Abstract

Background and aim: Research and public interest in psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy (PAP) are growing. Psychiatrists’ expertise in psychopathology and psychopharmacology gives a unique perspective on a non-standard intervention such as PAP. We aimed to measure the attitudes toward psychedelics among psychiatrists currently working in Europe and identify associated personal or professional factors that can contribute to predicting these attitudes.

Methods: We conducted an anonymous, web-based survey consisting of demographic information, a test of basic knowledge on psychedelics, and the 20-item Attitudes on Psychedelics Questionnaire (APQ). Participants were recruited by contacting psychiatrists’ and psychiatry trainees’ professional organizations, publicly available e-mails of corresponding authors on psychiatry-related articles, and snowball sampling over personal contacts.

Results: We included N=419 participants from 33 countries in the study (55% male, 66% psychiatry specialists). The three most represented countries were Poland (13%), United Kingdom (8%), and Italy (8%). One-third of participants (34%) reported past use of psychedelics, and a fifth (20%) reported previous experience with PAP or psychedelic research. Median scores were 66.0 on the APQ (possible range 20-100) and 86.0 on the basic knowledge on the psychedelics test (range 0-100). The knowledge and APQ scores were moderately correlated (Spearman’s rho=0.310, p<0.001). The regression model indicated that past psychedelic use, younger age, considering oneself as spiritual, previous experience with PAP or psychedelic research, and male gender significantly predicted more positive attitudes and together explained 26.0% of the variance in APQ scores.

Discussion: European psychiatrists showed moderate attitudes toward psychedelics and a general openness to PAP. Past psychedelic use was the best predictor of attitudes on psychedelics, even when compared with the professional characteristics related to participants’ experience and work in psychiatry. Most psychiatrists could recognize psychedelic substances, although mixed results for ketamine demonstrate some confusion around the classifications of psychedelics.

Conclusions: Although psychedelics are widely present in the public dialogue, more work is needed to expand awareness and education about their potential for clinical use among professionals such as psychiatrists, especially those unfamiliar with PAP and older practitioners.