Jurisdictional differences in opioid use, other licit and illicit drug use, and harms associated with substance use among people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids

Primary care initiatives focused on the secondary prevention and management of chronic pain: a scoping review of the Australian literature

The aim of this scoping review was to identify initiatives focused on the secondary prevention and management of chronic pain in Australian primary care to understand options available to Primary Health Networks and to identify evidence gaps. The Medline, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Cochrane databases, as well as relevant websites, were searched for eligible records published from 2007 to 2018. Initiative characteristics and outcomes evaluated were extracted and synthesised. In all, 84 initiatives from 167 published and grey literature records were identified, including: (1) consumer initiatives that aimed to improve access to multidisciplinary care, health literacy and care navigation (n=56); (2) health professional capacity building initiatives that aimed to ensure health professionals are skilled and provide best-practice evidence-based care (n=21); and (3) quality improvement and health system support initiatives (n=7). Evidence gaps were found relating to initiatives addressing the secondary prevention of chronic pain, those targeting vulnerable and regional populations, health professional capacity building initiatives for all primary health care providers and quality improvement and system support initiatives. Addressing evidence gaps related to effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and implementation should be the focus for future chronic pain initiatives in primary care settings.

Trends in methamphetamine and opioid use among clients of needle-syringe programs in Queensland, Australia: 2007-2015

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Needle-syringe programs (NSP) are an underutilized source of data on drug injection trends; these data are essential for informing public health interventions. We examine trends in NSP service occasions from 2007-2015.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Using standardised data from 26 NSP outlets through the Queensland NSP Minimum Data Set (QNSPMDS), trends in service occasions among clients intending to inject methamphetamine, heroin, opioid substitution therapy (OST) medications and other pharmaceutical opioids were assessed using multilevel mixed-effects negative binomial regression, adjusting for month, year, age and clustering by site.

RESULTS

Over 1.5 million service occasions were recorded in 2007-2015. Methamphetamine was the main 'drug intended to inject' (33.7%), however cf. 2007, the incidence rate ratio decreased to 0.64 (95% CI: 0.62, 0.66) in 2009, remaining low until 2015. Among clients reporting methamphetamine injection, there was a shift in the form from base to the higher-potency crystal methamphetamine since 2012. Heroin injection (22.5% service occasions) initially increased (cf. 2007), followed by a decline to 0.77 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.79) in 2015. Significant and sustained increases in OST and other pharmaceutical opioids injection were observed throughout the study period, accounting for 7.2% and 19.8% of total visits, respectively.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The QNSPMDS provides unique, routinely collected, jurisdiction-wide and standardised data on the demographics of people who inject drugs, types of drugs injected and regional variations; these data are essential in informing policy, planning and program implementation. There remains significant opportunity to enhance engagement and linkage to care alongside needle-syringe provision.

The effect of a potentially tamper-resistant oxycodone formulation on opioid use and harm: main findings of the National Opioid Medications Abuse Deterrence (NOMAD) study

BACKGROUND

Escalation of pharmaceutical opioid use and harm in North America is well-documented, with similar issues emerging in Australia. One response is the development of tamper-resistant formulations of opioids. A potentially tamper-resistant formulation of controlled-release oxycodone was introduced in Australia in April, 2014, rapidly replacing the non-tamper-resistant formulation. Our study is the most systematic and comprehensive examination of the impact of a new opioid formulation to date, assessing the effect of tamper-resistant formulation of controlled-release oxycodone on population-level opioid use and opioid-related harm (ie, overdose, help-seeking, and treatment-seeking); and opioid use, tampering, and preference for the tamper-resistant formulation of controlled-release oxycodone compared with other drugs or formulations among sentinel populations likely to tamper with pharmaceutical opioids.

METHODS

We conducted interrupted time-series analyses of opioid sales data and multiple routinely collected health datasets, followed up a cohort of people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids before and after the introduction of the tamper-resistant formulation of controlled-release oxycodone, and analysed annual surveys of people who inject drugs. Data were collected from several Australian states: New South Wales, South Australia, and Tasmania. Meta-analyses (weighted Z tests) were conducted to synthesise across data sources providing evidence for a given indicator.

FINDINGS

At the population level, we found reduced sales of higher strengths of controlled-release oxycodone and increased sales of other oxycodone formulations. No significant effect was observed among population-level indicators of opioid overdose, or help or treatment-seeking. Mortality data were not available for inclusion at the time of our study. Meta-analyses across sentinel populations (ie, prospective cohort, surveys of people who inject drugs, and clients of supervised injecting facilities or needle and syringe programmes) indicated reduced controlled-release oxycodone use via tampering (mainly injection), with no evidence of switching to heroin or other drug use.

INTERPRETATION

This formulation of controlled-release oxycodone reduced tampering with pharmaceutical opioids among people who inject drugs, but did not affect population-level opioid use or harm.

FUNDING

Mundipharma Australia, the Australian Government, and the National Health and Medical Research Council.

High risk injecting behaviour among people who inject pharmaceutical opioids in Australia

BACKGROUND

Use of opioid analgesic medicines has doubled globally over the past decade, with a concomitant increase in prevalence of injection of pharmaceutical opioids (PO), including in Australia. This study investigates types of PO injected, methods used to prepare PO for injection and correlates of recent (last 6 months) PO injection among a large national sample of people who inject drugs (PWID).

METHODS

The Australian NSP Survey (ANSPS), conducted annually at ∼50 NSP services across Australia, consists of a brief self-administered questionnaire and provision of a capillary dried blood spot for HIV and hepatitis C antibody testing. Data from 2014 were used to conduct univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine factors independently associated with recent injection of PO.

RESULTS

Among 1488 ANSPS respondents who were identified as opioid injectors, 57% (n=848) reported injection of PO in the previous six months. The majority of PO injectors (85%) reported filtering PO prior to injection, although use of efficacious wheel filters was relatively rare (11%). Correlates of POs injection included daily injection (AOR=1.65, 95% CI 1.31-2.08), receptive sharing of syringes (AOR=2.00, 95% CI 1.43-2.78), receptive sharing of drug preparation equipment (AOR=1.55, 95% CI 1.19-2.01), drug overdose in the previous year (AOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.36-2.42) and residence in inner regional (AOR=3.27, 95% CI 2.21-5.23) or outer regional/remote (AOR=5.50, 95% CI 3.42-8.84) areas of Australia.

CONCLUSION

PO injection is geographically widespread among Australian PWID and takes place in the context of poly-drug use. People who inject POs are at high risk of overdose, injection related injury and disease and blood borne viral infections. Harm reduction services that target this group, including in non-urban areas, should deliver health education regarding PO-specific overdose risks, the requirement to adequately filter PO before injection and to ensure that both naloxone and specialist pill filters are readily accessible.

The extent and correlates of community-based pharmaceutical opioid utilisation in Australia

PURPOSE

There has been concern regarding the increasing use of opioids and related harm. We present data on opioid utilisation across Australia and consider sociodemographic factors that may affect utilisation rates.

METHODS

IMS Health national sales data for over-the-counter (codeine) and prescription opioids (buprenorphine, codeine, dextropropoxyphene, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, tapentadol and tramadol) were used to estimate total utilisation rates in the community during 2013, mapped to Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) and Remoteness Areas. All opioid amounts were measured in pack sales and milligrammes then converted to oral morphine equivalent milligrammes (OME mg) for comparison across opioids. Data on the demographic characteristics of SLAs were obtained from the ABS (sex and age distribution, income and levels of physical labour) and other sources (number of pharmacies in SLAs) and were included in linear regression analyses.

RESULTS

In 2013, an estimated 10 747 kg (OME) of opioids were sold across Australia, equating to 481 OME mg per person. There was considerable geographic variation in opioid utilisation, with higher rates of use in rural and regional areas. Geographic areas that were less populated, had more men and older people, proportionally more low-income earning households and greater proportions in jobs requiring physical labour had higher utilisation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial geographic variation in opioid utilisation was identified, with areas outside of major cities having higher rates of utilisation of all types of opioids. Prescription monitoring and best practice interventions aimed at improving opioid use need to have a particular focus on areas outside of major cities. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A typology of people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids: responses to introduction of a tamper-resistant formulation of controlled-release oxycodone

PURPOSE

In April 2014, a tamper-resistant controlled-release oxycodone formulation was released in Australia. We aimed to determine whether there are latent classes of people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids based on frequency of opioid and illicit drug use, the demographic and clinical profiles of these groups, and if there were changes in use and harms following the introduction.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 606 people who regularly tamper with pharmaceutical opioids was interviewed January to March 2014 (Wave 1) and May to August 2014 (Wave 2). Latent class analysis identified groups based on non-prescribed opioid, illicit drug and prescribed opioid substitution therapy (OST) use at Wave 1. Regression models examined whether group membership predicted use and harms at Wave 2.

RESULTS

Four groups were identified: frequent OST group (39%), mixed OST/heroin group (7%), infrequent pharmaceutical opioid and heroin group (44%) and frequent oxycodone group (25%). Compared with the frequent OST group, the infrequent pharmaceutical opioid/heroin group was more likely to report non-everyday pain and risky alcohol use, and the frequent oxycodone group had higher odds of homelessness. At Wave 2, oxycodone use decreased across groups (odds ratios (OR) ≤ 0.18, p < 0.001, particularly for the frequent oxycodone group: OR ≤ 0.05, p < 0.001), with reductions in days of use (g ≥ 0.35, p < 0.050). Non-prescribed pharmaceutical opioid use, illicit drug use and harms remained stable or decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite heterogeneity among people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids, the tamper-resistant formulation was followed by reductions in oxycodone tampering among high-frequency and low-frequency users. There was no evidence of increased use of other opioids or illicit drugs.

Methods and predictors of tampering with a tamper-resistant controlled-release oxycodone formulation

BACKGROUND

In April 2014, a tamper-resistant controlled-release oxycodone formulation was introduced into the Australian market. This study aimed to identify the level and methods of tampering with reformulated oxycodone, demographic and clinical characteristics of those who reported tampering with reformulated oxycodone, and perceived attractiveness of original and reformulated oxycodone for misuse (via tampering).

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 522 people who regularly tampered with pharmaceutical opioids and had tampered with the original oxycodone product in their lifetime completed two interviews before (January-March 2014: Wave 1) and after (May-August 2014: Wave 2) introduction of reformulated oxycodone.

RESULTS

Four-fifths (81%) had tampered with the original oxycodone formulation in the month prior to Wave 1; use and attempted tampering with reformulated oxycodone amongst the sample was comparatively low at Wave 2 (29% and 19%, respectively). Reformulated oxycodone was primarily swallowed (15%), with low levels of recent successful injection (6%), chewing (2%), drinking/dissolving (1%), and smoking (<1%). Participants who tampered with original and reformulated oxycodone were socio-demographically and clinically similar to those who had only tampered with the original formulation, except the former were more likely to report prescribed oxycodone use and stealing pharmaceutical opioid, and less likely to report moderate/severe anxiety. There was significant diversity in the methods for tampering, with attempts predominantly prompted by self-experimentation (rather than informed by word-of-mouth or the internet). Participants rated reformulated oxycodone as more difficult to prepare and inject and less pleasant to use compared to the original formulation.

CONCLUSION

Current findings suggest that the introduction of the tamper-resistant product has been successful at reducing, although not necessarily eliminating, tampering with the controlled-release oxycodone formulation, with lower attractiveness for misuse. Appropriate, effective treatment options must be available with increasing availability of abuse-deterrent products, given the reduction of oxycodone tampering and use amongst a group with high rates of pharmaceutical opioid dependence.

The introduction of a potentially abuse deterrent oxycodone formulation: Early findings from the Australian National Opioid Medications Abuse Deterrence (NOMAD) study

BACKGROUND

There is increasing concern about tampering of pharmaceutical opioids. We describe early findings from an Australian study examining the potential impact of the April 2014 introduction of an abuse-deterrent sustained-release oxycodone formulation (Reformulated OxyContin(®)).

METHODS

Data on pharmaceutical opioid sales; drug use by people who inject drugs regularly (PWID); client visits to the Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC); and last drug injected by clients of inner-Sydney needle-syringe programmes (NSPs) were obtained, 2009-2014. A cohort of n=606 people tampering with pharmaceutical opioids was formed pre-April 2014, and followed up May-August 2014.

RESULTS

There were declines in pharmacy sales of 80mg OxyContin(®) post-introduction of the reformulated product, the dose most commonly diverted and injected by PWID. Reformulated OxyContin(®) was among the least commonly used and injected drugs among PWID. This was supported by Sydney NSP data. There was a dramatic reduction in MSIC visits for injection of OxyContin(®) post-introduction of the new formulation (from 62% of monthly visits pre-introduction to 5% of visits, August 2014). The NOMAD cohort confirmed a reduction in OxyContin(®) use/injection post-introduction. Reformulated OxyContin(®) was cheaper and less attractive for tampering than Original OxyContin(®).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that, in the short term, introduction of an abuse-deterrent formulation of OxyContin(®) in Australia was associated with a reduction in injection of OxyContin(®), with no clear switch to other drugs. Reformulated OxyContin(®), in this short follow-up, does not appear to be considered as attractive for tampering.