Exploring prison buprenorphine misuse in the United Kingdom: a qualitative study of former prisoners

New trends of drug abuse in custodial settings: A systematic review on the misuse of over-the-counter drugs, prescription-only-medications, and new psychoactive substances

The article presents a systematic literature review on the use and the psychiatric implications of over-the-counter drugs (OTC), prescription-only-medications (POM), and new psychoactive substances (NPS) within custodial settings. The searches wer carried out on 2 November 2022 on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in line with PRISMA guidelines. A total of 538 records were identified, of which 37 met the inclusion criteria. Findings showed the most prevalent NPS and OTC and POM classes reported in prisons were synthetic cannabinoids receptor agonists (SCRAs) and opioids, respectively. NPS markets were shown to be in constant evolution following the pace of legislations aimed to reduce their spread. The use of such substances heavily impacts the conditions and rehabilitation of persons in custody, with consequent physical and mental health risks. It is important to raise awareness of the use and misuse of such substances in prisons (i) from an early warning perspective for law enforcement and policy makers (ii) to prompt doctors to cautiously prescribe substances that may be misused (iii) to improve and increase access to treatment provided (iv) to add such substances to routine toxicological screening procedures (v) to improve harm reduction programmes.

Diversion of medications to treat opioid use disorder: Qualitative findings from formerly incarcerated adults in Massachusetts

BACKGROUND

Carceral officials often cite diversion of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (e.g., buprenorphine) as a reason for not offering MOUD treatment in jails and prisons with little understanding of patient perspectives. We aimed to understand patient perceptions of medication diversion from jail-based MOUD programs and the factors that contribute to and reduce diversion.

METHODS

We conducted thematic analyses of semi-structured interviews held in 2021-22 with 38 adults who received MOUD treatment and were released from eight Massachusetts jails that had implemented a MOUD program on or after September 2019.

RESULTS

Consistent with prior reports from carceral staff, patients perceived MOUD diversion to happen less frequently than expected, which they attributed to dosing protocols that have effectively reduced it. Patients reported that MOUD availability reduced the contraband buprenorphine market, although other contraband substances have entered jails (fentanyl, oxycodone, K2). Patients perceived Subutex to have greater misuse potential and added diversion risks. Patients valued graduated consequences and other efforts to reduce MOUD diversion and contraband for making jails safer and for enabling patients to receive treatment. Nearly all participants reported having heard about, witnessed, or been involved in actual or attempted diversion, with variation in reports by jail. Patients suggested that dispensing MOUD to all who need it immediately upon intake would be the most effective way to reduce MOUD diversion and contraband.

CONCLUSION

Formerly incarcerated patients perceived MOUD diversion within jail medication programs as occurring less often than expected and that it can be reduced with appropriate protocols. To help limit medication diversion, patients recommended provision of MOUD upon intake to all individuals with opioid use disorder who need it. Findings have implications for MOUD program adaptation, successful routinization, and diffusion in carceral settings.

Detection of methadone and buprenorphine in urine samples from inmates of German prisons

The use of non-prescribed opioid substitution drugs is a serious public health problem, involving general population as well as vulnerable populations such as prisoners. The estimation of the prevalence of opioid substitution drug misuse in prisoners is crucial to suggest strategies to contrast this phenomenon and reduce the associated morbidity and mortality. The present study aimed to provide an objective estimation of the prevalence of illicit use of methadone and buprenorphine in two German prisons. Urine samples were collected from inmates of Freiburg and Offenburg prisons at random times and tested for the detection of methadone, buprenorphine and their metabolites. Analyses were performed by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method. In total 678 inmates participated in this study. The participation rate was about 60% of all permanent inmates. Of the 675 samples suitable for the analysis, 70 samples (10.4%) tested positive for methadone, 70 samples (10.4%) for buprenorphine, and 4 samples (0.6%) for both drugs. At least 100 samples (14.8%) were not associated with reported prescribed-opioid substitution treatment (OST). Buprenorphine was the most common illicitly used drug. In one of the prisons, buprenorphine was brought in from the outside. The present cross-sectional experimental study was able to provide reliable information regarding the illicit use of opioid substitution drugs in prisons.

'Keeping a lid on it': Exploring 'problematisations' of prescribed medication in prisons in the UK

BACKGROUND

The non-medical use of prescription medication and risk of diversion have become policy and practice concerns within prison settings in the UK. These issues have been highlighted by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons and Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (2019) prison drugs strategy. In 2019, new prescribing guidance was issued by the Royal College of General Practitioners for clinicians working within prison settings.

METHODS

Informed by Bacchi's (2009) What's the problem represented to be? framework, the ways in which the 'problem' of prescribed medication in prisons have been represented is interrogated through an analysis of the prescribing guidance framework for clinicians working in prisons.

RESULTS

Restrictive prescribing practices are recommended as a solution to the 'problem' of diversion and misuse of prescribed medication. Prescribers are advised to consider de-prescribing, non-pharmacological treatments and alternative prescriptions with less diversionary potential. They are represented as responsible for the 'problems' that prescribed medication bring to prisons. The guidance is underpinned by the assumption that prescribers lack experience, knowledge and skills in prison settings. People serving prison sentences are assumed to be 'untrustworthy' and their symptoms treated with suspicion. This representation of the 'problem' has a number of effects including the possibility of increasing drug-related harm, damaging the patient-doctor relationship and disengagement from healthcare services.

CONCLUSION

The representation of prescribed medication as problems of diversion and prescribing practices inhibits alternative representations of the problem which would inform different policy directions including improvements to regime and healthcare provision and would include a range of practitioners in prison settings to address the 'problem' more holistically.

Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the criminal justice system: Perspectives of individuals recently released from incarceration

Buprenorphine, an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), remains underutilized in many U.S. jails and prisons. However, use of non-prescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The current study examined non-prescribed buprenorphine use experiences in correctional and community contexts. The study conducted face-to-face interviews with 300 adults with OUD/opioid misuse and recent incarceration, recruited in Baltimore, MD, and New York, NY (n = 150 each). Illicit/non-prescribed opioid use during incarceration was reported by 63% of participants; 39% reported non-prescribed buprenorphine. Non-prescribed buprenorphine was considered the most widely available opioid in jails/prisons in both states (81% reported "very" or "somewhat" easy to get). The average price of non-prescribed buprenorphine in jail/prison was ~10× higher than in the community (p < 0.001). Participants were more likely to endorse getting high/mood alteration as reasons for using non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration, but tended to ascribe therapeutic motives to use in the community (e.g., self-treatment; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that different individual-level characteristics were associated with history of non-prescribed buprenorphine use during incarceration and in the community. Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration was associated with younger age (p = 0.006) and longer incarceration history (p < 0.001), while use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the community was associated with MD recruitment site (p = 0.001), not being married (p < 0.001), prior buprenorphine treatment experience (p < 0.001), and housing situation (p = 0.01). These findings suggest that different dynamics and demand characteristics underlie the use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in community and incarceration contexts, with implications for efforts to expand OUD treatment in correctional settings.

Factors of Interest in Extended-Release Buprenorphine: Comparisons Between Incarcerated and Non-Incarcerated Patients with Opioid Use Disorder

PURPOSE

Extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) covers a range of formulations of buprenorphine-based treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) that release the medication over a period of one week, one month, or six months. OUD is particularly prevalent among incarcerated populations, and previous findings have shown that incarcerated subjects were not less interested in XR-BUP than non-incarcerated subjects. However, no study has ever investigated whether the factors of interest in XR-BUP were similar in incarcerated and non-incarcerated populations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We carried out post-hoc analyses using data from the "AMBRE" survey, which was conducted among 366 individuals with OUD, that were recruited in 68 French addiction settings, including six prison medical centers. The reasons for interest in XR-BUP were compared between incarcerated and non-incarcerated interviewees, using logistic regressions models, which provided raw and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Adjustment variables were gender, age category, level of education, and type of current medication for OUD, respectively.

RESULTS

Data from 317 participants (ie, 221 non-incarcerated, and 96 incarcerated individuals) were included in the analyses. Adjusted comparisons found that "no longer taking a daily treatment" (aOR= 2.91; 95% CI= 1.21-6.98) and "having a more discreet medication" (aOR= 1.76; 95% CI= 1.01-3.10) were reasons that appealed more to incarcerated participants than to non-incarcerated ones. On the other hand, the potential reduction of withdrawal symptoms (aOR= 0.54; 95% CI= 0.29-0.99) or the risk of misuse (aOR= 0.56; 95% CI= 0.34-0.94) associated with XR-BUP treatment were considered more important by non-incarcerated individuals than by incarcerated ones.

CONCLUSION

Incarcerated interviewees were interested in XR-BUP for different reasons than those outside prison. In particular, incarcerated patients were more interested in practicability and discretion features, and less in improving recovery or reducing misuse than non-incarcerated patients.

The source and diversion of pharmaceutical drugs for non-medical use: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The non-medical use (NMU) of pharmaceutical drugs is an increasing public health concern. This systematic review consolidates current knowledge about how pharmaceutical drugs are obtained for NMU and the processes and people involved in diversion.

METHODS

Peer-reviewed and grey literature databases were searched for empirical studies published between 1996 and 2017 that examined the source or diversion of pharmaceutical opioids, sedatives or stimulants for NMU in countries with reported misuse problems. Pooled prevalence meta-analyses using random effects models were used to estimate the prevalence of medical and non-medical sourcing reported by end-users, and gifting, selling and trading by various populations.

RESULTS

This review synthesizes the findings of 54 cross-sectional studies via meta-analyses, with a remaining 95 studies examined through narrative review. Pharmaceutical drugs are primarily sourced for NMU from friends and family (57%, 95% CI 53%-62%, I² = 98.5, n = 30) and despite perceptions of healthcare professionals to the contrary, illegitimate practices such as doctor shopping are uncommon (7%, 95% CI 6%-10%, I² = 97.4, n = 29). Those at risk of diversion include patients displaying aberrant medication behaviors, people with substance use issues and students in fraternity/sorority environments. Sourcing via dealers is also common (32%, 95% CI 23%-41%, I² = 99.8, n = 25) and particularly so among people who use illicit drugs (47%, 95% CI 35%-60%, I² = 99.1, n = 15). There is little to no organized criminal involvement in the pharmaceutical black market.

CONCLUSION

Pharmaceutical drugs for NMU are primarily sourced by end-users through social networks. Future research should examine how dealers source pharmaceutical drugs.

Prescription opioid abuse in prison settings: A systematic review of prevalence, practice and treatment responses

BACKGROUND

To systematically review the quantitative and qualitative evidence base pertaining to the prevalence, practice of, and treatment response to the diversion of prescribed opiates in the prison setting.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, ASSIA and Science Direct databases were searched for papers from 1995 to the present relevant to the abuse of prescribed opiate medication. Identified journals and their reference lists were hand searched for other relevant articles. Of the abstracts identified as relevant, full text papers were retrieved and critiqued against the inclusion criteria for the review.

RESULTS

Three hundred and fifty-five abstracts were identified, leading to 42 full-text articles being retrieved. Of those, 10 papers were included in the review. Significant differences in abuse behaviours between different countries were reported. However, a key theme emerged from the data regarding a culture of nasal administration of prescribed sublingual buprenorphine within some prisons due to both reduced prevalence of injection within prison and reduced supplies of illicit drugs within prison. The buprenorphine/naloxone preparation appears to be less amenable to abuse. The review highlighted a paucity of empirical research pertaining to both prevalence of the phenomenon and treatment responses.

CLINICAL AND RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS

Healthcare providers within prisons need to prescribe opioids in the least abuseable preparation since the risk of abuse is significant, despite widespread processes of supervised dispensing. Prescription medication abuse is not limited to opioids and the predominant drug of abuse in an individual prison can rapidly change according to availability.

Subjective effects of prisoners using buprenorphine for detoxification

PURPOSE

Buprenorphine (Subutex) was piloted in two Scottish prisons between 2004 and 2006 and consequently used within other penal establishments in Scotland. This 2007 qualitative study aimed to explore the use of Subutex and its associated effects on 14 participants on detoxification programmes.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

All participants were male, aged from 21 to 44 years with prison sentences ranging from a few months to life imprisonment. Buprenorphine was unavailable to female prisoners at the time of this study. Participants were recruited from seven Scottish prisons. All 14 participants were on detoxification programmes, each was prescribed Subutex, and each was selected from a larger investigation that included both those undergoing detoxification and maintenance (n=21). All participants had previously also used methadone on previous detoxification programmes.

FINDINGS

It can be concluded that the majority of detoxification participants within this study indicated that Subutex was a more effective treatment than methadone as it helped reduce craving, eased the process of withdrawal and improved sleeping patterns. In addition, the majority of participants noted higher levels of motivation and the ability to set goals towards obtaining an improved quality of life.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This study provides an alternative perspective to the use of Subutex within prison settings, when compared with results from previous quantitative studies reported. The study also highlights inconsistencies drawn from studies in this area, which may be an artefact of study design. It is recommended that further qualitative studies be conducted to explore further this alternative perspective. Finally, the issue of methodological approach taken should be addressed within the context of a related, but independent, research forum.

The paradox of control: An ethnographic analysis of opiate maintenance treatment in a Norwegian prison

BACKGROUND

Opiate maintenance treatment (OMT) is increasingly being offered in prisons throughout Europe. The benefits of OMT in prison have been found to be similar to those produced by OMT in community settings. However, prison-based OMT has been a controversial issue because of fear of the diversion of OMT medications and the development of black markets for prescription drugs such as buprenorphine and methadone. Prison-based OMT thus involves a delicate balance between the considerations of control and treatment.

METHODS

This article reports on an ethnographic study of a prison-based OMT programme in a closed Norwegian prison. The data include field notes from eight months of participant observation in the prison as well as qualitative interviews with 23 prisoners and 12 prison staff. Midway through the fieldwork, the prison authorities established a separate unit for OMT-enrolled prisoners to reduce the widespread diversion of buprenorphine. This "natural experiment" is explored in the analysis.

RESULTS

The prison-based OMT programme was characterised by strict and repressive control to prevent the diversion of buprenorphine, and the control became even stricter after the establishment of the OMT unit. However, the diversion of buprenorphine increased rather than decreased after the establishment of the OMT unit. To understand this "paradox of control", the article engages with theories of legitimacy, power and resistance. The excessive and repressive control was perceived as illegitimate and unfair by the majority of study participants. In various ways, many prisoners protested, confronted and subverted the OMT programme. The increase in buprenorphine diversion is interpreted as a form of collective resistance towards the perceived unfairness of the OMT programme.

CONCLUSION

The article demonstrates that an unbalanced and control-dominated approach to prison-based OMT may have the opposite effect of what is intended.

Comparative prices of diverted buprenorphine/naloxone and buprenorphine in a UK prison setting: a cross-sectional survey of drug using prisoners

BACKGROUND

There is evidence regarding the abuse potential of buprenorphine in prison settings. There is also emerging evidence from community settings that buprenorphine/naloxone is less amenable to abuse than the single preparation buprenorphine hydrochloride as evidenced by cost-differentials of diverted medication. This study sought to explore cost-differentials within a prison setting of diverted buprenorphine/naloxone medication relative to either single preparation buprenorphine hydrochloride or methadone.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey in one remand prison.

RESULTS

A total of 85 prisoners participated in the survey. Prisoners estimated buprenorphine to have a significantly (p<0.001) higher cost than buprenorphine/naloxone both inside and outside of prison. This finding was supported when the analysis was restricted to both the prisoners with a longer-term experience of taking opioid substitution drugs during their current prison stay and those with a longer-term experience prior to reception.

CONCLUSIONS

Consideration should be given to the recommendation that buprenorphine/naloxone medication is the prescribed buprenorphine preparation of choice for clinicians offering opiate substitution therapy to prisoners, pending developments of buprenorphine preparations that have less abuse potential than sublingual preparations.