Question 1: Are the following assumptions about the DSM-5 term 'inhalant' correct?:
- does not describe a specific class of drugs defined in terms of molecular structure and/or mechanism of action
- does not include drugs that are heated to inhale, burned to smoke, or crushed to snort
- includes only substances that are gases (volatile) at room temperature
- includes only psycho-active substances - i.e., excludes drugs that exert their effects primarily via toxicity/cell damage v altering neural activity
- includes pharmaceutical agents (e.g., nitrous oxide)
- has the same meaning as the term 'volatile inhalant' used in ICD-11
Question 2: Does a clinician diagnose a substance-induced mental disorder if the exposure to the substance is unintentional - e.g., environmental or work-related exposure to fumes; atypical reaction to pharmaceutical agent used in the context of health care?
Thanks,
Piper
2 Comments
Matt Cordell
This looks like an old question, but I've only just come across it, and since there's no answer.
My input as a non-clinician terminologist, who's handled some content requests in this space.
I would expect the answer to Q1 is yes. With a couple of notes:
1382521000168108 | Aerosol inhalation abuse (disorder) |
1382531000168106 | Petrol inhalation abuse (disorder) |
1382541000168102 | Paint inhalation abuse (disorder) |
1382551000168100 | Butane inhalation abuse (disorder) |
1382561000168103 | Nitrite inhalation abuse (disorder) |
1382571000168109 | Nitrous oxide inhalation abuse (disorder) |
1382581000168107 | Glue inhalation abuse (disorder) |
Piper Allyn Ranallo
Matt Cordell,
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
Agree regarding the unnecessary complexity of introducing meaning around state of substance (gas/liquid). I like your approach of using the term "inhalation" in the FSN (unambiguously describing how the substance gets into the body) rather than the term "inhalant" (which implies a class of substances that can be unambiguously defined).
Best,
Piper