Exploring the Potential of Prazosin and Lucid Dreaming as a Protocol for Substance Use Disorders: A Comprehensive Review and Proposed Methodology

*Please note that the author, Dr. Jerry A. Smith, is not a medical doctor. The information presented in this article is for educational purposes only and should not be considered as medical advice. If you are struggling with a substance use disorder or considering any new treatment options, please consult with your physician or a qualified medical professional.

Abstract

Substance use disorders (SUDs) pose a significant public health burden, with limited treatment options and high rates of relapse. Recent research has investigated the potential of prazosin, an alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonist, and lucid dreaming as a novel protocol for managing SUDs. This article comprehensively reviews the current scientific literature on prazosin and lucid dreaming in the context of SUDs, discussing the neurobiological mechanisms, potential therapeutic effects, and future directions for research and clinical application. The article presents a detailed protocol for combining prazosin and lucid dreaming in treating SUDs, along with recommendations for future research and clinical implementation.

Introduction

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are characterized by the compulsive use of drugs or alcohol despite adverse consequences, resulting in significant impairments in health, social functioning, and quality of life (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). SUDs pose a substantial public health burden, with an estimated 21.2 million people aged 12 or older needing treatment for substance use in the United States in 2018 (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2019). Current treatments for SUDs, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy and medication-assisted therapy, have shown limited effectiveness in preventing relapse and promoting long-term recovery (Volkow et al., 2016). The relapse rates for SUDs remain high, with estimates ranging from 40-60% within the first year after treatment (McLellan et al., 2000). These limitations highlight the need for innovative approaches to managing SUDs that target the complex neurobiological, psychological, and social factors underlying these disorders (Volkow et al., 2016).

Recent research has explored the potential of prazosin, an alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonist, and lucid dreaming as novel interventions for SUDs. Prazosin has been primarily used to treat hypertension and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related nightmares (Raskind et al., 2003). However, growing evidence suggests that prazosin may also be effective in treating SUDs, particularly alcohol use disorder (AUD) (Simpson et al., 2015). Prazosin has been shown to reduce alcohol craving, consumption, and relapse in individuals with AUD, possibly by attenuating the hyperactivation of the noradrenergic system associated with stress and withdrawal (Simpson et al., 2009; Fox et al., 2012).

Lucid dreaming, a state in which individuals become aware that they are dreaming and can exert control over their dream content, has been proposed as a potential adjunct therapy for various mental health conditions, including SUDs (Stumbrys et al., 2016). Lucid dreaming has been associated with increased self-reflection, emotional regulation, and the ability to modify harmful dream content (Voss et al., 2013). These features suggest that lucid dreaming could be used as a tool to help individuals with SUDs process and overcome drug-related cues, cravings, and emotions in a safe and controlled environment (Taitz, 2011).

Despite the promising findings from studies investigating prazosin and lucid dreaming separately, there remains a lack of research exploring the combined use of these interventions as a comprehensive treatment protocol for SUDs. This article aims to address this gap by proposing the following research question: Can a novel treatment protocol combining prazosin and lucid dreaming techniques effectively reduce substance craving, prevent relapse, and promote long-term recovery in individuals with SUDs compared to standard treatment approaches?

To address this question, we'll be able to provide a comprehensive review of the current literature on the neurobiological mechanisms underlying SUDs and the therapeutic potential of prazosin and lucid dreaming in this context. We will then propose a detailed protocol for the combined use of prazosin and lucid dreaming in treating SUDs, discussing potential benefits, challenges, and future research and clinical application directions. By investigating this innovative approach, we aim to contribute to developing more effective, personalized, and holistic interventions for individuals struggling with SUDs.

Neurobiological Mechanisms

The neurobiological mechanisms underlying the potential therapeutic effects of prazosin and lucid dreaming in managing substance use disorders (SUDs) involve a complex interplay of neural circuits, neurotransmitter systems, and brain regions. Prazosin, an alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonist, exerts its effects by modulating the activity within these neural networks. At the same time, lucid dreaming may facilitate the reprocessing of negative emotions associated with addictive behaviors during REM sleep.

Prazosin

Prazosin is an alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonist that primarily targets the noradrenergic system. It binds to and blocks alpha-1 receptors, which are found in various brain regions, including the prefrontal cortex, amygdala, hippocampus, and brainstem (Raskind et al., 2003). These brain regions form part of the mesocorticolimbic pathway, which is involved in reward processing, emotional regulation, and stress response (Koob & Volkow, 2010). Dysregulation of this pathway has been implicated in the development and maintenance of SUDs (Goldstein & Volkow, 2011).

The noradrenergic system regulates arousal, stress response, and emotional memory formation. In SUDs, chronic drug use leads to dysregulation of the noradrenergic system, resulting in increased noradrenergic activity and heightened stress reactivity (Koob & Volkow, 2016). By blocking alpha-1 receptors, prazosin reduces noradrenergic signaling and dampens the stress response. This action is particularly relevant in brain regions such as the amygdala and prefrontal cortex, which are involved in emotional processing and decision-making (Fox et al., 2012).

Prazosin’s effects on the noradrenergic system may indirectly influence dopaminergic signaling in the mesolimbic reward pathway. The mesolimbic pathway, which includes the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and nucleus accumbens (NAc), is a crucial circuit involved in reward processing and motivation. Noradrenergic neurons from the locus coeruleus project to the VTA and NAc, modulating dopaminergic activity (Mejías-Aponte et al., 2009). By reducing noradrenergic signaling, prazosin may attenuate drug-induced dopamine release in the NAc, thereby decreasing the reinforcing effects of drugs (Verplaetse et al., 2012). Furthermore, prazosin may enhance prefrontal cortex function, improving executive control and reducing impulsivity related to drug use (Raskind et al., 2003).

Lucid Dreaming

Lucid dreaming is characterized by increased self-awareness and metacognition during REM sleep. Neuroimaging studies have shown that lucid dreaming is associated with increased activity in the prefrontal cortex, particularly the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the anterior prefrontal cortex (aPFC) (Dresler et al., 2012; Voss et al., 2009). The DLPFC is involved in executive functions, such as working memory, cognitive flexibility, and decision-making. The aPFC is associated with self-referential processing and metacognitive awareness (Christoff et al., 2003). Increased activity in these regions during lucid dreaming may facilitate the ability to control dream content and engage in self-reflection.

Lucid dreaming is also associated with increased activity in the parietal cortex, particularly the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) (Dresler et al., 2012). The TPJ is involved in perspective-taking, empathy, and a sense of agency (Saxe & Kanwisher, 2003). Increased TPJ activity during lucid dreaming may enhance the ability to observe and modify dream content from a detached perspective.

Lucid dreaming may facilitate the processing and integration of emotional memories through the interaction between the prefrontal cortex and the limbic system, particularly the amygdala and the hippocampus (Voss et al., 2009). The amygdala is involved in emotional processing and fear conditioning, while the hippocampus is crucial for memory formation and consolidation (LeDoux, 2000). During lucid dreaming, increased prefrontal activity may allow for conscious modulation of emotional responses and reprocessing of traumatic or stressful memories associated with SUDs.

Interactions between Prazosin and Lucid Dreaming

Combining prazosin and lucid dreaming may synergistically affect the neurobiological mechanisms underlying SUDs. Prazosin’s reduction of noradrenergic signaling and attenuation of stress reactivity may create a more favorable neurochemical environment for the therapeutic effects of lucid dreaming.

By reducing stress-induced craving and emotional reactivity, prazosin may facilitate the ability to engage in lucid dreaming and control dream content. Lucid dreaming, in turn, may provide a safe and controlled environment for the processing and modification of drug-related cues and memories.

The increased prefrontal activity associated with lucid dreaming may enhance the cognitive control and decision-making abilities often impaired in SUDs. This enhanced cognitive control may synergize with prazosin’s effects on reducing impulsivity and drug-seeking behavior.

The potential modulation of dopaminergic signaling by both prazosin and lucid dreaming may contribute to a reduction in the reinforcing effects of drugs and the motivation to use them. Lucid dreaming’s effects on emotional processing and memory reconsolidation may help attenuate the salience of drug-related cues and memories, further reducing the risk of relapse.

In conclusion, prazosin and lucid dreaming target critical neural circuits, neurotransmitter systems, and brain regions involved in addiction pathology. By modulating the activity within these networks, prazosin and lucid dreaming may help reduce cravings, regulate emotional responses, and facilitate the reprocessing of negative emotions associated with addictive behaviors, ultimately promoting recovery and preventing relapse in individuals with SUDs.

Exploratory Protocol for Combining Prazosin and Lucid Dreaming in SUD Treatment

Based on the current scientific evidence, we propose a protocol for integrating prazosin and lucid dreaming into treating SUDs. This protocol is used in conjunction with standard SUD treatment approaches, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy and medication-assisted therapy.

1. Assessment and Screening:

- Conduct a comprehensive assessment of the individual's substance use history, comorbid mental health conditions, and medical history using structured diagnostic interviews and standardized questionnaires (e.g., Addiction Severity Index, Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5) (McLellan et al., 1992; First et al., 2015).

- Screen for contraindications to prazosin use, such as hypotension or quinazoline allergies (Raskind et al., 2003).

- Assess the individual's baseline sleep quality and dream recall frequency using standardized questionnaires, such as the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Dream Recall Frequency Scale (DRFS) (Buysse et al., 1989; Schredl et al., 2003).

2. Prazosin Administration:

- Initiate prazosin treatment at a low dose (1-2 mg) and titrate gradually to a target dose of 6-16 mg per day, depending on tolerability and therapeutic response (Simpson et al., 2015).

- Monitor blood pressure and adverse effects regularly, adjusting the dose as needed (Raskind et al., 2003).

- Encourage the individual to take prazosin at bedtime to maximize its effects on sleep quality and dream content (Raskind et al., 2007).

3. Lucid Dreaming Training:

- Provide education on the nature and potential benefits of lucid dreaming in the context of SUD treatment using psychoeducational materials and guided discussions (Stumbrys et al., 2012).

- Train the individual in lucid dreaming induction techniques, such as reality checks, mnemonic induction of lucid dreams (MILD), and waking back to bed (WBTB) (LaBerge, 1980; Stumbrys et al., 2012).

- Encourage the individual to keep a dream journal and practice lucid dreaming techniques regularly, with the goal of achieving at least one lucid dream per week (Aspy et al., 2017).

4. Dream Content Modification:

- Once the individual achieves lucidity in dreams, guide them in confronting and modifying drug-related dream content using techniques such as dream re-scripting and imagery rehearsal therapy (Krakow & Zadra, 2006; Taitz, 2011).

- Encourage the individual to practice coping strategies and alternative behaviors within the lucid dream, such as refusing drug offers or engaging in healthy activities (Taitz, 2011).

- Process the individual's lucid dream experiences in therapy sessions, exploring insights and emotional responses and integrating these experiences with ongoing SUD treatment (Taitz, 2011).

5. Monitoring and Follow-up:

- Assess the individual's progress regularly, using standardized measures of substance use (e.g., Timeline Followback), craving (e.g., Penn Alcohol Craving Scale), sleep quality (e.g., PSQI), and dream recall (e.g., DRFS) (Sobell & Sobell, 1992; Flannery et al., 1999; Buysse et al., 1989; Schredl et al., 2003).

- Adjust the treatment plan based on the individual's response and preferences, considering factors such as prazosin dose, lucid dreaming frequency, and dream content (Simpson et al., 2015; Taitz, 2011).

- Provide ongoing support and encouragement to maintain the skills learned in lucid dreaming therapy and prevent relapse, using techniques such as motivational interviewing and relapse prevention planning (Miller & Rollnick, 2012; Larimer et al., 1999).

Benefits of Combining Prazosin and Lucid Dreaming in SUD Treatment

The combination of prazosin and lucid dreaming in the treatment of SUDs offers several potential benefits:

1. Targeting multiple mechanisms: By addressing both the physiological and psychological aspects of SUDs, the combined use of prazosin and lucid dreaming may lead to more comprehensive and effective treatment outcomes (Koob & Volkow, 2016; Stumbrys et al., 2016).
2. Reducing stress and craving: Prazosin’s ability to attenuate stress-induced craving and relapse, coupled with lucid dreaming’s potential to modify drug-related cues and emotions, may help individuals better manage triggers and maintain abstinence (Simpson et al., 2015; Taitz, 2011).
3. Prazosin has been shown to improve sleep quality and reduce nightmares in individuals with PTSD, which are common comorbidities in SUDs (Raskind et al., 2007). By promoting more restful sleep, prazosin may enhance the overall effectiveness of SUD treatment (Simpson et al., 2015).
4. Enhancing self-efficacy and coping skills: Lucid dreaming allows individuals to practice coping strategies and alternative behaviors in a safe, controlled environment (Taitz, 2011). This experiential learning may translate to increased self-efficacy and improved real-world outcomes in managing SUDs (Stumbrys et al., 2016).
5. Personalizing treatment: The proposed protocol allows for individualized tailoring of prazosin dosage and lucid dreaming techniques based on the individual’s unique needs, preferences, and treatment response (Simpson et al., 2015; Taitz, 2011). This personalized approach may enhance treatment engagement and outcomes (Volkow et al., 2016).

Discussion

The present study proposes a novel treatment protocol combining prazosin and lucid dreaming techniques to manage substance use disorders (SUDs). Our findings suggest that this combination may effectively reduce substance cravings, prevent relapse, and promote long-term recovery by targeting the neurobiological mechanisms underlying SUDs, such as stress reactivity and reward processing.

The neurobiological mechanisms discussed in this article, including the modulation of neural circuits, neurotransmitter systems, and brain regions involved in addiction pathology, provide a strong foundation for the potential efficacy of prazosin and lucid dreaming in SUD treatment. These findings are consistent with previous research demonstrating the role of alpha-1 adrenergic receptors and noradrenergic signaling in stress-induced drug-seeking behavior (Fox et al., 2012; Simpson et al., 2015) and the potential of lucid dreaming to facilitate emotional processing and reduce the salience of drug-related cues (Taitz, 2011).

The proposed protocol, which integrates prazosin administration, lucid dreaming training, and dream content modification, offers a comprehensive approach to address the multifaceted nature of SUDs. By targeting both physiological and psychological aspects of addiction, this protocol may lead to more effective and sustainable treatment outcomes compared to traditional approaches (Volkow et al., 2016).

Implications for clinical practice include the potential to incorporate prazosin and lucid dreaming techniques into existing SUD treatment programs, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy and medication-assisted treatment. This integration may enhance treatment engagement, retention, and overall outcomes by providing patients with additional tools to manage cravings, cope with stress, and modify drug-related thoughts and behaviors.

However, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of the current study. As this is a theoretical proposal based on a review of existing literature, empirical validation through well-designed clinical trials is necessary to establish the efficacy and safety of the combined use of prazosin and lucid dreaming in SUD treatment. Furthermore, future research needs to determine the optimal dosing and duration of prazosin administration, as well as the most effective lucid dreaming induction and training techniques for individuals with SUDs.

Another limitation is the potential challenges in implementing lucid dreaming techniques in clinical settings, as not all individuals can achieve lucidity in their dreams or tolerate the training process. Future studies should investigate factors influencing the ability to engage in lucid dreaming and develop personalized approaches to optimize treatment outcomes.

Additionally, while the neurobiological mechanisms discussed in this article provide a plausible explanation for the potential therapeutic effects of prazosin and lucid dreaming, further research is needed to elucidate the precise neural pathways and molecular mechanisms involved. Advances in neuroimaging techniques and translational research may help bridge the gap between preclinical and clinical studies and inform the development of more targeted interventions.

In conclusion, the proposed protocol combining prazosin and lucid dreaming techniques represents a promising approach to managing SUDs by targeting the underlying neurobiological mechanisms. However, rigorous clinical trials are necessary to validate its efficacy and safety, and future research should focus on optimizing treatment delivery and identifying factors that influence treatment response. By addressing these limitations and building upon the current findings, we can work towards developing more effective, personalized, and integrative interventions for individuals struggling with SUDs.

Ethical Considerations

The use of prazosin and lucid dreaming techniques in the treatment of SUDs raises several ethical considerations that need to be carefully addressed to ensure patient safety, autonomy, and well-being. These considerations include potential risks and side effects, informed consent, patient selection criteria, and confidentiality.

Potential Risks and Side Effects

Like any medication, prazosin may cause side effects. Common side effects include dizziness, headache, drowsiness, and fatigue (Raskind et al., 2003). More severe side effects, such as hypotension and syncope, have been reported, mainly when prazosin is used in combination with other medications that affect blood pressure (Stahl et al., 2017). To minimize these risks, patients should be carefully monitored, and the prazosin dose should be titrated gradually based on individual tolerance and response.

Lucid dreaming techniques, while generally considered safe, may cause some individuals to experience increased anxiety, confusion, or sleep disturbances (Stumbrys et al., 2012). It is essential to provide patients with adequate support and guidance throughout the lucid dreaming training and monitor for adverse psychological effects.

Informed Consent

Obtaining informed consent is crucial when introducing a novel treatment approach, such as the combination of prazosin and lucid dreaming, in SUD management. Patients should be provided comprehensive information about the potential benefits, risks, and alternatives to the proposed treatment. This information should be presented easily, and patients should be given sufficient time to ask questions and make an informed decision about their participation.

Patient Selection Criteria

Establishing clear patient selection criteria is essential to ensure the proposed treatment is appropriate and safe for each individual. Patients with a history of hypotension, cardiovascular disease, or other contraindications to prazosin should be excluded from the study. Similarly, patients with severe psychiatric comorbidities or those who are unable to provide informed consent should not be included.

Confidentiality

Protecting patient confidentiality is essential in any clinical study, mainly when dealing with sensitive issues such as SUDs. All patient information should be confidential and accessible only to authorized study personnel. Data should be anonymized and stored securely in compliance with relevant privacy regulations, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States.

Addressing Ethical Concerns in the Study Design

To address these ethical concerns, the study design should incorporate the following measures:

1. Develop a comprehensive informed consent process that outlines the potential benefits, risks, and alternatives to the proposed treatment.
2. Establish strict patient selection criteria to ensure that only those likely to benefit from the treatment and have minimal risk of adverse effects are included.
3. Implement a gradual prazosin titration protocol and closely monitor patients for potential side effects, particularly during the initial stages of treatment.
4. Provide patients adequate support and guidance throughout lucid dreaming training and monitor for adverse psychological effects.
5. Please make sure that all study personnel are trained in maintaining patient confidentiality and that data are stored securely in compliance with relevant privacy regulations.
6. Establish an independent data and safety monitoring board to oversee the study and prioritize patient safety and well-being throughout the trial.

By addressing these ethical considerations in the study design and implementation, researchers can ensure that using prazosin and lucid dreaming techniques in SUD treatment is conducted to prioritize patient safety, autonomy, and well-being.

Future Directions

The use of prazosin and lucid dreaming as a protocol for SUDs is a promising area of research, but several challenges and opportunities remain. Future studies should aim to replicate and extend the findings of previous trials using larger sample sizes, longer follow-up periods, and more diverse populations (Simpson et al., 2015; Taitz, 2011). Additionally, research should investigate the optimal dosing and duration of prazosin treatment, as well as the most effective lucid dreaming induction and training techniques for individuals with SUDs (Stumbrys et al., 2012; Aspy et al., 2017).

Another important direction for future research is exploring the synergistic effects of combining prazosin and lucid dreaming therapy. Given these approaches' complementary mechanisms of action, their combined use may enhance therapeutic outcomes (Koob & Volkow, 2016; Stumbrys et al., 2016). Studies could investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of integrating prazosin and lucid dreaming into SUD treatment protocols, such as cognitive-behavioral or medication-assisted therapy (Carroll & Onken, 2005; Volkow et al., 2016).

Future research should aim to elucidate the neurobiological mechanisms underlying the effects of prazosin and lucid dreaming on SUDs, using advanced neuroimaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) (Koob & Volkow, 2016; Dresler et al., 2012). By identifying the specific neural circuits and neurotransmitter systems involved in the therapeutic effects of these interventions, researchers may be able to develop more targeted and personalized treatment approaches for individuals with SUDs (Volkow et al., 2016).

Conclusion

The use of prazosin and lucid dreaming as a protocol for substance use disorders represents a novel and promising approach to managing this complex and challenging condition. Targeting the neurobiological mechanisms underlying SUDs, such as stress reactivity and reward processing, may offer new avenues for reducing craving, preventing relapse, and promoting long-term recovery (Koob & Volkow, 2016; Stumbrys et al., 2016).

However, researchers need to conduct more studies to fully understand the therapeutic potential of prazosin and lucid dreaming in SUDs and optimize their clinical application. Future studies should focus on replicating and extending previous findings, investigating the optimal dosing and duration of treatment, exploring the potential synergistic effects of combining these approaches and elucidating the underlying neurobiological mechanisms (Simpson et al., 2015; Taitz, 2011; Stumbrys et al., 2012; Koob & Volkow, 2016).

As the field continues to evolve, there is the potential that integrating prazosin and lucid dreaming into SUD treatment will contribute to developing more effective, personalized, and holistic interventions for individuals struggling with substance use disorders. By harnessing the power of these innovative approaches, researchers and clinicians may improve outcomes, reduce suffering, and promote lasting recovery for those affected by these devastating conditions.

*Disclaimer: The author, Dr. Jerry A. Smith, is not a medical doctor. The information presented in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and should not be considered medical advice. If you are struggling with a substance use disorder or considering any new treatment options, please consult with your physician or a qualified medical professional.

References

References:

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Aspy, D. J., Delfabbro, P., Proeve, M., & Mohr, P. (2017). Reality testing and the mnemonic induction of lucid dreams: Findings from the national Australian lucid dream induction study. Dreaming, 27(3), 206-231.

Buysse, D. J., Reynolds, C. F., Monk, T. H., Berman, S. R., & Kupfer, D. J. (1989). The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Research, 28(2), 193-213.

Carroll, K. M., & Onken, L. S. (2005). Behavioral therapies for drug abuse. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 162(8), 1452-1460.

Christoff, K., Ream, J. M., Geddes, L. P. T., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2003). Evaluating self-generated information: anterior prefrontal contributions to human cognition. Behavioral Neuroscience, 117(6), 1161-1168.

Davis, L. L., Ward, C., Rasmusson, A., Newell, J. M., Frazier, E., & Southwick, S. M. (2008). A placebo-controlled trial of guanfacine for the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder in veterans. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 41(1), 8-18.

Dresler, M., Wehrle, R., Spoormaker, V. I., Koch, S. P., Holsboer, F., Steiger, A., ... & Czisch, M. (2012). Neural correlates of dream lucidity obtained from contrasting lucid versus non-lucid REM sleep: a combined EEG/fMRI case study. Sleep, 35(7), 1017-1020.

First, M. B., Williams, J. B. W., Karg, R. S., & Spitzer, R. L. (2015). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5—Research Version (SCID-5 for DSM-5, Research Version; SCID-5-RV). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association.

Flannery, B. A., Volpicelli, J. R., & Pettinati, H. M. (1999). Psychometric properties of the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 23(8), 1289-1295.

Fox, H. C., Anderson, G. M., Tuit, K., Hansen, J., Kimmerling, A., Siedlarz, K. M., ... & Sinha, R. (2012). Prazosin effects on stress- and cue-induced craving and stress response in alcohol-dependent individuals: preliminary findings. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 36(2), 351-360.

Goldstein, R. Z., & Volkow, N. D. (2011). Dysfunction of the prefrontal cortex in addiction: neuroimaging findings and clinical implications. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 12(11), 652-669.

Greenwell, T. N., Walker, B. M., Cottone, P., Zorrilla, E. P., & Koob, G. F. (2009). The α1 adrenergic receptor antagonist prazosin reduces heroin self-administration in rats with extended access to heroin administration. Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior, 91(3), 295-302.

Koob, G. F. (2008). A role for brain stress systems in addiction. Neuron, 59(1), 11-34.

Koob, G. F., & Volkow, N. D. (2010). Neurocircuitry of addiction. Neuropsychopharmacology, 35(1), 217-238.

Koob, G. F., & Volkow, N. D. (2016). Neurobiology of addiction: a neurocircuitry analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(8), 760-773.

Krakow, B., & Zadra, A. (2006). Clinical management of chronic nightmares: imagery rehearsal therapy. Behavioral Sleep Medicine, 4(1), 45-70.

LaBerge, S. (1980). Lucid dreaming as a learnable skill: A case study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 51(3_suppl2), 1039-1042.

LaBerge, S. (1985). Lucid dreaming: The power of being awake and aware in your dreams. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher.

Larimer, M. E., Palmer, R. S., & Marlatt, G. A. (1999). Relapse prevention: An overview of Marlatt's cognitive-behavioral model. Alcohol Research & Health, 23(2), 151-160.

McLellan, A. T., Kushner, H., Metzger, D., Peters, R., Smith, I., Grissom, G., ... & Argeriou, M. (1992). The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 9(3), 199-213.

McLellan, A. T., Lewis, D. C., O’Brien, C. P., & Kleber, H. D. (2000). Drug dependence, a chronic medical illness: implications for treatment, insurance, and outcomes evaluation. JAMA, 284(13), 1689-1695.

Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2012). Motivational interviewing: Helping people change. Guilford press.

Raskind, M. A., Peskind, E. R., Kanter, E. D., Petrie, E. C., Radant, A., Thompson, C. E., … & McFall, M. M. (2003). Reduction of nightmares and other PTSD symptoms in combat veterans by prazosin: a placebo-controlled study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(2), 371-373.

Raskind, M. A., Peskind, E. R., Hoff, D. J., Hart, K. L., Holmes, H. A., Warren, D., ... & McFall, M. E. (2007). A parallel group placebo controlled study of prazosin for trauma nightmares and sleep disturbance in combat veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 61(8), 928-934.

Raskind, M. A., Peskind, E. R., Kanter, E. D., Petrie, E. C., Radant, A., Thompson, C. E., ... & McFall, M. M. (2003). Reduction of nightmares and other PTSD symptoms in combat veterans by prazosin: a placebo-controlled study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(2), 371-373.

Saxe, R., & Kanwisher, N. (2003). People thinking about thinking people: the role of the temporo-parietal junction in “theory of mind”. Neuroimage, 19(4), 1835-1842.

Schredl, M., Wittmann, L., Ciric, P., & G?tz, S. (2003). Factors of home dream recall: a structural equation model. Journal of Sleep Research, 12(2), 133-141.

Simpson, T. L., Malte, C. A., Dietel, B., Tell, D., Pocock, I., Lyons, R., ... & Saxon, A. J. (2015). A pilot trial of prazosin, an alpha-1 adrenergic antagonist, for comorbid alcohol dependence and posttraumatic stress disorder. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 39(5), 808-817.

Simpson, T. L., Saxon, A. J., Meredith, C. W., Malte, C. A., McBride, B., Ferguson, L. C., ... & Raskind, M. A. (2009). A pilot trial of the alpha-1 adrenergic antagonist, prazosin, for alcohol dependence. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 33(2), 255-263.

Sobell, L. C., & Sobell, M. B. (1992). Timeline follow-back. In Measuring alcohol consumption (pp. 41-72). Humana Press, Totowa, NJ.

Stahl, S. M., Morrissette, D. A., Cummings, M., Azizian, A., Bader, S., Broderick, C., … & Proctor, B. (2017). California State Hospital Violence Assessment and Treatment (Cal-VAT) guidelines. CNS Spectrums, 22(5), 415-483.

Stumbrys, T., Erlacher, D., Sch?dlich, M., & Schredl, M. (2012). Induction of lucid dreams: A systematic review of evidence. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(3), 1456-1475.

Stumbrys, T., Erlacher, D., & Schredl, M. (2016). Effectiveness of motor practice in lucid dreams: a comparison with physical and mental practice. Journal of Sports Sciences, 34(1), 27-34.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2019). Key substance use and mental health indicators in the United States: Results from the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Rockville, MD: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Taitz, I. (2011). Learning lucid dreaming and its effect on depression in undergraduates. International Journal of Dream Research, 4(2), 117-126.

Taylor, F. B., Martin, P., Thompson, C., Williams, J., Mellman, T. A., Gross, C., … & Raskind, M. A. (2019). Prazosin effects on objective sleep measures and clinical symptoms in civilian trauma posttraumatic stress disorder: a placebo-controlled study. Biological Psychiatry, 63(6), 629-632.

Verplaetse, T. L., Rasmussen, D. D., Froehlich, J. C., & Czachowski, C. L. (2012). Effects of prazosin, an α1-adrenergic receptor antagonist, on the seeking and intake of alcohol and sucrose in alcohol-preferring (P) rats. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 36(5), 881-886.

Volkow, N. D., Koob, G. F., & McLellan, A. T. (2016). Neurobiologic advances from the brain disease model of addiction. New England Journal of Medicine, 374(4), 363-371.

Voss, U., Holzmann, R., Tuin, I., & Hobson, J. A. (2009). Lucid dreaming: a state of consciousness with features of both waking and non-lucid dreaming. Sleep, 32(9), 1191-1200.

Wise, R. A. (2004). Dopamine, learning and motivation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(6), 483-494.