4.4 Review

Chemsex and Psychosis: A Systematic Review

Journal

BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Volume 12, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/bs12120516

Keywords

chemsex; slamsex; men who have sex with men; psychosis; mental health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This review analyzed the relationship between chemsex and psychosis development and found that this behavior is associated with an increased risk of psychosis. Multiple risk factors and a clear mediating role of drugs were identified. The review emphasizes the importance of considering motivations and psychosocial circumstances in the prevention and treatment of chemsex addiction.
Chemsex is presented as a major challenge in public health, with numerous physical and mental consequences. The general objective of this review was to analyze the relationship between the practice of chemsex and the development of psychosis. A mixed systematic review model was chosen. PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases were searched following a predetermined search strategy. The studies were selected, and their information was extracted following a systematic method. A total of 10 articles were included. Psychotic symptoms ranged from 6.7% to 37.2%, being one of the most frequent psychiatric diagnoses. Slamsex, polydrug use and smoked methamphetamine posed up to a 3-fold increased risk of psychosis within this practice. The risk factors found were foreign or ethnic minority status, location in large cities, stress and anxiety, trauma, loneliness, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), hepatitis, and previous psychotic history. In conclusion, chemsex is associated with psychosis development; we found numerous converging risk factors and a clear mediating role of drugs. It is important, in approaching the prevention and treatment of this addiction, to take into account motivations and psychosocial circumstances.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available