Medication Assisted Treatment: A Standard of Care. An interview with Elinore McCance-Katz, MD, PhD, Chief Medical Officer, SAMHSA

Edit-Dr.M-KNote: This interview was issued by SAMHSA’s HRSA Center for Integrated Health Solutions in their February 2014 eSolutions newsletter.

“We have a huge need in our country to treat mental health and substance use concerns, and we have a chronic shortage of specialty care programs with enough capacity to treat everyone with a substance use concern. It is our responsibility to expand access to this care in a way that allows greater choice of where individuals can receive treatment.

With the Affordable Care Act, the treatment of substance use disorders is now an essential benefit. Individuals with multiple complex healthcare needs, including mental health and substance use concerns, can be seen in integrated care settings and health homes.

We are going to see more and more integrated care. All healthcare providers, whether in primary care, mental health, or substance use treatment, will need to learn how to provide treatment for disorders they may not have historically treated. Providers who are not used to treating patients with certain types of problems may not feel confident about providing care. When that happens, the individual is less likely to get the care they need. Primary care providers especially will need to be ready to assess and provide treatment for clients who present with mental health and substance use concerns.

The Need for Medication Assisted Treatment

Medication assisted treatment (MAT) is a standard of care. There are a variety of medications that have been shown to be effective in treating substance use disorders and that can be used safely. Specifically, there are a number of FDA-approved medications for tobacco, alcohol and opioid abuse treatments.

MAT is an effective form of care, when medication is taken as prescribed, used properly, and the individual is engaged with other supports and services. With opioid use disorders, studies show that clients who get medical detoxification only have a greater than 90% relapse rate.

We have to think about how effective the treatment is, what the alternative is if not treated, and where an individual is in their recovery. Individuals with chronic relapsing diseases should have access to MAT. It’s just the standard of care. We cannot diminish the importance of that.

Substance use disorders are not simply treated by taking a medication. In fact, taking medications can be part of the problem. Just giving someone medication is not enough. Psychosocial interventions, counseling, and other services are absolutely necessary and will always be very important.

Integrated care providers are going to have to learn about how to use these medications. Many medications can be used within primary care. We’re going to see a spectrum of severity with clients in primary care. Some may need referral to specialty care and others can be treated at the primary care organization.”

The interview can be accessed at: http://www.atforum.com/addiction-resources/documents/SAMHSA-MAT-A-Standard-of-Care-Feb-2014.pdf

Source: The Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration – February 2014

Prescriptions for Opioids Stabilizing After Fivefold Increase in 10-Year Span

Pg_3_pillsDeath rates from opioids have been soaring in the U.S. since the 1990s. To support the appropriate use of these controlled substances and inform public health interventions to prevent drug abuse, most states have implemented a prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP). In a latest study, researchers at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health evaluated the impact of these state-wide programs and found that after tripling until 2007, annual rates of prescriptions for opioid analgesics have stabilized although the effects of PDMPs on opioid dispensing vary markedly by state. Findings are published in the March/April issue of Public Health Reports.

From 1991 to 2010 the annual number of prescriptions for opioid analgesics in the U.S. almost tripled, from about 76 million to almost 210 million

“We found that PDMPs administered by state health departments appeared to be more effective than those administered by other government agencies, such as the bureau of narcotics and the board of pharmacy, ” said senior author Guohua Li, MD, DrPH, Mailman School of Public Health professor of Epidemiology and director of the Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention.”

The press release can be accessed at: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-03/cums-pfo031014.php

Source: Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health – March 10, 2014

Half of Veterans Prescribed Medical Opioids Continue to Use Them Chronically, Study Finds

“Of nearly 1 million veterans who receive opioids to treat painful conditions, more than half continue to consume opioids chronically or beyond 90 days, new research says. Results presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Pain Medicine reported on a number of factors associated with opioid discontinuation with the goal of understanding how abuse problems take hold in returning veterans.

Of 959,226 veterans who received an opioid prescription, 502,634 (representing 52.4% of the total sample) used opioids chronically.

The preliminary analysis showed that certain factors were more likely to be present in veterans who continued to use opioids chronically. They include post-traumatic stress disorder, tobacco use, being married, having multiple chronic pain conditions, the use of multiple opioids and opioid dose above 100 mg per day.

Some findings did not align with previous research in the fields of pain and addiction.

The press release is available at: http://www.newswise.com/articles/half-of-veterans-prescribed-medical-opioids-continue-to-use-them-chronically-study-finds

Source: American Academy of Pain Medicine (AAPM) – March 7, 2014

Doctors Urge FDA to Reverse Approval of Zohydro, Controversial New Pain Drug

zoA coalition of addiction experts, physicians and others is urging U.S. health officials to reverse course and block the launch of a powerful painkiller called Zohydro, expected to hit the market next month. The opioid drug, manufactured by Zogenix Inc, contains a potent amount of an active ingredient that could be lethal to new patients and children and is not safer than other current pain drugs, the groups told the Food and Drug Administration.

In December, attorneys general from 28 states also urged the FDA to reconsider its approval of the drug.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/docs-urge-fda-halt-launch-controversial-pain-drug-article-1.1706470

Source: New York Daily News – February 28, 2014

Killing Pain: Fewer Opioid Scripts

prescriiption pad“Doctors and other health providers wrote about 11 million fewer prescriptions for narcotic painkillers in 2013 than in 2012, but some experts expected a bigger drop-off given the brighter spotlight on the nation’s opioid epidemic.

In 2013, there were 230 million prescriptions for opioids such as Vicodin, OxyContin and Percocet, according to data from IMS Health, a drug market research firm. That represents about a 5% drop from a year earlier when 241 million were written.

Opioid prescriptions had grown substantially since the 1990s. At the same time, data show an increase in use of tranquilizers, and weaker opioids such as tramadol, suggesting that Americans are mixing and matching their narcotics and trying unpredictable and dangerous combinations.”

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PainManagement/PainManagement/44499

Source: MedPageToday.com – February 26, 2014

 

From NIDA Notes: Medications That Treat Opioid Addiction Do Not Impair Liver Health

A trial that compared buprenorphine/naloxone (Bup/Nx) to methadone produced no evidence that either medication damages the liver. Researchers concluded that Bup/Nx and methadone are equally safe for the liver, and Bup/Nx may be considered a first line alternative to the more established medication for treating opioid addiction.

Dr. Andrew Saxon at the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System in Seattle, and Dr. Walter Ling at the University of California, Los Angeles Integrated Substance Abuse Program, conducted the trial with colleagues in the NIDA Clinical Trials Network. Dr. Saxon’s team randomly assigned 1,269 new patients in 8 U.S. opioid treatment programs to therapy with either Bup/Nx or methadone. The study findings reflect the experiences of 731 patients who provided blood samples for liver function tests at baseline, completed the 24 weeks of active treatment, and submitted blood for at least 4 of 8 scheduled tests of liver function during treatment. These tests include measuring the levels of two enzymes (alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase) that the liver releases when it is injured.

Most trial participants maintained enzyme levels that indicate healthy liver function throughout the study. In 15.5 percent, enzyme levels increased to higher than twice the upper end of the normal range, indicating some ongoing liver injury. A few patients developed extreme elevations to 10 times the upper limit of normal or had other laboratory signs of severe liver injury.

The percentages of Bup/Nx and methadone patients who experienced each outcome were so close as to be statistically equivalent, warranting the conclusion that both medications were similarly safe. Although the researchers could not definitively rule out the possibility that the medications contributed to some of the observed worsening of liver function, their analysis produced no evidence to this effect. Instead, they say the changes most likely resulted from hepatitis, the toxicity of illicit drugs, and impurities in those drugs. Infection with hepatitis B or C doubled a patient’s odds of a significant change in enzyme levels and was the only predictor of worsening liver function. Most extreme increases in enzyme levels occurred when a patient seroconverted to hepatitis B or C, or used illicit drugs during the study.

The researchers note that about 44 percent of those screened for the study did not meet its enrollment criteria, suggesting that the participant group was healthier than many who visit clinics for addiction treatment. The ineligible population was also older, had a higher rate of stimulant use, and was less likely to be white than patients in the enrolled group, suggesting that the evaluable patient group might not be representative of all opioid-dependent patient groups.

Graphs available at: http://www.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-notes/2013/12/medications-treat-opioid-addiction-do-not-impair-liver-health

Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Notes – December 2013

Q & A – Methadone or Buprenorphine for Maintenance Therapy of Opioid Addiction: What’s the Right Duration?

question boxQuestion: How long should patients with opioid addiction be treated with methadone or buprenorphine?

Response from Michael G. O’Neil, PharmD Professor, Department of Pharmacy Practice; Consultant, Drug Diversion and Substance Abuse, South College School of Pharmacy, Knoxville, Tennessee

“Data supporting positive long-term outcomes after definitive discontinuation of methadone or buprenorphine in a predetermined time frame for all patients are lacking. Prudent clinical practice dictates that duration of therapy should be individualized by well-trained addiction specialists, taking into account a disease treatment history that includes such factors as relapse, individual patient characteristics, evidence-based literature, patient adherence, socioeconomic characteristics, and environmental considerations until long-term evidence-based studies prove otherwise.

In summary, the complexities of the disease of opioid addiction have created a frustrating situation for practitioners and patients alike. Basic practice principles for chronic diseases, such as hypertension or schizophrenia, should be applied to patients who are unable to stay in recovery using abstinence programs alone. Strict discontinuance of opioid maintenance therapy solely on the basis of duration of treatment is not clinically justifiable at this time. Individualization of treatment for opioid addiction with methadone or buprenorphine by qualified specialists is necessary for many suffering patients, in conjunction with counseling, community support, or behavioral interventions. Treatment cultures for opioid addiction need to continue to evolve, as does education of the general public.”

The article can be accessed at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/819875

Source: www.Medscape.com - February 3, 2014

Genes Play a Large Role in Opioid Dependence

dna“There is reason to think that opioid dependence is at least 60 percent inherited. Now a genomewide association study appears to have led to the identification of major genes contributing to this risk.

Some major genes that contribute to the risk for opioid dependence appear to have been identified. The genes make proteins that influence calcium signaling or potassium signaling within neurons.

The lead scientist, Joel Gelernter, M.D., a professor of psychiatry, genetics, and neurobiology at Yale University, told Psychiatric News that he was surprised by this finding. He had expected genes that code for opioid receptors to turn out to be major contributors, he said. But that was not the case.

Gelernter and his coworkers conducted a genomewide association study to see whether they could significantly link any gene variants with a risk for opioid dependence. They used a relatively large sample—some 5,700 subjects (over a third with opioid dependence and the rest controls). Afterward they conducted two more studies—one with some 4,000 subjects and the other with some 2,500 ones—to see whether they could replicate their initial findings.

They were able to link variants of a number of genes with a risk for opioid dependence. But the variants that were most strongly associated with opioid dependence risk were those from genes involved in calcium or potassium signaling within neurons.”

http://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/newsarticle.aspx?articleid=1820456

Source: Psychiatryonline.org – January 28, 2014

SAMHSA’s New Report Tracks the Behavioral Health of America

 

samhsa“A new report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) illuminates important trends – many positive — in Americans’ behavioral health, both nationally and on a state-by-state basis.

SAMHSA’s new report, the “National Behavioral Health Barometer” (Barometer), provides data about key indicators of behavioral health problems including rates of serious mental illness, suicidal thoughts, substance abuse, underage drinking, and the percentages of those who seek treatment for these disorders. The Barometer shows this data at the national level, and for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The Barometer indicates that the behavioral health of our nation is improving in some areas. For example, the rate of prescription pain reliever abuse has fallen for both children ages 12-17 and adults ages 18-25 from 2007 to 2011 (9.2 percent to 8.7 percent and 12.0 percent to 9.8 percent respectively).

In the United States, only 14.8% of persons aged 12 or older with illicit drug dependence or abuse (an estimated 1.1 million individuals) in 2012 received treatment for their illicit drug use within the year prior to being surveyed.

The Barometer also shows more people are getting the help they need in some crucial areas. A case in point is that the number of people getting buprenorphine treatment for a heroin addiction has jumped 400 percent from 2006 to 2010. In 2012 the number of people who received buprenorphine as part of their substance abuse treatment was 39, 223. The number of people who received methadone as part of their substance abuse treatment was 311,718 in 2012.

The data in the Barometer is drawn from various federal surveys and provides both a snapshot of the current status of behavioral health nationally and by state, and trend data on some of these key behavioral health issues over time. The findings will be enormously helpful to decision makers at all levels who are seeking to reduce the impact of substance abuse and mental illness on America’s communities.

“The Barometer is a dynamic new tool providing important insight into the “real world’ implications of behavioral health issues in communities across our nation,” said SAMHSA’s Administrator, Pamela S. Hyde.”Unlike many behavioral health reports, its focus is not only on what is going wrong in terms of behavioral health, but what is improving and how communities might build on that progress.”

The Barometer also provides analyses by gender, age group and race/ethnicity, where possible, to further help public health authorities more effectively identify and address behavioral health issues occurring within their communities, and to serve as a basis for tracking and addressing behavioral health disparities.”

To view and download copies of the national or any state Behavioral Health Barometer, please visit the SAMHSA web site at http://store.samhsa.gov/product/SMA13-4796?from=carousel&position=1&date=0130214

http://www.samhsa.gov/newsroom/advisories/1401301041.aspx

Source: – Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration – 1/31/14

MAT With Methadone or Buprenorphine: Assessing the Evidence for Effectiveness

evidenceIt’s not surprising that a thorough review of the efficacy of medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with methadone or buprenorphine reveals  a high level of evidence for the positive impact of MAT in keeping patients in treatment and reducing or eliminating illicit opioid use.

What is surprising is that the stigma against MAT persists—even though evidence suggests that methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) has a positive impact on drug-related HIV risk behaviors and criminal activity—and thus could make clinic neighborhoods safer, rather than less desirable.

The research findings on MMT and buprenorphine or buprenorphine-naloxone maintenance treatment (BMT) were published in November 2013 in two peer-reviewed articles (see References) as part of the Assessing the Evidence Base (AEB) Series sponsored by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

The Assessing the Evidence Base Series

SAMHSA sponsored the AEB Series to help guide providers’ decisions about which behavioral health services public and commercially funded plans should cover. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) greatly expands health care coverage and provides the opportunity “for federal and state agencies to work with private and nonprofit sectors to transform the American health care system” by developing a comprehensive set of community-based, recovery-oriented, and evidence-based services for people with mental and substance use disorders. The ACA doesn’t specify specific treatments, leaving the decision to federal, state, and local agencies, managed care organizations, and commercial and private insurers.

Deciding which services have verified effectiveness isn’t an easy task. To help in the decision-making process, the AEB Series provides a literature evaluation for 14 behavioral health services. For people with substance use disorders, they include, in addition to MMT and BMT, residential treatment, peer-recovery support, and intensive outpatient programs. The goal of the AEB Series is “to provide a framework for decision makers to build a modern addictions and mental health service system for the people who use these services and the people who provide them.”

The Studies

Authors of the MMT and BMT studies searched major databases and other sources to review meta-analyses, reviews, and individual studies from 1995 through 2012.

In brief, the studies found that with adequate dosing, MMT (> 60 mg) and BMT (16 mg-32 mg) caused a similar reduction in illicit opioid use, but MMT was associated with better treatment retention and BMT with a lower risk of adverse events. In pregnancy, MMT and BMT (without naltrexone) showed similar efficacy, but MMT was better than BMT in retaining pregnant women in treatment, and BMT was associated with improved maternal and fetal outcomes, compared to no MAT.

MMT and BMT showed similar occurrence rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome, “but symptoms were less severe for infants whose mothers were treated with BMT.” BMT is associated with a lower risk of adverse events, and has the advantage of greater availability (office facilities improve access and provide earlier care). MMT may be needed for patients who require high doses of opioid agonist treatment, and has the advantage of a possible positive effect on mortality, drug-related HIV risk behaviors, and criminal activity.

The authors advise that MMT “should be a covered service available to all individuals,” and that BMT “should be considered for inclusion as a covered benefit.”

Sprinkled within the two articles are qualifiers such as “possible,” “associated with,” and “suggestive.” That’s because the statistical significance shown in some large, well-designed studies tends to disappear when data from individual studies are merged. Merging changes drug dosages, length of treatment, patient characteristics of the group, and other data; these changes may make reaching statistical significance impossible.

Areas for Future Research

The authors identified several areas where additional data would be helpful. For methadone, these include the impact of MMT on secondary outcomes, the efficacy and safety tradeoffs of doses > 100 mg, and confirmation of results of interim treatment for improved outcome. (In interim treatment, patients receive methadone daily under supervision for up to 120 days, and emergency counseling, while awaiting placement in a program.)  Another research area: the use of MMT in subpopulations—racial and ethnic minority groups, and people who misuse prescription drugs.

For buprenorphine, suggested research areas include the impact of BMT on secondary outcomes, appropriate dosing to enhance outcomes, and confirmation of stepped-care results. (Stepped-care involves gradually increasing buprenorphine doses to 32 mg—higher doses “do not provide additional efficacy;” patients requiring more medication are switched—“stepped-up”—to high-dose methadone.) Other research areas: the use of BMT in subpopulations (described above), and improved induction protocols to minimize retention problems.

A box in each publication summarizes the authors’ findings for each treatment. We reproduce them below, as they appeared in print.

 

Evidence for the effectiveness of MMT: high

Evidence clearly shows that MMT has a positive impacta on:

  • Retention in treatment
  • Illicit opioid use

Evidence is less clear but suggestive that MMT has a positive impact on:

  • Mortality
  • Illicit drug use (non-opioid)
  • Drug-related HIV risk behaviorsb
  • Criminal activity

Evidence suggests that MMT has little impact on:

  • Sex-related HIV risk behaviorsc

 

a Compared with placebo, detoxification, drug-free rehabilitation, or wait-listing
b Sharing injection equipment.
c Having unprotected sexual relations.

 

Evidence for the effectiveness of BMT: high

Evidence clearly shows that BMT has a positive impact compared with placebo on:

  • Retention in treatment
  • Illicit opioid use

Evidence is mixed for its impact on:

  • Non-opioid illicit drug use

 

Regarding retention in treatment and illicit opioid use, BMT had a positive effect compared to placebo, while MMT had a positive effect compared to placebo, detoxification, drug-free protocols, or wait-listing protocols.

Closing Statements

The authors note the importance of MAT, especially considering the poor success rates of abstinence-based treatments, and recognize both MMT and BMT as important treatment options. Below are summaries of their closing statements.

Methadone: The authors point out the need for educating providers, consumers, and family members about the benefits of MMT and ways to avoid the significant adverse events that can occur (referring to respiratory depression and cardiac arrhythmias). They also note the need for education about “appropriate doses to improve efficacy” and “appropriate initiation to minimize adverse events.”

They close with: Because of MMT’s relative efficacy, efforts should be made to increase access to MMT for all individuals who struggle with opioid use disorders. Directors of state mental health and substance abuse agencies and community health organizations should look for methods to increase access to MMT, and purchasers of health care services should cover appropriately monitored MMT.”

Buprenorphine: Noting the key advantage of buprenorphine—its availability—and the “limited access to and more restrictive safety profile of MMT,” the authors consider BMT an important treatment for opioid dependence. “Policy makers have reason to promote access to BMT for patients in substance use treatment who may wish to choose BMT as a potentially safer alternative to MMT.

They close with: “Administrators of substance use treatment programs, community health centers, and managed care organizations and other purchasers of health care services, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial insurance carriers, should give careful consideration to BMT as a covered benefit.”

#     #     #

References

Fullerton CA, Kim M, Thomas CP, et al. Medication-assisted treatment with methadone: assessing the evidence. Psychiatric Services in Advance. November 18, 2013; doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201300235.

Thomas CP, Fullerton CA, Kim M, et al. Medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine: Assessing the Evidence. Psychiatric Services in Advance. November 18, 2013; doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201300256.

Dougherty RH, Lyman DR, George P, Ghose SS, Daniels AS, Delphin-Rittmon ME.

Assessing the Evidence Base for Behavioral Health Services: Introduction to the Series.

Psychiatric Services. 2014; doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201300214

http://ps.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleID=1759202

Prescription Drugs a ‘Tipping Point’ For Dating Violence among Urban Youth

A new University of Michigan Injury Center study recently found a link between misuse of prescription drugs and physical violence among dating partners.

Alcohol and other drugs have been a well-studied health concern among youth with a history of substance use. Previous studies asking youth about daily use over the course of a month show that alcohol and drugs are more likely to be used on days in which violence, both dating and nondating, occurs than on days when there was no violence.

This latest research indicates a connection with misusing prescription sedatives and opioids prior to incidents of dating violence, which many youth or adults may not think of as a risk factor for dating violence.

“Without the alcohol or prescription drugs involved, they simply might walk away from a potentially violent situation,” said Quyen Epstein-Ngo, a fellow at the U-M Injury Center and researcher at the Institute for Research on Women and Gender. “The alcohol and other substance use may be the tipping points.”

The study examined substance use—prescription sedatives and opioids—immediately preceding dating violent conflicts on the day of the conflict among high-risk urban youths. Data was collected from 575 participants ages 14-24 in the Flint Youth Injury Study, funded by the National Institutes of Health and supported by the U-M Injury Center, which looks at substance use and violence among youth treated in an urban emergency room. They reported substance use and instances of violence over a12-month period.

 http://www.healthcanal.com/substance-abuse/46532-prescription-drugs-a-tipping-point-for-dating-violence-among-urban-youth.html

Source:  HealthCanal.com – January 11, 2014

Dr. Westley Clark on Overdose – Prevention of Prescription Drug Abuse Can Start With Education about the Risk of Overdose Death

ClarkOn January 16, the ATTC Network hosted a free webinar, “SAMHSA’s Opioid Overdose Prevention Toolkit & Prescription Drug Abuse,” led by the Director of the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment at SAMHSA, Dr. H. Westley Clark.

In addition to an overview of the toolkit itself, Clark’s presentation included epidemiological details about the current overdose epidemic, federal-level efforts to address overdose, and the importance of access to evidence-based treatment (including medications).

The recorded webinar is available online for on-demand viewing.  You can also download the slides for an overview of the talk.

Here are two salient points:

  • The exchange of prescription pain relievers is happening at a person-to-person level.
  • Prevention of prescription drug abuse can start with education about the risk of overdose death. 

The risk of death from an overdose, said Clark, is a good jumping off place for a larger conversation about substance use.  Not only is pill-popping not harmless, it can actually kill you or someone you love. “We can use overdose as a starting point to get people to be aware of some of the consequences of the misuse of prescription opioids or heroin, for that matter,” he said. “We’ve got friends and relatives who are handing people very powerful drugs with the assumption that if they can take it, then anybody can take it.  And that is not the case.”

Emphasizing the long-term consequences of a behavior–like the possibility of becoming addicted as a result of recreational painkiller use–doesn’t always get through to people.  But the possibility of dying from a drug overdose today or tomorrow?  No kindly neighbor wants to bear responsibility for that.

The Institute for Research, Education & Training in Addictions (IRETA) blog also provides a list of currently available and forthcoming resources to help individuals and communities prevent prescription drug abuse and overdose.

http://iretablog.org/author/iretablog/

Source:  Institute for Research, Education & Training in Addictions – January 27, 2014

Blog: For Young People Addicted to Painkillers, the Path Less Taken — Why?

Pill interactions“Many adolescents believe that Rx opioids are safe because they are prescribed by a doctor. But when abused, they can be as potent and as deadly as heroin. In fact, many teens and young adults who abuse Rx opioids move on to heroin abuse.

But Rx opioid or heroin abuse does not have to be lethal. There are behavioral and pharmacological treatments that can save lives and bring even seriously addicted kids into long-term recovery. The problem is that many treatment programs have chosen to either rely on only behavioral treatments or only medications; and most physicians do not have sufficient training in either medication or behavioral therapy to provide effective treatment.

While no one treatment approach is right for every teen, it is clinically sensible — but not easy — to find comprehensive care. We tell families to look for three things: First, the availability of professional counseling; second, medications and regular monitoring for the affected teen; and finally, family therapy to help that teen.

Families can, and should, insist that their treatment providers offer these medications (methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone) as part of a treatment plan for teen and young adult patients who are struggling with an Rx opioid addiction. It is possible that medication-assisted treatment will not be necessary, but there should be monitoring and management in place to determine whether or when behavioral treatment alone is not adequate.”

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-j-pasierb/teen-addiction_b_4473606.html

Source: HuffingtonPost.com – December 21, 2013

Monitoring the Future Results Released

In mid-December, The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) announced the results of its 2013 Monitoring the Future (MTF) survey. The survey, conducted earlier in the year by scientists at the University of Michigan, tracks annual drug abuse trends of eighth, 10th, and 12th-grade students. NIDA is a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

MTF is one of three major survey instruments the Department of Health and Human Services uses to monitor the nation’s substance abuse patterns among teens.

This year’s announcement focused on attitudes about and prevalence of marijuana use, as well as abuse of synthetic drugs, prescription medications, and tobacco.

Prescription Medications – There was mixed news regarding abuse of prescription medications. The survey shows continued abuse of Adderall, commonly used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, with 7.4 percent of seniors reporting taking it for non-medical reasons in the past year. However, only 2.3 percent of seniors report abuse of Ritalin, another ADHD medication. Abuse of the pain reliever Vicodin has shown a marked decrease in the last 10 years, now measured at 5.3 percent for high school seniors, compared to 10.5 percent in 2003.

Heroin – For cocaine and heroin, while there was no significant change from the 2012 rates, there continues to be a gradual decline in use, with both drugs at historic lows in all three grades. The 2013 rate for high school seniors for past year cocaine use is 2.6 percent, compared to a peak of 6.2 percent in 1999. Similarly, the reported use of heroin by 12th-graders is 0.6 percent this year, compared to a peak of 1.5 percent in 2000.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/monitoring-future

Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse – December 16, 2013

Among Prescription Painkillers, Drug Abusers Prefer Oxycodone

prescriiption pad“A nationwide survey of opioid drug abusers in rehab indicates that because of the high it produces, the prescription painkiller oxycodone is the most popular drug of choice. Hydrocodone, also prescribed to treat pain, is next in line. In all, some 75 percent of those surveyed rated one of these drugs as their favorite.

Researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and Nova Southeastern University in Miami questioned more than 3,500 people in 160 drug-treatment programs across the United States, asking which drugs they abuse and why. Oxycodone was favored by 45 percent, and hydrocodone was preferred by about 30 percent.

Although the drugs are meant to be taken orally, almost 64 percent of oxycodone abusers and just over one-quarter of hydrocodone abusers crushed the tablets and inhaled the drug, while one in five oxycodone abusers reported that they sometimes dissolved the drug in water and injected it. Less than 5 percent reported taking hydrocodone intravenously.

Personality, age and gender all played a role in drug preferences, the research showed. Oxycodone was attractive to those who enjoy taking risks and prefer to inject or snort drugs to get high. Young, male drug users tend to fit that profile.

In contrast, hydrocodone is the more popular choice among women, older people, people who don’t want to inject drugs and those who prefer to deal with a doctor or friend rather than a drug dealer.

The research is published in the current issue of the journal PAIN.

“Opioids are prescribed to treat pain, but their misuse has risen dramatically in recent years,” said principal investigator Theodore J. Cicero, PhD, a Washington University researcher who studies prescription drug abuse. “Our goal is to understand the personal characteristics of people who are susceptible to drug abuse, so we can detect problems ahead of time.”

Among those surveyed, 54 percent said the quality of the high was considered much better for oxycodone, compared with 20 percent who preferred the high they got from hydrocodone.

“Among the reasons addicts prefer oxycodone is that they can get it in pure form,” Cicero said. “Until recently, all drugs with hydrocodone as their active ingredient also contained another product such as acetaminophen, the pain reliever in Tylenol. That turns out to be very important because addicts don’t like acetaminophen.”

Acetaminophen causes considerable irritation when it’s injected, and when taken orally in large amounts, it can cause severe liver damage, he explained.

“Interestingly, addicts, while they’re harming their health in one respect by taking these drugs, report being very concerned about the potentially negative side effects of acetaminophen,” said Cicero, a professor of neuropharmacology in psychiatry.

Those side effects, combined with a preference for the high provided by oxycodone, have led drug abusers to seek out that drug, either on the street or by visiting physicians and attempting to convince doctors that they have pain severe enough to warrant a prescription pain killer.

Cicero is concerned with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) recent approval of a new, pure form of hydrocodone without acetaminophen, a formulation he expects will be attractive to abusers.

The study also found that even among people in treatment for drug dependence, there seems to be little appetite for moving to stronger prescription narcotics such as fentanyl or various derivatives of morphine.”

The press release can be accessed at: http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/26204.aspx

Source: Washington University School of Medicine – November 25, 2013

 

Site last updated March 28, 2014 @ 7:50 am