis found that treatments for cannabis dependence actually had larger effect sizes than treatments for other substance use disorders, suggesting the treatments work, just not well enough. No pharmacological treatment had been firmly established, though several were under development.

The review highlighted that about 9% of cannabis users develop dependence, but given how many people use cannabis, the absolute number needing help exceeds treatment system capacity.

Key Numbers

Long-term abstinence: <20% in clinical trials. Cannabis dependence rate: ~9% of users. Treatment effect sizes for cannabis were larger than for other substance use disorders.

How They Did This

Comprehensive narrative review of psychosocial interventions, pharmacological treatments, and delivery innovations for cannabis dependence. Covered adolescent and adult populations, including those with co-occurring disorders.

Why This Research Matters

This review captured the gap between treatment demand and treatment efficacy for cannabis dependence. It identified the best available approaches while acknowledging their limitations, and pointed to innovations (phone/computer-based interventions, primary care integration) that could expand access.

The Bigger Picture

The finding that cannabis dependence treatments had comparatively large effect sizes was counterintuitive given the low abstinence rates. It suggested the problem was not that treatments are ineffective but that addiction is difficult to treat across all substances.

What This Study Doesn't Tell Us

Narrative review without systematic search methodology. Focused primarily on English-language literature. The 20% abstinence figure came from controlled trials, which may not represent real-world outcomes. Long-term follow-up data was limited.

Questions This Raises

  • ?Can digital and phone-based interventions meaningfully expand treatment access?
  • ?Would longer treatment duration improve outcomes?
  • ?How should treatment be adapted for the increasing potency of cannabis products?

Trust & Context

Key Stat:
Fewer than 20% achieved long-term abstinence in clinical trials
Evidence Grade:
Comprehensive narrative review drawing on multiple clinical trials and a meta-analysis. Provides good overview but is not itself a systematic review.
Study Age:
Published in 2012. Digital and app-based interventions for cannabis use have expanded significantly since.
Original Title:
State of the art treatments for cannabis dependence.
Published In:
The Psychiatric clinics of North America, 35(2), 309-26 (2012)
Database ID:
RTHC-00553

Evidence Hierarchy

Meta-Analysis / Systematic Review
Randomized Controlled Trial
Cohort / Case-Control
Cross-Sectional / ObservationalSnapshot without intervening
This study
Case Report / Animal Study

Summarizes existing research on a topic.

What do these levels mean? →

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best treatment for cannabis dependence?

Combination approaches worked best: starting with motivational interviewing (building desire to change), adding cognitive-behavioral skills (learning to handle triggers), and using incentives (rewards for abstinence). For adolescents, involving family improved outcomes.

Why are success rates so low?

A less-than-20% long-term abstinence rate is actually comparable to or better than treatment outcomes for many substance use disorders. Addiction involves lasting brain changes that make relapse common across all drugs. The treatments work, but addiction is fundamentally difficult to overcome.

Read More on RethinkTHC

Cite This Study

RTHC-00553·https://rethinkthc.com/research/RTHC-00553

APA

Danovitch, Itai; Gorelick, David A. (2012). State of the art treatments for cannabis dependence.. The Psychiatric clinics of North America, 35(2), 309-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psc.2012.03.003

MLA

Danovitch, Itai, et al. "State of the art treatments for cannabis dependence.." The Psychiatric clinics of North America, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psc.2012.03.003

RethinkTHC

RethinkTHC Research Database. "State of the art treatments for cannabis dependence." RTHC-00553. Retrieved from https://rethinkthc.com/research/danovitch-2012-state-of-the-art

Access the Original Study

Study data sourced from PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

This study breakdown was produced by the RethinkTHC research team. We analyze and report published research findings without making health recommendations. All interpretations are based solely on the published abstract and study data.