Heroin maintenance for chronic heroin-dependent individuals

Client preferences for the design and delivery of injectable opioid agonist treatment services: Results from a best-worst scaling task

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Clinical trials support injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) for whom other pharmacological management approaches are not well-suited. However, despite substantial research indicating that person-centered care improves engagement, retention and health outcomes for individuals with OUD, structural requirements (e.g. drug policies) often dictate how iOAT must be delivered, regardless of client preferences. This study aimed to quantify clients' iOAT delivery preferences to improve client engagement and retention.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional preference elicitation survey.

SETTING

Metro Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

124 current and former iOAT clients.

MEASUREMENTS

Participants completed a demographic questionnaire package and an interviewer-led preference elicitation survey (case 2 best-worst scaling task). Latent class analysis was used to identify distinct preference groups and explore demographic differences between preference groups.

FINDINGS

Most participants (n = 100; 81%) were current iOAT clients. Latent class analysis identified two distinct groups of client preferences: (1) autonomous decision-makers (n = 73; 59%) and (2) shared decision-makers (n = 51; 41%). These groups had different preferences for how medication type and dosage were selected. Both groups prioritized access to take-home medication (i.e. carries), the ability to set their own schedule, receiving iOAT in a space they like and having other services available at iOAT clinics. Compared with shared decision-makers, fewer autonomous decision-makers identified as a cis-male/man and reported flexible preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) clients surveyed in Vancouver, Canada, appear to prefer greater autonomy than they currently have in choosing OAT medication type, dosage and treatment schedule.

Building Capacity for Injectable Diacetylmorphine and Hydromorphone for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: Identifying Typical Doses

Identifying typical doses of existing opioid use disorder medications, such as injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT), can support client and program needs, and potentially increase iOAT expansion. Longitudinal data from participants in a cohort study (n = 131), along with clinic dispensation records from August 2014 to April 2020, were used to examine physician prescribed as well as used doses of injectable diacetylmorphine and hydromorphone. Dosage groups, by medication and prescribed dose per session, were created for both hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine. A total of 534, 522 injections were registered during the study period among 129 participants. Mean received diacetylmorphine doses ranged from 106 to 989 mg per day, with most clients using 125-262 mg per session (mean 192.99 mg) and attending 2.40 sessions per day. Mean received hydromorphone doses ranged from 51.09 to 696.06 mg per day, with the majority using 88-154 mg per session (mean 121.32 mg; 2.43 sessions). Average daily doses remained stable overtime and, while mid-range doses were most typical, participants used the whole spectrum of allowable dose prescriptions. Evidence supporting typical doses of iOAT can be integrated into program planning to better allow providers and prescribers to anticipate program needs and engage in individualized care.

Evaluation of heroin-assisted treatment in Norway: protocol for a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) has a convincing evidence base, although variable retention rates suggest that it may not be beneficial for all. One of the options to include more patients is the introduction of heroin-assisted treatment (HAT), which involves the prescribing of pharmaceutical heroin in a clinical supervised setting. Clinical trials suggest that HAT positively affects illicit drug use, criminal behavior, quality of life, and health. The results are less clear for longer-term outcomes such as mortality, level of function and social integration. This protocol describes a longitudinal evaluation of the introduction of HAT into the OAT services in Norway over a 5-year period. The main aim of the project is to study the individual, organizational and societal effects of implementing HAT in the specialized healthcare services for OUD.

METHODS

The project adopts a multidisciplinary approach, where the primary cohort for analysis will consist of approximately 250 patients in Norway, observed during the period of 2022-2026. Cohorts for comparative analysis will include all HAT-patients in Denmark from 2010 to 2022 (N = 500) and all Norwegian patients in conventional OAT (N = 8300). Data comes from individual in-depth and semi-structured interviews, self-report questionnaires, clinical records, and national registries, collected at several time points throughout patients' courses of treatment. Qualitative analyses will use a flexible inductive thematic approach. Quantitative analyses will employ a wide array of methods including bi-variate parametric and non-parametric tests, and various forms of multivariate modeling.

DISCUSSION

The project's primary strength lies in its comprehensive and longitudinal approach. It has the potential to reveal new insights on whether pharmaceutical heroin should be an integral part of integrated conventional OAT services to individually tailor treatments for patients with OUD. This could affect considerations about drug treatment even beyond HAT-specific topics, where an expanded understanding of why some do not succeed with conventional OAT will strengthen the knowledge base for drug treatment in general. Results will be disseminated to the scientific community, clinicians, and policy makers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was approved by the Norwegian Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK), ref.nr.:195733.

High Interest in Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment With Hydromorphone Among Urban Syringe Service Program Participants

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment with hydromorphone (iOAT-H) is effective for persons who inject drugs (PWID) with opioid use disorder (OUD) but remains unavailable in the United States. Our objective was to determine interest in iOAT-H among syringe services program (SSP) participants.

METHODS

We recruited PWID with OUD from SSPs in New York City. Interest in iOAT-H was assessed on a 4-point scale. We compared participants who were and were not interested in iOAT-H regarding sociodemographic characteristics and self-reported variables (past 30 days): heroin use, public injection practices, and participation in illegal activity other than drug possession. Participants reported their preferred OUD treatment and reasons for these preferences.

RESULTS

Of 108 participants, most were male (69%), Hispanic (68%), and median age was 42 years. The median number of prior OUD treatment episodes was 6 (interquartile range: 2-12). Most (65%) were interested in iOAT-H. Interested participants (vs not interested) reported, over the prior 30 days, greater heroin use days (mean, 26.4 vs 22.3), injecting in public more times (median, 15 vs 6), and a higher percentage having participated in illegal activity (40% vs 16%). Preferences for OUD treatment were: iOAT-H (43%), methadone (39%), and buprenorphine (9%). Participants who preferred iOAT-H to conventional OUD treatments reported preferring injection as a route of administration and that available OUD treatments helped them insufficiently.

CONCLUSIONS

SSP participants with OUD reported high interest in iOAT-H. Participants had attempted conventional treatments but still used heroin almost daily. We identified PWID at risk for opioid-related harms who potentially could benefit from iOAT-H.

Changes in daily dose in open-label compared to double-blind: The role of clients' expectations in injectable opioid agonist treatment

Introduction

Though double-blind studies have indicated that hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine produce similar effects when administered through injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) programs, participant preference may influence some aspects of medication dispensation such as dose.

Methods

 This is a retrospective longitudinal analysis. Participants (n = 131) were previously enrolled in a double-blind clinical trial for iOAT who continued to receive treatment in an open-label follow up study. Data included medication dispensation records from 2012 to 2020. Using linear regression and paired t-tests, average daily dose totals of hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine were examined comparatively between double-blind and open-label periods. A subgroup analysis explored dose difference by preference using the proxy, blinding guess, a variable used to facilitate the measurement of treatment masking during the clinical trial by asking which medication the participant thought they received.

Results

During the open-label period, participants prescribed diacetylmorphine received 49.5 mg less than during the double-blind period (95% CI -12.6,-86.4). Participants receiving hydromorphone did not see a significant dose decrease. Participants who guessed they received hydromorphone during the clinical trial, but learned they were on diacetylmorphine during the open-label period, saw a decrease in total daily dose of 78.3 mg less (95% CI -134.3,-22.4) during the open-label period.

Conclusion

If client preference is considered in the treatment of chronic opioid use disorder, clients may be able to better moderate their dose to suit their individual needs. Together with their healthcare providers, clients can participate in their treatment trajectories collaboratively to optimize client outcomes and promote person-centered treatment options.

Clients' experiences on North America's first take-home injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) program: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

To support public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, oral opioid agonist treatment (OAT) take-home doses were expanded in Western countries with positive results. Injectable OAT (iOAT) take-home doses were previously not an eligible option, and were made available for the first time in several sites to align with public health measures. Building upon these temporary risk-mitigating guidelines, a clinic in Vancouver, BC continued to offer two of a possible three daily doses of take-home injectable medications to eligible clients. The present study explores the processes through which take-home iOAT doses impacted clients' quality of life and continuity of care in real-life settings.

METHODS

Three rounds of semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted over a period of seventeen months beginning in July 2021 with eleven participants receiving iOAT take-home doses at a community clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia. Interviews followed a topic guide that evolved iteratively in response to emerging lines of inquiry. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded using NVivo 1.6 using an interpretive description approach.

RESULTS

Participants reported that take-home doses granted them the freedom away from the clinic to have daily routines, form plans, and enjoy unstructured time. Participants appreciated the greater privacy, accessibility, and ability to engage in paid work. Furthermore, participants enjoyed greater autonomy to manage their medication and level of engagement with the clinic. These factors contributed to greater quality of life and continuity of care. Participants shared that their dose was too essential to divert and that they felt safe transporting and administering their medication off-site. In the future, all participants would like more accessible treatment such as access longer take-home prescriptions (e.g., one week), the ability to pick-up at different and convenient locations (e.g., community pharmacies), and a medication delivery service.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing the number of daily onsite injections from two or three to only one revealed the diversity of rich and nuanced needs that added flexibility and accessibility in iOAT can meet. Actions such as licencing diverse opioid medications/formulations, medication pick-up at community pharmacies, and a community of practice that supports clinical decisions are necessary to increase take-home iOAT accessibility.

Measuring the preferences of injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) clients: Development of a person-centered scale (best-worst scaling)

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is effective for opioid use disorder (OUD), yet little is known about client preferences for accessing iOAT (e.g., with diacetylmorphine, hydromorphone, buprenorphine, fentanyl, etc.). Best-worst scaling (BWS) is a preference elicitation method from health economics that has never been applied to addiction care broadly, or iOAT specifically. We describe the stages of developing a BWS scale that assesses iOAT clients' treatment delivery preferences to inform program planning and maximize healthcare efficiency.

METHODS

We underwent several steps to reveal the relevant attributes/levels and design the scale structure. An initial list of potential attributes and levels was established from a literature review and prior qualitative data. Then, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with clients (n=21) on their iOAT preferences to confirm the attributes and prioritize/include new ones. Next, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with iOAT experts and stakeholders to receive their input on the draft list of attributes and levels. A BWS profile case design was piloted with iOAT clients (n=18) from different sites during a think aloud interview. After several rounds of revisions, the final version was tested by iOAT clients (n=2) before the scale was launched.

RESULTS

We developed a person-centered scale that assesses current and former iOAT clients' most and least wanted aspects of iOAT delivery. The final version yielded 7 unique attributes: choice of medication, choice of dose, convenience, location & space, scheduling & routines, staff & training, and types of services offered.

CONCLUSION

This scale can help expand iOAT programs in a way that is person-centered, rapid, and affordable. The methodology is a guide for other regions with similar populations who aim to develop strong quantitative methodologies that prioritize client collaboration.

Does slow release oral morphine have impact on craving and impulsivity in heroin dependent individuals?

Craving and impulsivity are addiction components which explain why heroin-dependant individuals (HDI), continue using heroin despite not wanting to do so. Opioid maintenance treatment (OMT), such as slow-release oral morphine (SROM), is the most effective treatment for opioid dependence. However, the impact of SROM on craving and impulsivity remains unclear. In this observational study, 23 HDI receiving SROM, their usual OMT, took part in the experiment. Each of the participants filled in the perceived level of craving with a visual analog scale. Their impulsivity was assessed via three laboratory tasks, the stop-signal reaction time, the Balloon Analogue Risk Task and delay discounting. Each evaluation was performed before and after SROM administration. Craving was significantly reduced after administration of SROM (difference 2.83; P  = 0.0010), whereas there were no significant differences in performance in the three laboratory tasks. In the long term, we observed an improvement on delay discounting correlated with the duration and dosage of SROM. The acute impact of SROM appears to significantly reduce craving, without impacting impulsivity. Observation of the correlation between delay discounting and the duration and dosage of OMT is of great interest and should be studied further.

Preliminary attitudes on medications for opioid use disorders (MOUDs) in Southeastern Switzerland and New York City

The United States (US) and Switzerland are affluent countries with different responses to surges in opioid use disorder (OUD) cases over the last thirty years. The Swiss "PROVE" trail implemented heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) for OUD alongside other medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). In contrast, heroin remains highly controlled, HAT is inaccessible, and MOUD programs are generally more restrictive in the US than in Switzerland. We conducted a survey to compare practitioners' attitudes toward HAT across sites in both countries. Surveys were distributed electronically for voluntary, uncompensated completion (N = 120) at two mental health delivery sites, Psychiatrische Dienste Graubünden (PDGR) in Graubünden, Switzerland and Montefiore Medical Center (MMC) in the Bronx, NY. The survey instrument included 10 demographic and 19 "beliefs" questions measuring agreement level with a statement on a 5-point scale. Analysis included 79 PDGR respondents (mean age = 43.2, 59.5% women) and 41 MMC respondents (mean age = 44.7, 63.4% women), and did not show differences in confidence to treat OUD, addictions, and psychiatric disorders. For belief in HAT, Swiss respondents had a significantly more favorable view (b = 0.62) than those in New York (p = 0.00027). This study shows a difference in attitudes toward HAT among demographically similar staff treating OUD patients across sites. The cohorts demonstrate an overall positive attitude toward HAT but a more robust positive attitude was evident in Switzerland. Previously unreported attitude comparisons across sites with dissimilar OUD treatment availability may explain differences in practices and success in reducing harm from this disorder.

Do Individuals with Internet Gaming Disorder Share Personality Traits with Substance-Dependent Individuals?

(1) Background: Internet gaming disorder (IGD) shares many similarities with substance use disorder (SUD), contributing to its recognition as an addictive disorder. Nevertheless, no study has compared IGD to other addictive disorders in terms of personality traits established as highly co-occurring with SUDs. (2) Methods: We recruited a sample of gamers (massively multiplayer online role-playing games) (MMORPGs) via online in-game forums. We compared 83 individuals with IGD (MMORPG-IGD group) to 47 former heroin addicts under methadone maintenance treatment (MMT; MMT group) with regard to alexithymia, impulsivity, sensation seeking and aggressiveness assessed through self-administered scales, being TAS-20, BIS-10, Z-SSS and BDHI, respectively. (3) Results: Our results draw a relatively similar personality profile between groups but indicate that the subject traits are generally more pronounced in the MMT cohort. The overall lesser intensity of these traits in the MMORPG-IGD group might reflect the greater variability in the severity of the IGD. (4) Conclusions: IGD shares personality traits with MMT, and intensity may be influenced by the severity of the addiction or by certain direct environmental factors, and might also influence the propensity towards one behavior rather than another.

Nasal administration of diacetylmorphine improved the adherence in a patient receiving heroin-assisted treatment

Background

Traditional heroin-assisted treatment in Switzerland consists of oral and injectable diacetylmorphine (pharmaceutical heroin) administration. To date, no suitable treatment option is available for patients who crave rapid onset (“rush”) but are either unable to inject or primarily sniff or inhale illicit heroin. We present a patient who successfully switched to intranasal heroin-assisted treatment following several unsuccessful treatment attempts.

Case presentation

A 29-year-old male with severe opioid use disorder, injection substance use, and concomitant cocaine use, previously prescribed slow-release oral morphine, was started on intravenous diacetylmorphine. Due to complications and harms associated with intravenous injections, nasal diacetylmorphine was prescribed. With this novel route of administration, the patient who had previously been unable to adhere to other OAT options remained in treatment. Health outcomes improved by reduction of injection-related harms, increased adherence to the heroin-assisted treatment regimen, and increased collaboration with the therapeutic staff.

Conclusions

Nasal heroin-assisted treatment can be a feasible therapeutic option for individuals with severe opioid use disorder who crave the fast onset of effect of diacetylmorphine but are unable to inject intravenously.

Opioid Use Disorder

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a treatable chronic disorder with episodes of remission and recurrence characterized by loss of control of opioid use, compulsive use, and continued use despite harms. If untreated, OUD is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Buprenorphine and methadone reduce fatal and nonfatal opioid overdose and infectious complications of OUD and are the first-line treatment options. Physicians have an important role to play in diagnosing OUD and its comorbidities, offering evidence-based treatment, and delivering overdose prevention and other harm reduction services to people who continue to use opioids. Interdisciplinary office-based addiction treatment programs support high-quality OUD care.

The suitability of oral diacetylmorphine in treatment-refractory patients with heroin dependence: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To review the scientific literature on the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical efficacy and safety of (supervised) oral diacetylmorphine for patients with severe heroin dependence.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and PsycINFO databases were searched. Eleven published studies were identified and selected based on defined eligibility and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Four pharmacokinetic studies reported negligible plasma concentrations of diacetylmorphine and its active metabolite 6-monacetylmorphine. Among six pharmacodynamic studies, three trials showed that oral diacetylmorphine reduced opioid withdrawal symptoms, one open-label pilot study reported that two patients experienced a modest 'rush' after oral diacetylmorphine and two studies found that patients could not distinguish between oral diacetylmorphine, methadone, or morphine. Regarding the clinical studies, a Swiss prospective cohort study in patients with heroin dependence showed high retention rates of oral diacetylmorphine treatment with few serious adverse events, whereas in the Canadian SALOME trial, oral diacetylmorphine treatment was prematurely discontinued because treatment retention of oral diacetylmorphine was lower than injectable diacetylmorphine maintenance treatment. Finally, two case studies illustrate the limitations and potential problems of oral diacetylmorphine in the treatment of treatment-refractory heroin dependent patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on all published data, it is unlikely that oral diacetylmorphine produces a substantial 'rush'. Prescription of oral diacetylmorphine might therefore be effective only for treatment-refractory patients with heroin dependence (i) as maintenance treatment for those who never injected or inhaled opioids; (ii) as maintenance treatment for those who want to switch from injection to oral administration of diacetylmorphine; and/or (iii) to reduce opioid withdrawal symptoms.

New Approaches in Drug Dependence: Opioids

Purpose of Review

This article aims to provide an overview of standard and adjunctive treatment options in opioid dependence in consideration of therapy-refractory courses. The relevance of oral opioid substitution treatment (OST) and measures of harm reduction as well as heroin-assisted therapies are discussed alongside non-pharmacological approaches.

Recent Findings

Currently, recommendation can be given for OST with methadone, buprenorphine, slow-release oral morphine (SROM), and levomethadone. Heroin-assisted treatment using diamorphine shall be considered as a cost-effective alternative for individuals not responding to the afore-mentioned opioid agonists in order to increase retention and reduce illicit opioid use. The modalities of application and the additional benefits of long-acting formulations of buprenorphine should be sufficiently transferred to clinicians and the eligible patients; simultaneously methods to improve planning of actions and self- management need to be refined. Regarding common primary outcomes in research on opioid treatment, evidence of the effectiveness of adjunctive psychological interventions is scarce.

Summary

Maintaining a harm reduction approach in the treatment of opioid addiction, a larger range of formulations is available for the prescribers. Embedding the pharmacological, ideally individualized treatment into a holistic, structure-giving concept also requires a reduction of fragmentation of ancillary services available, drug policies, and treatment philosophies on a global scale.

Take home injectable opioids for opioid use disorder during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic is in urgent need: a case study

Background

In North America the opioid poisoning crisis currently faces the unprecedented challenges brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, further straining people and communities already facing structural and individual vulnerabilities. People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are facing unique challenges in response to COVID-19, such as not being able to adopt best practices (e.g., physical distancing) if they’re financially insecure or living in shelters (or homeless). They also have other medical conditions that make them more likely to be immunocompromised and at risk of developing COVID-19. In response to the COVID-19 public health emergency, national and provincial regulatory bodies introduced guidance and exemptions to mitigate the spread of the virus. Among them, clinical guidance for prescribers were issued to allow take home opioid medications for opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Take Home for injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is only considered within a restrictive regulatory structure, specific to the pandemic. Nevertheless, this risk mitigation guidance allowed carries, mostly daily dispensed, to a population that would not have access to it prior to the pandemic. In this case it is presented and discussed that if a carry was possible during the pandemic, then the carry could continue post COVID-19 to address a gap in our approach to individualize care for people with OUD receiving iOAT.

Case presentation

Here we present the first case of a patient in Canada with long-term OUD that received take home injectable diacetylmorphine to self-isolate in an approved site after being diagnosed with COVID-19 during a visit to the emergency room where he was diagnosed with cellulitis and admitted to receive antibiotics.

Conclusion

In the present case we demonstrated that it is feasible to provide iOAT outside the community clinic with no apparent negative consequences. Improving upon and making permanent these recently introduced risk mitigating guidance during COVID-19, have the potential not just to protect during the pandemic, but also to address long-overdue barriers to access evidence-based care in addiction treatment.

Individual and structural correlates of willingness for intravenous buprenorphine treatment among people who inject sublingual buprenorphine in France

BACKGROUND

Some people do not benefit from oral administration of opioid agonist treatment, and an intravenous (IV) formulation may be more suitable. Our objective was to evaluate the willingness of people who regularly inject sublingual buprenorphine to receive IV buprenorphine as a prescribed treatment, and to examine related correlates.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of data from the cross-sectional study PrebupIV, conducted in France in 2015 among 557 people who inject opioids. The study comprised questionnaires completed either face to face or online and community-based workshops. We only included participants who reported buprenorphine as their main injected drug (n = 209). Willingness to receive IV buprenorphine treatment was measured on a scale from 0 to 10. Ordinal logistic regression identified correlates of willingness. Artworks and testimonies from participants in the workshops were also used to illustrate correlates of willingness.

RESULTS

Among the 209 participants, the mean score (SD) for willingness to receive IV buprenorphine was 8.0 (2.8). Multivariate analysis showed that participants who reported using non-prescribed buprenorphine (AOR = 4.82, p = 0.019), a higher daily dosage of buprenorphine (AOR (for 1 mg) = 1.05, p = 0.043), and a higher number of complications due to injection (AOR = 2.28, p = 0.037), were more willing to receive IV buprenorphine treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Willingness to initiate IV buprenorphine treatment was high among people who regularly inject sublingual buprenorphine. A prescribed IV formulation could attract and retain more people into care and reduce harms associated with the injection of buprenorphine tablets.

Are patients' goals in treatment associated with expected treatment outcomes? Findings from a mixed-methods study on outpatient pharmacological treatment for opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVES

Existing methods of measuring effectiveness of pharmacological treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) are highly variable. Therefore, understanding patients' treatment goals is an integral part of patient-centred care. Our objective is to explore whether patients' treatment goals align with a frequently used clinical outcome, opioid abstinence.

DESIGN

Triangulation mixed-methods design.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We collected prospective data from 2030 participants who were receiving methadone or buprenorphine-naloxone treatment for a diagnosis of OUD in order to meet study inclusion criteria. Participants were recruited from 45 centrally-managed outpatient opioid agonist therapy clinics in Ontario, Canada. At study entry, we asked, 'What are your goals in treatment?' and used NVivo software to identify common themes.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Urine drug screens (UDS) were collected for 3 months post-study enrolment in order to identify abstinence versus ongoing opioid use (mean number of UDS over 3 months=12.6, SD=5.3). We used logistic regression to examine the association between treatment goals and opioid abstinence.

RESULTS

Participants had a mean age of 39.2 years (SD=10.7), 44% were women and median duration in treatment was 2.6 years (IQR 5.2). Six overarching goals were identified from patient responses, including 'stop or taper off of treatment' (68%), 'stay or get clean' (37%) and 'live a normal life' (14%). Participants reporting the goal 'stay or get clean' had lower odds of abstinence at 3 months than those who did not report this goal (OR=0.73, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.91, p=0.005). Although the majority of patients wanted to taper off or stop medication, this goal was not associated with opioid abstinence, nor were any of their other goals.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient goals in OUD treatment do not appear to be associated with programme measures of outcome (ie, abstinence from opioids). Future studies are needed to examine outcomes related to patient-reported treatment goals found in our study; pain management, employment, and stopping/tapering treatment should all be explored.

Service delivery models for injectable opioid agonist treatment in Canada: 2 sequential environmental scans

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is an emerging evidence-based option in the continuum of care for opioid use disorder in parts of Canada. Our study objective was to identify and describe iOAT programs operating during the ongoing opioid overdose crisis.

METHODS

We conducted 2 sequential environmental scans. Programs were eligible to participate if they were in operation as of Sept. 1, 2018, and Mar. 1, 2019. Information was collected over 2-3 months for each scan (September-October 2018, March-May 2019). Programs that participated in the first scan and newly established programs were invited to participate in the second scan. The scans included questions about location, service delivery model, clinical and operational characteristics, numbers and demographic characteristics of clients, and program barriers and facilitators. Descriptive analysis was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 14 unique programs across the 2 scans. Eleven programs located in urban centres in British Columbia and Ontario participated in the first scan. At the time of the second scan, 2 of these programs were on hold and 2 of 3 newly established programs were in Alberta. The total capacity of all participating programs was 420 clients at most. Four service delivery models were identified; iOAT was most commonly integrated within existing health and social services. All programs offered hydromorphone, and 1 program also offered diacetylmorphine. In the first scan, 73% of clients (133/183) were male; the mean age of clients was 47 years. Limited capacity, pharmacy operations and lack of diacetylmorphine access were among the most frequently reported barriers. The most commonly reported facilitators included client-centred care, client relationships and access to other health and social support.

INTERPRETATION

Evidence indicates that iOAT can be successfully implemented using diverse service delivery models. Future work should facilitate scale-up of this evidence-based treatment where gaps persist in high-risk communities.

An ethical analysis of UK drug policy as an example of a criminal justice approach to drugs: a commentary on the short film Putting UK Drug Policy into Focus

Background

Drug-related deaths in the UK are at the highest level on record—the war on drugs has failed. A short film has been produced intended for public and professional audiences featuring academics, representatives of advocacy organisations, police and policymakers outlining the problems with, and highlighting alternative approaches to, UK drug policy. A range of ethical arguments are alluded to, which are distilled here in greater depth for interested viewers and a wider professional and academic readership.

Main body

The war on drugs is seemingly driven by the idea that the consumption of illegal drugs is immoral. However, the meaning ascribed to ‘drug’ in the illicit sense encompasses a vast range of substances with different properties that have as much in common with legal drugs as they do with each other. The only property that distinguishes illegal from legal drugs is their legal status, which rather than being based on an assessment of how dangerous they are has been defined by centuries of socio-political idiosyncrasies. The consequences of criminalising people who use drugs often outweigh the risks they face from drug use, and there is not convincing evidence that this prevents wider drug use or drug-related harm. Additionally, punishing someone as a means, to the end of deterring others from drug use, is ethically problematic. Although criminalising the production of harmful drugs may seem more ethically tenable, it has not reduced the supply of drugs and it precludes effective regulation of the market. Other potential policy approaches are highlighted, which would be ethically preferable to existing punitive policy.

Conclusion

It is not possible to eliminate all drug use and associated harms. The current approach is not only ineffective in preventing drug-related harm but itself directly and indirectly causes incalculable harm to those who use drugs and to wider society. For policymakers to gain the mandate to rationalise drug policy, or to be held accountable if they do not, wider engagement with the electorate is required. It is hoped that this film will encourage at least a few to give pause and reflect on how drug policy might be improved.

Maintenance agonist treatments for opiate-dependent pregnant women

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of opiate use among pregnant women can range from 1% to 2% to as high as 21%. Just in the United States alone, among pregnant women with hospital delivery, a fourfold increase in opioid use is reported from 1999 to 2014 (Haight 2018). Heroin crosses the placenta, and pregnant, opiate-dependent women experience a six-fold increase in maternal obstetric complications such as low birth weight, toxaemia, third trimester bleeding, malpresentation, puerperal morbidity, fetal distress and meconium aspiration. Neonatal complications include narcotic withdrawal, postnatal growth deficiency, microcephaly, neuro-behavioural problems, increased neonatal mortality and a 74-fold increase in sudden infant death syndrome. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review first published in 2008 and last updated in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of any maintenance treatment alone or in combination with a psychosocial intervention compared to no intervention, other pharmacological intervention or psychosocial interventions alone for child health status, neonatal mortality, retaining pregnant women in treatment, and reducing the use of substances.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to February 2020: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. We also searched two trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials which assessed the efficacy of any pharmacological maintenance treatment for opiate-dependent pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four trials with 271 pregnant women. Three compared methadone with buprenorphine and one methadone with oral slow-release morphine. Three out of four studies had adequate allocation concealment and were double-blind. The major flaw in the included studies was attrition bias: three out of four had a high dropout rate (30% to 40%), and this was unbalanced between groups. Methadone versus buprenorphine: There was probably no evidence of a difference in the dropout rate from treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 1.20, three studies, 223 participants, moderate-quality evidence). There may be no evidence of a difference in the use of primary substances between methadone and buprenorphine (RR 1.81, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.68, two studies, 151 participants, low-quality evidence). Birth weight may be higher in the buprenorphine group in the two trials that reported data MD;-530.00 g, 95%CI -662.78 to -397.22 (one study, 19 particpants) and MD: -215.00 g, 95%CI -238.93 to -191.07 (one study, 131 participants) although the results could not be pooled due to very high heterogeneity (very low-quality of evidence). The third study reported that there was no evidence of a difference. We found there may be no evidence of a difference in the APGAR score (MD: 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03, two studies,163 participants, low-quality evidence). Many measures were used in the studies to assess neonatal abstinence syndrome. The number of newborns treated for neonatal abstinence syndrome, which is the most critical outcome, may not differ between groups (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.87 to1.63, three studies, 166 participants, low-quality evidence). Only one study which compared methadone with buprenorphine reported side effects. We found there may be no evidence of a difference in the number of mothers with serious adverse events (AEs) (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.75 to 3.83, 175 participants, low-quality evidence) and we found there may be no difference in the numbers of newborns with serious AEs (RR 4.77, 95% CI 0.59, 38.49,131 participants, low-quality evidence). Methadone versus slow-release morphine: There were no dropouts in either treatment group. Oral slow-release morphine may be superior to methadone for abstinence from heroin use during pregnancy (RR 2.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 5.77, one study, 48 participants, low-quality evidence). In the comparison between methadone and slow-release morphine, no side effects were reported for the mother. In contrast, one child in the methadone group had central apnoea, and one child in the morphine group had obstructive apnoea (low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Methadone and buprenorphine may be similar in efficacy and safety for the treatment of opioid-dependent pregnant women and their babies. There is not enough evidence to make conclusions for the comparison between methadone and slow-release morphine. Overall, the body of evidence is too small to make firm conclusions about the equivalence of the treatments compared. There is still a need for randomised controlled trials of adequate sample size comparing different maintenance treatments.

Safer opioid distribution in response to the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 has turned the world upside down in a very short period of time. The impact of COVID-19 will disproportionately effect people who are least able to protect themselves and this will include people who use drugs. The arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic comes at time when North America is in the midst of a protracted overdose epidemic caused by a toxic illegal drug supply. Overdose deaths are likely to rise when people are isolated, social support programs are cut back, and the illicit drug supply is further compromised. Safer opioid distribution in response to a toxic street drug supply is a pragmatic and effective way to reduce overdose deaths. COVID-19 makes such an approach even more urgent and compelling.

Acceptability and efficacy of naltrexone for criminal justice-involved individuals with opioid use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Criminal justice-involved individuals carry a disproportionately higher burden of opioid use disorder (OUD) than those not involved with the criminal justice system, and are often unable to access opioid agonist therapies such as methadone and buprenorphine. The opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone (NTX) is effective for the prevention of relapse to OUD and may be more acceptable in criminal justice settings. The objectives of this review were to: (1) provide an overall summary effect across studies for the efficacy and acceptability of oral and injectable NTX for the treatment of OUD among criminal justice-involved individuals and (2) examine systematic variations in study results to explain heterogeneity among study-specific effects.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of 1045 patients across 11 studies (10 randomized controlled trials, one quasi-experimental study). All available outcomes were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted for oral and injectable naltrexone; meta-regression analyses were conducted for socio-demographic and study-level characteristics.

RESULTS

NTX improved retention in treatment [risk ratio (RR) = 1.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05, 1.63], reduced rates of re-incarceration (RR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54-0.92), reduced opioid relapse (RR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.53-0.76) and improved opioid abstinence (RR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.16-1.65). While NTX was associated with a greater burden of adverse events overall (RR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.13-1.95), the findings were inconclusive as to whether or not a difference was present for the number of serious adverse events or overdoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Naltrexone appears to be efficacious and acceptable for the treatment of opioid use disorder among criminal justice-involved individuals; however, the risk for adverse events must be weighed against the potential benefits.

Comparison of Treatment Options for Refractory Opioid Use Disorder in the United States and Canada: a Narrative Review

Amidst the opioid overdose crisis, there are increased efforts to expand access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Hospitalization for the complications of substance use in the United States (US) provides an opportunity to initiate methadone, buprenorphine, and extended release naltrexone and link high-risk, not otherwise engaged, patients into outpatient care. However, treatment options for patients are quickly exhausted when these medications are not desired, tolerated, or beneficial. As an example, we discuss the case of a man who was hospitalized 27 times over 2 years for complications related to his opioid use disorder (OUD), including recurring methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus vertebral osteomyelitis, increasing antimicrobial resistance, new infections, and multiple overdoses in and out of the hospital. The patient suffered these complications despite efforts to treat his OUD with methadone and buprenorphine while hospitalized, and repeated attempts to link him to outpatient care. We use this case to review evidence-based treatments for refractory OUD, which are not approved in the US, but are available in Canada. If hospitalized in Vancouver, Canada, this patient could have been offered slow-release oral morphine and injectable opioid agonist therapy, as well as access to sterile syringes and injection equipment at an in-hospital supervised injection facility. Each of these approaches is supported by evidence and has been implemented successfully in Canada, yet none are available in the US. In order to combat the multiple harms from opioids, it is critical that we consider every evidence-based tool.

Dihydrocodeine for detoxification and maintenance treatment in individuals with opiate use disorders

BACKGROUND

Medical treatment and detoxification from opiate disorders includes oral administration of opioid agonists. Dihydrocodeine (DHC) substitution treatment is typically low threshold and therefore has the capacity to reach wider groups of opiate users. Decisions to prescribe DHC to patients with less severe opiate disorders centre on its perceived safety, reduced toxicity, shorter half-life and more rapid onset of action, and potential retention of patients. This review set out to investigate the effects of DHC in comparison to other pharmaceutical opioids and placebos in the detoxification and substitution of individuals with opiate use disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effectiveness of DHC in reducing illicit opiate use and other health-related outcomes among adults compared to other drugs or placebos used for detoxification or substitution therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2019 we searched Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science. We also searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and Trialsjournal.com. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effect of DHC for detoxification and maintenance substitution therapy for adolescent (aged 15 years and older) and adult illicit opiate users. The primary outcomes were abstinence from illicit opiate use following detoxification or maintenance therapy measured by self-report or urinalysis. The secondary outcomes were treatment retention and other health and behaviour outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the standard methodological procedures that are outlined by Cochrane. This includes the GRADE approach to appraise the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three trials (in five articles) with 385 opiate-using participants that measured outcomes at different follow-up periods in this review. Two studies with 150 individuals compared DHC with buprenorphine for detoxification, and one study with 235 participants compared DHC to methadone for maintenance substitution therapy. We downgraded the quality of evidence mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision. For the two studies that compared DHC to buprenorphine, we found low-quality evidence of no significant difference between DHC and buprenorphine for detoxification at six-month follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 1.39; P = 0.23) in the meta-analysis for the primary outcome of abstinence from illicit opiates. Similarly, low-quality evidence indicated no difference for treatment retention (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.68; P = 0.06). In the single trial that compared DHC to methadone for maintenance substitution therapy, the evidence was also of low quality, and there may be no difference in effects between DHC and methadone for reported abstinence from illicit opiates (mean difference (MD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.29). For treatment retention at six months' follow-up in this single trial, the RR calculated with an intention-to-treat analysis also indicated that there may be no difference between DHC and methadone (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.16). The studies that compared DHC to buprenorphine reported no serious adverse events, while the DHC versus methadone study reported one death due to methadone overdose.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low-quality evidence that DHC may be no more effective than other commonly used pharmacological interventions in reducing illicit opiate use. It is therefore premature to make any conclusive statements about the effectiveness of DHC, and it is suggested that further high-quality studies are conducted, especially in low- to middle-income countries.

Building healthcare provider relationships for patient-centered care: A qualitative study of the experiences of people receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) was designed as a pragmatic and compassionate approach for people who have not benefitted from medication assisted treatment with oral opioids (e.g., methadone). While, a substantial body of clinical trial evidence has demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of iOAT, considerably less is known about the patient-centered aspects of this treatment and their role in self-reported treatment goals and outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore participants' experiences in iOAT as they broadly relate to the domains of patient-centered care. A secondary goal was to explore how these experiences affected participants' self-reported treatment outcomes.

METHODS

A qualitative methodology, and constructivist grounded theory approach, was used to guide sampling, data collection and analysis. A total of 30 in-depth interviews were conducted with people receiving iOAT in North America's first clinic. Audio-recordings for each semi-structured interview were transcribed and read repeatedly. The strategy of constant comparison was used through iterative stages of line-by-line, focused and theoretical coding until theoretical saturation was achieved.

RESULTS

"Building healthcare provider relationships for patient-centered care in iOAT" was the emergent core concept. Healthcare provider relationships were established through two interrelated processes: 'Opening up' was attributed to the positive environment, and to feeling understood and supported by healthcare providers. 'Being a part of care' emerged as participants felt safe to ask for what was needed and had opportunities to collaborate in treatment decisions. These processes established a foundation in which participants experienced care that was responsive to their individual dose, health and psychosocial needs.

CONCLUSIONS

The core concept suggested that therapeutic relationships were fundamental to experiences of patient-centered care in iOAT. When relationships were respectful and understanding, participants received individualized and holistic care in iOAT. These findings offer a valuable example of how therapeutic relationships can be strengthened in other substance use treatment settings, particularly when responding to the diverse treatment needs of clients.

Initiation of injectable opioid agonist treatment in hospital: A case report

Uncontrolled opioid withdrawal and pain often drive inpatients with opioid use disorder to leave hospital against medical advice, resulting in suboptimal medical and addiction treatment. When oral opioid agonist treatments such as methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone fail for management of craving and withdrawal, injectable opioid agonist treatment may serve to retain patients in care and link them to addiction services. We describe the case of a 47-year-old man with a severe, active opioid use disorder and daily use of illicitly manufactured fentanyl, who was re-admitted to hospital for post-operative management after leaving against medical advice due to uncontrolled opioid withdrawal. Intravenous hydromorphone was used to retain him in care, allowing for completion of his antibiotics and enrolment in ongoing community injectable opioid agonist treatment.

Opioid agonist treatment scale-up and the initiation of injection drug use: A dynamic modeling analysis

BACKGROUND

Injection drug use (IDU) is associated with multiple health harms. The vast majority of IDU initiation events (in which injection-naïve persons first adopt IDU) are assisted by a person who injects drugs (PWID), and as such, IDU could be considered as a dynamic behavioral transmission process. Data suggest that opioid agonist treatment (OAT) enrollment is associated with a reduced likelihood of assisting with IDU initiation. We assessed the association between recent OAT enrollment and assisting IDU initiation across several North American settings and used dynamic modeling to project the potential population-level impact of OAT scale-up within the PWID population on IDU initiation.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We employed data from a prospective multicohort study of PWID in 3 settings (Vancouver, Canada [n = 1,737]; San Diego, United States [n = 346]; and Tijuana, Mexico [n = 532]) from 2014 to 2017. Site-specific modified Poisson regression models were constructed to assess the association between recent (past 6 month) OAT enrollment and history of ever having assisted an IDU initiation with recently assisting IDU initiation. Findings were then pooled using linear mixed-effects techniques. A dynamic transmission model of IDU among the general population was developed, stratified by known factors associated with assisting IDU initiation and relevant drug use behaviors. The model was parameterized to a generic North American setting (approximately 1% PWID) and used to estimate the impact of increasing OAT coverage among PWID from baseline (approximately 21%) to 40%, 50%, and 60% on annual IDU initiation incidence and corresponding PWID population size across a decade. From Vancouver, San Diego, and Tijuana, respectively, 4.5%, 5.2%, and 4.3% of participants reported recently assisting an IDU initiation, and 49.4%, 19.7%, and 2.1% reported recent enrollment in OAT. Recent OAT enrollment was significantly associated with a 45% lower likelihood of providing recent IDU initiation assistance among PWID (relative risk [RR] 0.55 [95% CI 0.36-0.84], p = 0.006) compared to those not recently on OAT. Our dynamic model predicts a baseline mean of 1,067 (2.5%-97.5% interval [95% I 490-2,082]) annual IDU initiations per 1,000,000 individuals, of which 886 (95% I 406-1,750) are assisted by PWID. Based on our observed statistical associations, our dynamic model predicts that increasing OAT coverage from approximately 21% to 40%, 50%, or 60% among PWID could reduce annual IDU initiations by 11.5% (95% I 2.4-21.7), 17.3% (95% I 5.6-29.4), and 22.8% (95% I 8.1-36.8) and reduce the PWID population size by 5.4% (95% I 0.1-12.0), 8.2% (95% I 2.2-16.9), and 10.9% (95% I 3.2-21.8) relative to baseline, respectively, in a decade. Less impact occurs when the protective effect of OAT is diminished, when a greater proportion of IDU initiations are unassisted by PWID, and when average IDU career length is longer. The study's main limitations are uncertainty in the causal pathway between OAT enrollment and assisting with IDU initiation and the use of a simplified model of IDU initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to its known benefits on preventing HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV), and overdose among PWID, our modeling suggests that OAT scale-up may also reduce the number of IDU initiations and PWID population size.

Slow release oral morphine versus methadone for the treatment of opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of slow release oral morphine (SROM) as a treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

Three electronic databases were searched through 1 May 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE. We also searched the following electronic registers for ongoing trials: ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Current Controlled Trials and the EU Clinical Trials Register.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included RCTs of all durations, assessing the effect of SROM on measures of treatment retention, heroin use and craving in adults who met the diagnostic criteria for OUD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using the random-effects model and expressed as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed (χ2 statistic) and quantified (I2 statistic) and a sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assess the impact of particular high-risk trials.

RESULTS

Among 1315 records screened and four studies reviewed, four unique randomised trials met the inclusion criteria (n=471), and compared SROM with methadone. In the meta-analysis, we observed no significant differences between SROM and methadone in improving treatment retention (RR=0.98; 95%CI: 0.94 to 1.02, p=0.34) and heroin use (RR=0.96; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.52, p=0.86). Craving data was not amenable to meta-analysis. Available data implied no differences in adverse events, heroin, cocaine or benzodiazepine use.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of existing randomised trials suggests SROM may be generally equal to methadone in retaining patients in treatment and reducing heroin use while potentially resulting in less craving. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was low-to-moderate.

Prescribing diamorphine in the United States: Insights from a nationally representative survey

BACKGROUND

Some countries allow physicians to prescribe pharmaceutical-grade diamorphine to dependent users who have previously undergone treatment but are still using street-sourced heroin; this is not allowed in the US. This study provides the first nationally representative US data concerning public support for prescribing diamorphine to dependent users. We also test the hypothesis that calling it "diamorphine" instead of "heroin" increases support for this approach.

METHODS

The RAND American Life Panel is a nationally representative, probability-based survey of US adults. Of the 3345 panel members invited to take the survey, 2530 (75.6%) provided a valid response to our question module. Respondents were randomly assigned to have the question refer to the prescribed drug as either "heroin" or "diamorphine." The groups did not significantly differ on sex, age, race/ethnicity, or education. We compare the distribution of responses for the two groups and conduct Pearson's chi-squared test with the Rao-Scott correction.

RESULTS

For those asked whether the US should try prescribing pharmaceutical-grade "heroin," the share answering "Yes" (20.8%) was 15 percentage points lower than those responding "No" (35.8%). When the question asked about "diamorphine," the results were nearly reversed: the share answering "Yes" (30.6%) was almost 12 percentage points higher than those responding "No" (18.9%). The distributions of responses were significantly different (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Support for prescribing diamorphine to dependent users is low in the US. While the results are consistent with the hypothesis that referring to heroin as diamorphine may reduce stigma associated with the substance and increase support for prescribing it, opinions may change as individuals learn they are different names for the same substance.

Nontraditional Alcohol and Opioid Agonist Treatment Interventions

Despite the availability of effective medications and psychosocial interventions for the management of a substance use disorder, some individuals repeatedly fail the most aggressive treatment regimens. For such individuals, alternative treatment options exist seeking to mitigate the negative consequences of the use of harmful substances. Participation in a managed alcohol program, or the use of sustained-release oral morphine or injectable opioid agonist treatment or the creation of safe injecting facilities, are examples of such nonstandard approaches. This article reviews the available evidence of these treatment modalities.

The association between nicotine dependence and physical health among people receiving injectable diacetylmorphine or hydromorphone for the treatment of chronic opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

People with chronic opioid use disorder often present to treatment with individual and structural vulnerabilities and remain at risk of reporting adverse health outcomes. This risk is greatly compounded by tobacco smoking, which is highly prevalent among people with chronic opioid use disorder. Despite the known burden of tobacco smoking on health, the relationship between nicotine dependence and health has not been studied among those receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment. As such, the present study aims to explore the association between nicotine dependence and physical health among participants of the Study to Assess Longer-Term Opioid Medication Effectiveness (SALOME) at baseline and six-months.

METHODS

SALOME was a double-blind phase III clinical trial testing the non-inferiority of injectable hydromorphone to injectable diacetylmorphine for chronic opioid use disorder. Participants reporting tobacco smoking were included in a linear regression analysis of physical health at baseline (before receiving treatment) and at six-months.

RESULTS

At baseline, nicotine dependence score, lifetime history of emotional, physical, or sexual abuse and prior month safe injection site access were independently and significantly associated with physical health. At six-months nicotine dependence score was the only variable that maintained this significant and independent association with physical health.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate that after six-months, the injectable treatment effectively brought equity to patients' physical health status, yet the association with nicotine dependence remained. Findings could inform whether the provision of treatment for nicotine dependence should be made a priority in settings where injectable opioid agonist treatment is delivered to achieve improvements in overall physical health in this population.

[Diagnosis, differential diagnosis and therapy of substance use disorders in general hospital (general section)]

Substance use disorders are becoming an increasingly significant problem in general hospitals and hence play a key role in consultation- and liaison psychiatry. Diverse psychotropic effects of various substances mimic psychiatric disorders. An alcohol intoxication can present depressive or manic symptoms, a cannabis delirium can present as a psychosis while stimulants use can suggest the diagnosis of an anxiety disorder. Obtaining dual diagnoses by identifying substance-induced and non-substance-induced psychopathologies is clinically challenging.The aim of this article is to systematically describe the psychopathology, pathophysiology and therapeutic options of substance-use disorders particularly relevant for consultation and liaison psychiatry.

Characterizing the subjective, observer-rated, and physiological effects of hydromorphone relative to heroin in a human laboratory study

BACKGROUND

This study compared the effects of the several doses of the opioid agonists heroin and hydromorphone across two routes of administration in humans. The goal was to guide development of human laboratory studies of opioid effects and inform subsequent injection pharmacotherapy trials of hydromorphone-assisted treatment.

METHODS

A within-subject (N = 16), double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, evaluation of acute doses of heroin and hydromorphone was completed at four dose levels (placebo, low, medium, high) across two routes of administration (intravenous, subcutaneous) in non-physically dependent, opioid-experienced individuals. Subject and observer ratings, as well as physiological outcomes, were assessed.

RESULTS

Within each route of administration, heroin and hydromorphone produced effects that were qualitatively similar on most variables across the doses examined. All effects were dose-dependent. The drugs produced different effects on VAS ratings of "Feels Like Heroin," a Heroin Identification Test, observer agonist ratings, and oxygen saturation levels. Drug-dependent differences emerged at the highest doses in all cases. Few significant main effects of Route were identified and their pattern was not uniform. Relative potency calculations across all subject, observer, and physiological outcomes that met analysis criteria revealed similar profiles and resulted in mean heroin:hydromorphone potencies of 3.35:1 and 2.88:1 for the intravenous and subcutaneous routes, respectively, and intravenous:subcutaneous potencies of 0.47:1 and 0.49:1 for heroin and hydromorphone, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydromorphone produced similar subjective and physiological effects as heroin, but was more potent than heroin. The current findings support the use of hydromorphone as a model for heroin in human laboratory and clinical treatment studies, and help identify appropriate hydromorphone dose conversion ratios to produce effects qualitatively similar to heroin.

Eligibility for heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) among people who inject opioids and are living with HIV in a Canadian setting

Objectives

A growing body of evidence supports the effectiveness of injectable diacetylmorphine (i.e., heroin) for individuals with treatment-refractory opioid use disorder. Despite this evidence, and the increasing toll of opioid-associated morbidity and mortality, it remains controversial in some settings. To investigate the possible contribution of heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) to HIV treatment-related outcomes, we sought to estimate the proportion and characteristics of HIV-positive people who inject opioids that might be eligible for HAT in Vancouver, Canada.

Methods

We used data from a prospective cohort of people living with HIV who use illicit drugs in Vancouver, Canada. Using generalized estimating equations (GEE), we assessed the longitudinal relationships between eligibility for HAT, using criteria from previous clinical trials and guidelines, with behavioural, social, and clinical characteristics.

Results

Between 2005 and 2014, 478 participants were included in these analyses, contributing 1927 person-years of observation. Of those, 94 (19.7%) met eligibility for HAT at least once during the study period. In a multivariable GEE model, after adjusting for clinical characteristics, being eligible for HAT was positively associated with homelessness, female gender, high-intensity illicit drug use, drug dealing and higher CD4 count.

Conclusions

In our study of HIV-positive people with a history of injection drug use, approximately 20% of participants were eligible for HAT at ≥ 1 follow-up period. Eligibility was linked to risk factors for sub-optimal HIV/AIDS treatment outcomes, such as homelessness and involvement in the local illicit drug trade, suggesting that scaling-up access to HAT might contribute to achieving optimal HIV treatment in this setting.

"I Was Not Sick and I Didn't Need to Recover": Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) as a Refuge from Criminalization

BACKGROUND

Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) in the United States (U.S.) has been undergoing a shift towards conceptualizing the program as recovery-based treatment. Although recovery is seen by some as a means to restore MMT to its rightful position as a medically-based treatment for addiction, it may not represent the experiences, or meet the needs of people who use drugs (PWUD), many of whom who use the program as a pragmatic means of reducing harms associated with criminalization.

OBJECTIVES

To examine alternative constructions of MMT in order to produce a richer, more contextualized picture of the program and the reasons PWUD employ its services.

METHODS

This paper uses semi-structured interviews with 23 people on MMT (either currently or within the previous two years).

RESULTS

Most participants linked their use of MMT to the structural-legal context of prohibition/criminalization rather than through the narrative of the recovery model. Responses suggested the recovery model functions in part to obscure the role of criminalization in the harms PWUD experience in favor of a model based on individual pathology. Conclusions/Importance: In contrast to the recovery model, MMT cannot be understood outside of the structural context of criminalization and the War on Drugs which shape illegal drug use as a difficult and dangerous activity, and consequently position MMT as a way to moderate or escape from those harms.

Effect of dehydroepiandrosterone add-on therapy on mood, decision making and subsequent relapse of polydrug users

A major problem in the treatment of addiction is predicting and preventing relapse following a rehabilitation program. Recently, in preclinical rodent studies dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) was found to markedly improve the resistance to drug reuse. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we examined the effect of DHEA on relapse rates in adult polydrug users taking part in a detoxification program enriched with intensive psychosocial interventions and aftercare. During treatment, participants (79 percent males, mean age 28) consumed DHEA (100 mg/day) or placebo daily for at least 30 days. Of the 121 initial volunteers, 64 participated for at least 1 month. While in treatment, DHEA reduced negative affect on the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (F = 4.25, P = 0.04). Furthermore, in a 16-month follow-up, we found that reuse rates in the DHEA condition were about a third compared with placebo (12 versus 38 percent; χ(2)  = 5.03, P = 0.02). DHEA treatment also resulted in an increase in DHEA sulfate (DHEA-S) 1 month following treatment, and the level of DHEA-S predicted relapse in the follow-up assessment.

Sustained-release dexamfetamine in the treatment of chronic cocaine-dependent patients on heroin-assisted treatment: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Heroin-assisted treatment is effective for methadone treatment-refractory heroin-dependent patients, but continued comorbid cocaine dependence remains problematic. Sustained-release dexamfetamine is a promising agonist pharmacotherapy for cocaine dependence and we aimed to assess its acceptance, efficacy, and safety.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients who were treatment-refractory, as indicated by at least two earlier failed treatments aimed at reducing or abstaining from cocaine use, and who regularly (≥8 days/month) used crack-cocaine were enrolled from four heroin-assisted treatment centres in the Netherlands. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 12 weeks of daily, supervised prescription of 60 mg/day oral sustained-release dexamfetamine or placebo in addition to co-prescribed methadone and diacetylmorphine. Randomisation was done by the collaborating pharmacist, using a computer-generated random number sequence with stratification by treatment centre in blocks of four per stratum. Randomisation was masked to patients, staff, and researchers throughout the study. The primary outcome was the number of self-reported days of cocaine use during study treatment, assessed every 4 weeks. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The study was registered with the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials (EUdraCT 2013-004024-11) and with The Netherlands Trial Register (NTR2576).

FINDINGS

Between Aug 8, 2014, and Feb 27, 2015, 111 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 73 were enrolled and randomised; 38 patients were assigned to the sustained-release dexamfetamine group and 35 to the placebo group. Sustained-release dexamfetamine treatment resulted in significantly fewer days of cocaine use than placebo treatment (mean 44·9 days [SD 29·4] vs 60·6 days [24·3], respectively [95% CI of difference 3·1-28·4]; p=0·031; Cohen's standardised effect size d=0·58). One or more adverse events were reported by 28 (74%) patients in the dexamfetamine group and by 16 (46%) patients in the placebo group. Most adverse events were transient and well-tolerated.

INTERPRETATION

Sustained-release dexamfetamine is a well accepted, effective, and safe agonist pharmacotherapy for comorbid treatment-refractory cocaine dependence in heroin-dependent patients in heroin-assisted treatment. Future research should aim to replicate these findings in chronic cocaine-dependent and other stimulant-dependent patients in more routine treatment settings, including strategies to optimise treatment adherence like medication management interventions and contingency management.

FUNDING

Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Qualitative evaluation of a novel contingency management-related intervention for patients receiving supervised injectable opioid treatment

AIM

To evaluate a novel contingency management (CM)-related intervention for people experiencing complex drug problems, thereby increasing understanding of CM implementation in real-world settings. Objectives are to provide new insights into (i) how context influences intervention delivery; (ii) aspects of intervention delivery that influence outcomes; and (iii) intervention outcomes.

DESIGN

Qualitative realist evaluation of a novel CM-related intervention: conditional budgets (CB).

SETTING

Supervised injectable opioid treatment (IOT) clinic in England (May 2014-March 2015).

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty IOT clinic patients (14 men; six women); 10 IOT clinic staff (seven men; three women).

MEASUREMENTS

Semi-structured interviews systematically coded relating to knowledge and views of the intervention, experiences of delivering/receiving the intervention, and effectiveness of the intervention.

INTERVENTION

Personal budgets provided to patients who reduced their supervised IOT while demonstrating ongoing stability.

FINDINGS

(i) Contextual factors influencing intervention delivery included patient motivation; clarity of intervention information; prior trust in the treatment system; patient and staff involvement in intervention design; stability of the treatment setting. (ii) Aspects of delivery influencing outcomes included transparency of the eligibility criteria, rules and operating processes; rule enforcement; continued verbal information about the intervention; speed of incentive processing and receipt. (iii) Reduced drug use was difficult to attribute to CBs, as patients who did well were those most motivated to change before the intervention started. Unintended outcomes were positive (improved patient psychological wellbeing, staff job satisfaction, staff/patient relationships) and negative (patient relapse, increased staff work-load, tensions in clinic relationships).

CONCLUSIONS

A 'qualitative realist' evaluation of a contingency management intervention to help address complex substance use disorder problems suggests that the programmes need to have stakeholder input, implement consistent eligibility criteria, rules and processes and be introduced into stable treatment settings where relationships are trusting and patients and staff feel secure.

The effectiveness of compulsory drug treatment: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread implementation of compulsory treatment modalities for drug dependence, there has been no systematic evaluation of the scientific evidence on the effectiveness of compulsory drug treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the outcomes of compulsory treatment. We conducted a search in duplicate of all relevant peer-reviewed scientific literature evaluating compulsory treatment modalities. The following academic databases were searched: PubMed, PAIS International, Proquest, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Soc Abstracts, JSTOR, EBSCO/Academic Search Complete, REDALYC, SciELO Brazil. We also searched the Internet, and article reference lists, from database inception to July 15th, 2015. Eligibility criteria are as follows: peer-reviewed scientific studies presenting original data. Primary outcome of interest was post-treatment drug use. Secondary outcome of interest was post-treatment criminal recidivism.

RESULTS

Of an initial 430 potential studies identified, nine quantitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies evaluated compulsory treatment options including drug detention facilities, short (i.e., 21-day) and long-term (i.e., 6 months) inpatient treatment, community-based treatment, group-based outpatient treatment, and prison-based treatment. Three studies (33%) reported no significant impacts of compulsory treatment compared with control interventions. Two studies (22%) found equivocal results but did not compare against a control condition. Two studies (22%) observed negative impacts of compulsory treatment on criminal recidivism. Two studies (22%) observed positive impacts of compulsory inpatient treatment on criminal recidivism and drug use.

CONCLUSION

There is limited scientific literature evaluating compulsory drug treatment. Evidence does not, on the whole, suggest improved outcomes related to compulsory treatment approaches, with some studies suggesting potential harms. Given the potential for human rights abuses within compulsory treatment settings, non-compulsory treatment modalities should be prioritized by policymakers seeking to reduce drug-related harms.

Addiction, Autonomy, and Informed Consent: On and Off the Garden Path

Several ethicists have argued that research trials and treatment programs that involve the provision of drugs to addicts are prima facie unethical, because addicts can't refuse the offer of drugs and therefore can't give informed consent to participation. In response, several people have pointed out that addiction does not cause a compulsion to use drugs. However, since we know that addiction impairs autonomy, this response is inadequate. In this paper, I advance a stronger defense of the capacity of addicts to participate in the programs envisaged. I argue that it is only in certain circumstances that addicts find themselves choosing in ways that conflict with their genuine preferences. Research and treatment programs have none of the features that characterize choices in these autonomy-undermining circumstances, and there is therefore no reason to think that addicts lack the capacity to give informed consent to these programs.

Opioid dependency rehabilitation with the opioid maintenance treatment programme - a qualitative study from the clients' perspective

BACKGROUND

Opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) is the most widely used treatment for opioid dependence. The opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) programme represents an opportunity for people who are opioid users to minimize the many negative health and societal outcomes associated with opioid use through meeting the physiological need of their bodies for opioids. The purpose of this study is to shed some light on how clients in the Norwegian OMT programme see their level of influence on their own treatment.

METHOD

It is a qualitative enquiry using semi-structured interviews of seven OMT clients living in various locations in Norway. The analysis of the material utilized a grounded theory-inspired approach.

RESULTS

This study show that the clients who were part of the OMT programme had better lives than people with untreated addictions did. However, the participants experienced having to play by the rules of the OMT programme if they wanted to have successful treatment. This resulted in varying degrees of dissatisfaction with the treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicated that the clients felt objectified and disenfranchised in the OMT programme, and points out the low level of influence on their own treatment felt by the OMT clients.

Drug use, health and social outcomes of hard-to-treat heroin addicts receiving supervised injectable opiate treatment: secondary outcomes from the Randomized Injectable Opioid Treatment Trial (RIOTT)

AIMS

The Randomized Injectable Opioid Treatment Trial (RIOTT) compared supervised injectable heroin (SIH) and supervised injectable methadone (SIM) with optimized oral methadone (OOM) (ISRCTN0133807). Heroin addicts (previously unresponsive to treatment) made significant reductions in street heroin use at 6 months when treated with SIH. We now examine secondary outcomes.

DESIGN

Multi-site randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing SIH versus OOM and SIM versus OOM.

SETTING

Three supervised injectable opiate clinics in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Chronic refractory heroin addicts continuing to inject street heroin virtually daily despite oral substitution treatment (n = 127), randomized to either SIH(n = 43), SIM(n = 42) or OOM(n = 42). All received high levels of medical and psychosocial support.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

wider drug use, crime, health and social functioning at 6 months.

FINDINGS

At 6 months, no significant differences were found between treatment groups in wider drug use (crack/cocaine, benzodiazepines, alcohol), physical and mental health (SF-36) or social functioning. Within each treatment group, significant reductions were observed in crime [SIH = odds ratio (OR) 0.05; P < 0.001; SIM = OR 0.11; P = 0.002; OOM = OR 0.11; P = 0.003] and money spent per week on illicit drugs (SIH = mean change £-289.43; P < 0.001; SIM = mean change £-183.41; P < 0.001; OOM = mean change £-162.80; P < 0.001), with SIH significantly more likely to have reduced money spent on illicit drugs versus OOM (mean difference £-92.04; P < 0.001). Significant improvements were seen in physical health for SIH and SIM (SIH = mean change 3.97; P = 0.008; SIM = mean change 4.73; P = 0.002) and mental health for OOM (mean change 6.04; P = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Supervised injectable heroin treatment and supervised injectable methadone treatment showed no clearly identified benefit over optimized oral methadone in terms of wider drug use, crime, physical and mental health within a 6-month period, despite reducing street heroin use to a greater extent. However, all interventions were associated with improvements in these outcomes.

Efficacy of Heroin-assisted Treatment In Belgium: A Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) can improve the condition of heroin addicts still using street heroin after a methadone treatment. In Belgium, a new trial compared the efficacy of a HAT to existing methadone maintenance treatment.

METHODS

In this randomised controlled trial, HAT was limited to 12 months. Participants were assessed every 3 months. They were responders if they showed improvement on the level of street heroin use, health or criminal involvement.

RESULTS

74 participants were randomised in the trial. The experimental group (n = 36) counted 30% of responders more than the control group (n = 38) at each assessment point (p < 0.05), except at 12 months where the difference (11%) was no longer significant (p = 0.35). Still, after 12 months, participants in the experimental group reported significantly greater improvements (p < 0.05) than the control group on the level of street heroin use and on the level of physical and mental health. Both groups reported significantly less criminal acts after 12 months (p < 0.001), but with no significant difference between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial confirms the short-term efficacy of HAT for severe heroin addicts, who already failed methadone treatment.