Cognitive functioning clinical profile and life events in young adults addicted to drugs. Does being a girl make a difference?

Objective: Gender features play a fundamental role as risk factors in drug addiction, entailing differences in vulnerability, onset, drug use and clinical trajectories. Even if increasing empirical evidence has attested that drug abuse in emerging adulthood is associated with cognitive impairments, personality disorders and psychological distress, limited research has analyzed these aspects from a gender perspective. The present research focuses on gender differences in youths (18–24 years of age) diagnosed with substance use disorders (SUDs), in order to detect possible differences between females and males as regards their neuropsychological functioning, clinical profiles and past life experiences. Method: Neuropsychological functioning (neuropsychological battery Esame Neuropsicologico Breve-2), the severity of the symptomatology (Symptom Checklist-90-Revised), personality profile and disorders (Shedler Westen Assessment Procedure-200) and life history were assessed in two groups of young adults with SUDs, 20 males and 20 females (mean age = 21 years, SD = 2.2). Participants were recruited in a therapeutic community in Venice, Italy. Results: Girls showed less cognitive impairment but higher psychological distress with respect to boys; between the two groups, no differences emerged regarding the personality profiles. The girls’ life histories presented more experiences of abuse and maltreatment; they also moved more quickly from substance use to dependence. Boys, instead, were more involved in criminal activity. Conclusions: Given our results, it seems that gender differences manifest early, at emerging adulthood. Consequently, a gender-oriented treatment for drug addiction should be offered even at an early age, focusing on early adverse experiences and their potential traumatic effect on girls. By contrast, young men seem to rely on compromised cognitive functions, which require a specific treatment approach, since they constitute a crucial factor for individual adjustment and treatment outcomes. Results should be interpreted relative to some limitations (such as the small sample size and the preliminary and cross-sectional nature of the research), and future studies are required