Adolescent substance use is approximately 50%1. In 2018, 38% of high school seniors reported past-year cannabis use, with 5.8% reporting daily use1. Rates of vaping of cannabis are increasing annually, with the most recent data showing rates of 4.4% (8th grade), 12.4% (10th grade), and 13.1% (12th grade). In the past year, 12% of high school students reported the use of illicit drugs other than cannabis1. Vaping of nicotine has reversed previous declines in tobacco use, with 20% of high school seniors vaping nicotine in the past 30 days during 2018; increased from 10.9% from 20171.
Under-reporting of substance use is common and difficult to overcome with a biomarker that can demonstrate actual use2–4. Reporting of illegal use of a substance is even less likely to occur given potential negative consequences, and for almost all participants their use was illegal. Also, 8th and 10th grade youth are less likely to trust adult assurances that their responses are truly anonymous. Under-reporting issues are even greater for 12th grade participants since their participation is confidential, not anonymous to allow the investigators and track changes over time. Adolescents were less likely to report marijuana use and substance use in confidential versus anonymous surveys.5
Misunderstanding of the biological basis of substance use is still common. NIDA, despite its best efforts, continues to struggle against the fact that “Many people don’t understand why or how other people become addicted to drugs.”6. This attitude is in stark contrast to the understanding that addiction is a brain disease is now well-established, and many of the associated changes in the brain have been defined7–9. The fields of neuroscience/neuroimaging and psychotherapy identified brain mechanisms and circuits involved in behavior change from substance use therapies and sustained abstinence10–12.
Misunderstanding and bias against treatment harm interest in, demand for, payment of, and creation of addiction treatment. Alternatively reversing this problem can build a cascade of change. That is, increased interest can lead to demand, greater willingness of insurance providers to pay, and improved opportunity for addiction treatment. Or to utilize the above figures, with increased interest in treatment, the high rates of substance use and (downstream) lead to more availability and enthusiasm for substance use treatment.
Woefully few adolescents with substance use are receiving treatment and recovering. We estimate 1 in 20 adolescents with substance use get treatment and half of them relapse. The actual data reveal that few adolescents receive an actual diagnosis (4%)13, even fewer receive substance use treatment (0.7%)13. And relapse among treated adolescents is higher than the 40-60% rate seen in the adult population14,15. The disconnect between use → diagnosis → treatment → recovery calls out for a novel approach. The gap between substance use and recovery is especially worrisome because adolescent brains are still developing16, and all addictive substances9 negatively impact that development; successful early interventions could help avoid lifelong brain changes in adolescents with substance use problems.
Potential Value Of An Adjunctive Treatment
A strategy to efficiently solve this problem potentially starts at the end of the process – treatment. Our solution targets the few adolescents with substance use that are actually in treatment and have a diagnosed substance use disorder.
Our solution provides treatment providers and adolescents in substance use treatment with something novel – a fun and engaging VR experience to develop a newfound understanding of the brain and addiction, and useful skills to enhance their capability to recover from substance use. For adolescents, “fun and challenging” isn’t a bonus; it is an expectation and demand they learned to expect from video games17,18. And Adjunctive Virtual Reality Therapy (VRT) can engage, inform, offer skills practice, and prepare adolescents for substance use treatment and real-world challenges; translating the hard work of treatment into real-life changes to decrease relapse risk.
Although virtual reality has demonstrated a capability for cue reactivity for a variety of substances including alcohol24, cannabis25, cocaine26, methamphetamine27, and tobacco28 and to simulate cravings26,29–36, (especially for alcohol and tobacco), its potential is far beyond that limited use. Headset-based immersive virtual reality therapy (VRT) can prepare patients for treatment messages and interventions, reinforce treatment goals, and assist with practicing the corrective and alternative skills they will need to counter addiction in real-world contexts. VRT can provide a potent experience that enhances adolescent treatment enthusiasm and engagement in treatment; a well-established key to treatment success37,38.
How VR Brain Exploration Can Help
Our simulation is the first true 3D, inside-the-brain virtual experience39,40. An immersive VR experience takes the user inside a 3D model of the brain. Users can identify structures and pathways involved in the brain’s reward system, including unique brain regions, tracts, neurotransmitter activity, and labels of neuroanatomical elements.
Adolescents can navigate through the brain, identify brain structures and functions involved in addiction, control the impact of substances on the reward system, and actively enhance regions of the brain strengthened by treatment. In the process, they build a fundamental understanding of the neuroscience of addiction and the skills they will need in the real-world to protect their brain from addictive substances. Their health care provider will be able to tailor the experience based on their substance use and treatment so that it best enhances treatment in keeping with a prescribed digital therapeutic intervention.
In addition to obtaining and reinforcing addiction treatment skills, we anticipate the experience will enhance the adolescent’s assessment of treatment value. The perceived value should bolster their motivation to engage or remain in treatment—critical elements to avoiding relapse. The experience will also aim to enhance treatment and instill hope by showing that some aspects of addiction can be modified and that abstinence, repeated practice, use of will, and a circle of support also facilitate recovery. The experience will be designed to show that engaging in substance use treatment builds a brain that supports recovery.
Game-Based Skills Development
Health behavior skills-training simulations successfully impart health behavior change41–44. Simulations support positive emotions, engagement, social integration, and connectedness41–43. In sum, a simulation can provide an individualized, scalable, reproducible, comprehensive, and standardized experience offering visual reinforcement of messages about the harm of drug use and benefits of actions that support recovery and counteract addiction.
Simulations and games for learning (“serious games”) capitalize on the engaging and reinforcing nature of games and simulations and are gaining prominence due to a cultural shift toward visual, interactive, and entertainment-based learning45. They heighten enthusiasm46 and engagement, are effective teaching tools47, and increase motivation48.
A combination of self-determination theory49 and cognitive load theory50 support the planned use of exploration and simulation. These models provide theoretical underpinnings and guide our use of learner-controlled exploration, immersion, and reflection.
Learner Control and Self Determination49: Adolescents explore and navigate the simulation learning environment51 to identify factors and strategies relevant to them. For example, they may be more interested in neurological pathways related to regulating emotions, impulse control, or forming new habitual routines. Exploration puts the user in control and leads to increased learning and understanding52–55.
Cognitive Load Theory50 holds that cognitive challenges support efficient and rewarding task attainment, but too much difficulty feels overwhelming56–59. Immersion or heightened engagement adds value by enhancing interest, enthusiasm, and emotional involvement, and engaging both affective and cognitive processes60. High fidelity elements (accuracy, realism) are valuable if they raise the complexity of the experience sufficiently to yield engagement without overwhelming the learner. Adolescent transformation can occur during the simulation or via contemplation afterward, during a debriefing61. Reflection is encouraged during brief pauses to decrease cognitive load temporarily without disengagement and task switching62,63.
VR Brain Exploration Why It Works page also available as a downloadable PDF!
- Johnston L, Miech R, O’Malley P. Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use 1975-2018: Overview, key findings on adolescent drug use. Sponsored by NIDA; January 2019.
- Hormes JM, Gerhardstein KR, Griffin PT. Under-reporting of alcohol and substance use versus other psychiatric symptoms in individuals living with HIV. AIDS Care. 2012;24(4):420-423. doi:10.1080/09540121.2011.608795. PMCID: PMC3288469. PMID: 21942759.
- Dembo R, Robinson RB, Barrett K, et al. The Validity of Truant Youths’ Marijuana Use and Its Impact on Alcohol Use and Sexual Risk Taking. J Child Adolesc Subst Abuse. November 1, 2015;26(4):355-365. doi:10.1080/1067828X.2013.844089. PMCID: PMC4607153. PMID: 26478691.
- Althubaiti A. Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods. J Multidiscip Healthc. May 4, 2016;9:211-217. doi:10.2147/JMDH.S104807. PMCID: PMC4862344. PMID: 27217764.
- Brodey BB, McMullin D, Winters KC, Rosen CS, Downing DR, Koble JM. Adolescent substance use assessment in a primary care setting. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2007;33(3):447-454. doi:10.1080/00952990701315079. PMID: 17613972.
- Abuse NI on D. Addiction Science. July 29, 2015.
- Volkow ND, Koob GF, McLellan AT. Neurobiologic Advances from the Brain Disease Model of Addiction. New England Journal of Medicine. January 28, 2016;374(4):363-371. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1511480. PMID: 26816013.
- Uhl GR, Koob GF, Cable J. The neurobiology of addiction. Ann N Y Acad Sci. January 15, 2019. doi:10.1111/nyas.13989. PMID: 30644552.
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (US), Office of the Surgeon General (US). Facing Addiction in America: The Surgeon General’s Report on Alcohol, Drugs, and Health. Washington (DC): US Department of Health and Human Services; 2016. PMID: 28252892.
- Chung T, Noronha A, Carroll KM, et al. Brain mechanisms of Change in Addictions Treatment: Models, Methods, and Emerging Findings. Curr Addict Rep. September 2016;3(3):332-342. doi:10.1007/s40429-016-0113-z. PMCID: PMC5155705. PMID: 27990326.
- Feldstein Ewing SW, Chung T. Neuroimaging mechanisms of change in psychotherapy for addictive behaviors: emerging translational approaches that bridge biology and behavior. Psychol Addict Behav. June 2013;27(2):329-335. doi:10.1037/a0031491. PMCID: PMC3864922. PMID: 23815447.
- Cabrera EA, Wiers CE, Lindgren E, Miller G, Volkow ND, Wang G-J. Neuroimaging the Effectiveness of Substance Use Disorder Treatments. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol. 2016;11(3):408-433. doi:10.1007/s11481-016-9680-y. PMID: 27184387.
- SAMHSA, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, SAMHSA. Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results from the 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Rockville, MD: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.; September 2018.
- Andersson HW, Wenaas M, Nordfjærn T. Relapse after inpatient substance use treatment: A prospective cohort study among users of illicit substances. Addictive Behaviors. March 1, 2019;90:222-228. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.11.008.
- NIDA. Treatment and Recovery. NIDA Drugs, Brains, and Behavior: The Science of Addiction. July 2018.
- Winters KC, Arria A. Adolescent Brain Development and Drugs. Prev Res. 2011;18(2):21-24. PMCID: PMC3399589. PMID: 22822298.
- Entertainment Software Association. 2018 Sales, Demographic, and Usage Data: Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry. ESA. May 2018.
- Statista. U.S. average age of video gamers 2018 | Statistic. Statista. 2019.
- Kramer M, Harlan J. Parkland Shooting: Where Gun Control and School Safety Stand Today. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/13/us/parkland-shooting.html. Published February 15, 2019. Accessed March 19, 2019.
- Slater J. After Parkland shooting, teenagers rapidly reshaping gun debate in United States. The Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/teenagers-reshaping-gun-debate-in-united-states/article38104028/. Published February 23, 2018. Accessed March 19, 2019.
- Rennie G. Articulate US teenagers could finally force action on gun control. The Conversation. March 14, 2018.
- Valenti J. The guns debate is a culture war. And young people will win it | Jessica Valenti. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/27/gun-debate-culture-war-young-people-will-win. Published March 27, 2018. Accessed March 19, 2019.
- Skip Rizzo A, Lange B, Suma EA, Bolas M. Virtual Reality and Interactive Digital Game Technology: New Tools to Address Obesity and Diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. March 2011;5(2):256-264. PMCID: PMC3125914. PMID: 21527091.
- Bordnick PS, Traylor A, Copp HL, et al. Assessing reactivity to virtual reality alcohol based cues. Addict Behav. June 2008;33(6):743-756. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2007.12.010. PMID: 18282663.
- Bordnick PS, Copp HL, Traylor A, et al. Reactivity to cannabis cues in virtual reality environments. J Psychoactive Drugs. June 2009;41(2):105-112. doi:10.1080/02791072.2009.10399903. PMCID: PMC4104948. PMID: 19705672.
- Culbertson C, Nicolas S, Zaharovits I, et al. Methamphetamine craving induced in an online virtual reality environment. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior. October 2010;96(4):454-460. doi:10.1016/j.pbb.2010.07.005.
- Saladin ME, Brady KT, Graap K, Rothbaum BO. A preliminary report on the use of virtual reality technology to elicit craving and cue reactivity in cocaine dependent individuals. Addictive Behaviors. October 2006;31(10):1881-1894. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.01.004.
- Kaganoff E, Bordnick PS, Carter BL. Feasibility of Using Virtual Reality to Assess Nicotine Cue Reactivity During Treatment. Research on Social Work Practice. March 1, 2012;22(2):159-165. doi:10.1177/1049731511428617.
- Park C-B, Choi J-S, Park SM, et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of virtual cue exposure therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy for nicotine dependence. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. April 2014;17(4):262-267. doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0253. PMCID: PMC3976586. PMID: 24555521.
- Culbertson CS, Shulenberger S, De La Garza R, Newton TF, Brody AL. Virtual reality cue exposure therapy for the treatment of tobacco dependence. J Cyber Ther Rehabil. 2012;5(1):57-64. PMCID: PMC4204479. PMID: 25342999.
- Bordnick PS, Carter BL, Traylor AC. What Virtual Reality Research in Addictions Can Tell Us about the Future of Obesity Assessment and Treatment. J Diabetes Sci Technol. March 1, 2011;5(2):265-271. doi:10.1177/193229681100500210. PMID: 21527092.
- Gabriel C. Cue exposure cognitive behavior therapy in relapse and craving control among alcoholic young adults at selected rehabilitation centres in Uasin Gishu County, Kenya. Acad Res J Psychol Counsel. October 2014;1(5):54-58.
- Litt MD, Kadden RM, Kabela-Cormier E. Individualized Assessment and Treatment Program for Alcohol Dependence: Results of an Initial Study to Train Coping Skills. Addiction. November 2009;104(11):1837-1838. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02693.x. PMCID: PMC2763044. PMID: 19712124.
- Norberg MM, Barnier E, Weidemann G, Chakerian K, Cornish JL, Rapee RM. Randomised pilot study of cannabis cue exposure: Reducing cue reactivity while building tolerance. Clinical Psychologist. 2018;22(2):126-136. doi:10.1111/cp.12157.
- Hone-Blanchet A, Wensing T, Fecteau S. The Use of Virtual Reality in Craving Assessment and Cue-Exposure Therapy in Substance Use Disorders. Front Hum Neurosci. October 17, 2014;8. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00844. PMCID: PMC4201090. PMID: 25368571.
- Metcalf M, Rossie K, Stokes K, Tallman C, Tanner B. Virtual Reality Cue Refusal Video Game for Alcohol and Cigarette Recovery Support: Summative Study. JMIR Serious Games. April 16, 2018;6(2):e7. doi:10.2196/games.9231. PMCID: PMC5928331. PMID: 29661748.
- Hogue A, Henderson CE, Ozechowski TJ, Robbins MS. Evidence base on outpatient behavioral treatments for adolescent substance use: updates and recommendations 2007-2013. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2014;43(5):695-720. doi:10.1080/15374416.2014.915550. PMID: 24926870.
- Drug Strategies. Treating Teens: A Guide to Adolescent Drug Programs. Washington, DC: Drug Strategies; 2003.. In: Vol ; 2003.
- Tanner B, Metcalf M, Tanner E. Enhancing Neuroscience Knowledge of Secondary School Children via a PlayStation VR Game. Poster at 2019 Winter Conference on Brain Research Meeting. January 30, 2019. Aspen Highlands, CO.
- Tanner B, Metcalf M, Tanner E. Headset VR Clinical Challenges Combined with Neuroscience Training to Enhance Clinician Action and Capability. Poster at 2019 Winter Conference on Brain Research Meeting. January 30, 2019. Aspen Highlands, CO.
- Riva G. What is Positive Technology and its impact on cyberpsychology. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;181:37-41. PMID: 22954824.
- Riva G, Baños RM, Botella C, Wiederhold BK, Gaggioli A. Positive Technology: Using Interactive Technologies to Promote Positive Functioning. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. February 2012;15(2):69-77. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0139.
- Argenton L, Triberti S, Serino S, Muzio M, Riva G. Serious Games as Positive Technologies for Individual and Group Flourishing. In: In: Brooks AL, Brahnam S, Jain LC, editors. Technologies of Inclusive Well-Being. Vol 536. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2014:221-244.
- Baranowski T. Games and childhood obesity. Games for Health Journal. 2013;2(3):113-115. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/g4h.2013.1502.
- Johnson L, Adams S, Cummins M. The NMC horizon report: 2012 higher education edition. Austin, Texas; 2012.
- Lujan HL, DiCarlo SE. Too much teaching, not enough learning: what is the solution?. Advances in Physiology Education. March 1, 2006;30(1):17-22. doi:10.1152/advan.00061.2005. PMID: 16481604.
- Yang B, Zhao X, Ou Y, Zhang J, Li Q, Liu Z. Design and implementation of virtual reality software with psychological treatment for drug-dependent patients. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi. December 2012;29(6):1174-1177. PMID: 23469551.
- Diehl LA, Souza RM, Alves JB, et al. InsuOnline, a Serious Game to Teach Insulin Therapy to Primary Care Physicians: Design of the Game and a Randomized Controlled Trial for Educational Validation. JMIR Research Protocols. January 21, 2013;2(1):e5. doi:10.2196/resprot.2431. PMCID: PMC3628160. PMID: 23612462.
- Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. Am Psychol. January 2000;55(1):68-78. PMID: 11392867.
- Sweller J. Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning. Cognitive Science. April 1, 1988;12(2):257-285. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4.
- Fowler C. Virtual reality and learning: Where is the pedagogy?. Br J Educ Technol. March 1, 2015;46(2):412-422. doi:10.1111/bjet.12135.
- Khan S, Black J. Surrogate embodied learning in MUVEs: Enhancing memory and motivation through embodiment. 2014.
- Nicholson DT, Chalk C, Funnell WRJ, Daniel SJ. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Medical Education. November 1, 2006;40(11):1081-1087. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02611.x. PMID: 17054617.
- James KH, Humphrey GK, Vilis T, Corrie B, Baddour R, Goodale MA. “Active” and “passive” learning of three-dimensional object structure within an immersive virtual reality environment. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers. August 1, 2002;34(3):383-390. doi:10.3758/BF03195466. PMID: 12395554.
- Jonassen D, Land S. Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. Routledge; March 22, 2012.
- Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Vol 1 edition. HarperCollins e-books; August 18, 2008.
- Schmidt, J.A. Flow in Education. In: In: Peterson P, Baker E, McGaw B, editors. International Encyclopedia of Education, Third Edition. Vol 3 edition. Oxford: Elsevier Science; 2010.
- Murphy C, Chertoff D, Guerrero M, Moffitt K. Design Better Games! Flow, Motivation, & Fun. In: In: Hussain TS, Coleman SL, editors. Design and Development of Training Games: Practical Guidelines from a Multidisciplinary Perspective. Vol 1 edition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2014.
- Sharek D. The Influence of Flow in the Measure of Engagement. February 19, 2010.
- Bereiter C, Scardamalia M. Cognition and Curriculum. New York; Toronto; New York: Macmillan Pub. Co. ; Maxwell Macmillan Canada ; Maxwell Macmillan International; 1992.
- Schon DA. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action. Vol 1 edition. New York: Basic Books; September 23, 1984.
- Longman CS, Lavric A, Munteanu C, Monsell S. Attentional inertia and delayed orienting of spatial attention in task-switching. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. August 2014;40(4):1580-1602. doi:10.1037/a0036552. PMID: 24842065.
- Iqbal ST, Horvitz E. Disruption and Recovery of Computing Tasks: Field Study, Analysis, and Directions. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Vol CHI ’07. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2007:677–686. doi:10.1145/1240624.1240730.