Illegal college ADHD stimulant distributors: characteristics and potential areas of intervention

Prescription Stimulant Misuse and Diversion Events Among College Students: A Qualitative Study

Prescription stimulant misuse and diversion are interrelated behaviors: diversion increases the availability of stimulants for misuse, and persons who misuse are also more likely to divert. To date, research has examined these behaviors using a primarily quantitative lens. We led a qualitative investigation to better understand misuse and diversion events. Data are from a diverse southern California campus where we interviewed students who misuse and/or divert prescription stimulants (32 total interviews: 16 interviews with students who had a history of misuse, and 16 different interviews with students who had a history of diversion). We analyzed interview data inductively. We identified the following themes about misuse and diversion events, several of which intersected during interviews: medication surplus, diversion and misuse hubs, ease of behavior performance, academic stress, and other drugs commonly involved. For diversion, altruism and monetary gain were juxtaposed themes. Across themes, friends and family were influential figures. Implications for prevention, intervention, and future research directions are discussed.

Adolescents Treated for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Pediatric Primary Care: Characterizing Risk for Stimulant Diversion

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical and psychosocial characteristics, and their hypothesized interrelations, as it pertains to risk for stimulant diversion (sharing, selling, or trading) for adolescents in pediatric primary care treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

METHODS

Baseline data for 341 adolescents in a cluster-randomized controlled trial of stimulant diversion prevention in pediatric primary care (NCT_03080259) were used to (1) characterize diversion and newly measured risk factors, (2) examine their associations with age and sex, and (3) test whether associations among risk factors were consistent with model-implied predictions. Data were collected through multi-informant electronic surveys from adolescents and parents.

RESULTS

Diversion was rare (1%) in this sample (Mage = 15, SD = 1.5, 74% male participants). Older age was associated with being approached to divert (r = 0.25, p < 0.001) and higher risk on variables pertinent to stimulant treatment, such as treatment disclosure (r = 0.12, p < 0.05), tolerance for stimulant misuse and diversion (r = 0.17, p < 0.05), and peer norms favorable to stimulant misuse and diversion (r values = 0.15-0.34, p < 0.001). Sex differences were minimal. Variables from our conceptual model and specific to stimulants (e.g., perceived likelihood of negative consequences from diversion and schoolmate stimulant misuse/diversion) were related in multivariable regressions to hypothesized immediate precursors of diversion (e.g., diversion intentions).

CONCLUSION

Although diversion was rare for these primary care-treated adolescents, risk levels appear to be higher for older adolescents. Prevention may be most effective by capitalizing on current psychosocial strengths and discussing stimulant-specific attitudes, behaviors, and social norms before vulnerability to diversion increases in the final years of high school and into college.

Perspectives of US Adolescents on Diverted Stimulant Use

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perspectives of youth regarding diverted stimulant use among a contemporary sample of adolescents and young adults.

STUDY DESIGN

This study used MyVoice, a longitudinal national text message survey of American youth. In February 2019, 1228 MyVoice youth were asked 4 open-ended questions to elicit their perspectives on diverted stimulant use. Responses were assessed using thematic analysis, and quantitative results were summarized using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of 1228 youth, 906 responded to at least one survey question (relative risk, 74%). Respondents' ages ranged from 14 to 24 years with a mean age of 18.8 ± 2.9 years, 57% were female, and 66% identified as White. Peer pressure and coping were commonly perceived reasons for diversion, and respondents believed that many youth misuse stimulants. Many were aware of health risks of misuse, but few mentioned potential legal consequences. Youth thought stimulants could be obtained from peers, people with a prescription, dealers, and family, and some mentioned access through unnecessary prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

The perspectives of a national sample of youth suggest that stimulant diversion continues to be a significant problem among American youth, with many noting that diverted stimulants are easy to obtain and are used to self-treat mental health issues. Standardized interventions at schools and in healthcare settings, as well as universal screening for diversion and mental health conditions, may combat this public health concern.

Use of Stimulant Diversion Prevention Strategies in Pediatric Primary Care and Associations With Provider Characteristics

PURPOSE

Diversion of stimulant medications for ADHD is a prevalent problem. Pediatric primary care providers (PCPs) are well-positioned to reduce diversion risk among adolescents prescribed stimulants, but little is known about their use of prevention strategies. The objectives of this study were to describe the frequency with which pediatric PCPs use diversion prevention strategies and examine potential determinants (facilitators and barriers) of strategy use.

METHODS

Participants were pediatric PCPs (N = 76) participating in a randomized controlled trial of stimulant diversion prevention strategies. At baseline, before randomization, PCPs rated the frequency with which they used specific strategies in each of four categories: patient/family education, medication management/monitoring, assessment of mental health symptoms/functioning, and assessment of risky behaviors. They completed measures of attitudes toward diversion prevention, subjective norms (i.e., implementation climate), and perceived behavioral control (i.e., knowledge/skill, resource constraints). Associations between determinants and strategy use were tested with correlational and regression analyses.

RESULTS

PCPs used strategies for assessing mental health symptoms/functioning most frequently and patient/family education strategies least frequently. Attitudes about the effectiveness of diversion prevention, implementation climate, knowledge/skill, and resource constraints were positively correlated with the use of at least one category of strategies. In regression analysis, PCP knowledge/skill was positively associated with patient/family education, medication management, and risk assessment strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that improving knowledge and skill may increase the use of diversion prevention strategies by PCPs. Identifying provider-level determinants of strategy use informs implementation efforts in pediatric primary care and can facilitate efforts to prevent stimulant diversion among adolescents.

How to say "no" most effectively: Evaluating resistance strategies for prescription stimulant diversion to inform preventive interventions

We evaluated the perceived effectiveness of resistance strategies students could employ if approached to give away, trade, or sell their prescription stimulant medication, a growing concern on college campuses. Participants: We sampled undergraduates (N = 1,521) at three demographically dissimilar institutions between Fall 2017 and Spring 2018. Methods: We administered an anonymous, online survey and used linear mixed models to examine the effects of strategy type, face support (ie, adding politeness), and substance use history on perceived strategy effectiveness. Results: Internal (eg, "I am not comfortable sharing my medication") and external (eg, "My doctor won't prescribe me if I share") explanations were perceived to be most effective. Excuses, direct refusals, and suggesting an alternative (eg, energy drink) were less preferred. Adding face support improved perceived effectiveness for direct refusals and internal explanations. Conclusion: Preventive interventions for stimulant diversion could encourage the use of internal or external explanations or direct refusals with face support.

Illicit drug use among college students: The role of social norms and risk perceptions

PURPOSE

To examine the prevalence and correlates of college student use of illicit substances including cocaine, designer drugs, and nonmedical use of prescription stimulants and opioids, and to identify how different drug-related perceptions are related to past year use of these substances.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from a cross-sectional anonymous web-based survey among a sample (n = 1345, 81% female) of students attending a mid-sized liberal arts college in the US. Logistic regression models were estimated to assess the relationships between substance-specific descriptive norms, injunctive norms, perceived availability, risk perceptions and past year use of cocaine, designer drugs, prescription stimulants, and opioids, adjusting for current marijuana use, alcohol dependence, sensation seeking, and sociodemographic factors.

FINDINGS

Past year use of illicit substances ranged from 6% for nonmedical prescription opioids to 21% for nonmedical prescription stimulants. The sociodemographic correlates past year substance use differed by substance type. Descriptive norms (perceptions of peer use) and perceived risk were not consistently related to use of these substances. Current marijuana use was the strongest correlate across substances, and both injunctive norms (perceptions of peer approval) and perceived availability were consistently related to use of each substance.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that future college student drug prevention efforts should more directly target current marijuana users since they are most at risk of using other illicit substances. Additionally, findings indicate that injunctive norms may be an important consideration for education-focused drug prevention programs. However, findings should be interpreted in light of limitations of the sample, which is predominantly female.

Stimulant Diversion Risk Among College Students Treated for ADHD: Primary Care Provider Prevention Training

OBJECTIVE

To address increasing rates of stimulant misuse in college students, this study developed an evidence-based, brief clinical practice intervention for primary care providers (PCPs) to reduce stimulant medication diversion among young adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

College students (N-114; 18-25 years; 68% attending universities; 24% attending community college) treated for ADHD with a stimulant and their PCPs across six practices participated in this initial, uncontrolled study of pre- to post-intervention change. An educational workshop providing strategies aimed at reducing stimulant diversion was developed and delivered to providers and staff across all practices (50% pediatric; 50% family medicine). Patients and providers completed baseline and post intervention surveys.

RESULTS

Diversion was relatively infrequent, 16.7% at baseline and 14.9% post-intervention, respectively. Statistically significant decreases from baseline to post-intervention were found for three diversion risk factors: (1) number of times approached to divert, (2) intent to share, sell, or trade stimulants, and (3) disclosure of stimulant use. Providers and staff reported mostly high satisfaction with the training.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides initial evidence for a PCP-delivered intervention to reduce stimulant diversion. Research is needed on the efficacy of targeting college students directly, working with pharmacies and student health centers, and preventing misuse among teenagers.

Systematic Review: Nonmedical Use of Prescription Stimulants: Risk Factors, Outcomes, and Risk Reduction Strategies

OBJECTIVE

To review all literature on the nonmedical use (NMU) and diversion of prescription stimulants to better understand the characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of NMU and to review risk-reduction strategies.

METHOD

We systematically searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS from inception to May 2018 for studies containing empirical data about NMU and diversion of prescription stimulants. Additional references identified by the authors were also assessed for inclusion.

RESULTS

A total of 111 studies met inclusion criteria. NMU and diversion of stimulants are highly prevalent; self-reported rates among population samples range from 2.1% to 58.7% and from 0.7% to 80.0%, respectively. A variety of terms are used to describe NMU, and most studies have examined college students. Although most NMU is oral, non-oral NMU also occurs. The majority of NMU is associated with no, or minor, medical effects; however, adverse medical outcomes, including death, occur in some individuals, particularly when administered by non-oral routes. Although academic and occupational performance enhancement are the most commonly cited motivations, there is little evidence that academic performance is improved by NMU in individuals without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

CONCLUSION

NMU of stimulants is a significant public health problem, especially in college students, but variations in the terms used to describe NMU and inconsistencies in the available data limit a better understanding of this problem. Further research is needed to develop methods to detect NMU, identify individuals at greatest risk, study routes of administration, and devise educational and other interventions to help reduce occurrence of NMU. Colleges should consider including NMU in academic integrity policies.

Psychosis with Methylphenidate or Amphetamine in Patients with ADHD

BACKGROUND

The prescription use of the stimulants methylphenidate and amphetamine for the treatment of attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been increasing. In 2007, the Food and Drug Administration mandated changes to drug labels for stimulants on the basis of findings of new-onset psychosis. Whether the risk of psychosis in adolescents and young adults with ADHD differs among various stimulants has not been extensively studied.

METHODS

We used data from two commercial insurance claims databases to assess patients 13 to 25 years of age who had received a diagnosis of ADHD and who started taking methylphenidate or amphetamine between January 1, 2004, and September 30, 2015. The outcome was a new diagnosis of psychosis for which an antipsychotic medication was prescribed during the first 60 days after the date of the onset of psychosis. To estimate hazard ratios for psychosis, we used propensity scores to match patients who received methylphenidate with patients who received amphetamine in each database, compared the incidence of psychosis between the two stimulant groups, and then pooled the results across the two databases.

RESULTS

We assessed 337,919 adolescents and young adults who received a prescription for a stimulant for ADHD. The study population consisted of 221,846 patients with 143,286 person-years of follow up; 110,923 patients taking methylphenidate were matched with 110,923 patients taking amphetamines. There were 343 episodes of psychosis (with an episode defined as a new diagnosis code for psychosis and a prescription for an antipsychotic medication) in the matched populations (2.4 per 1000 person-years): 106 episodes (0.10%) in the methylphenidate group and 237 episodes (0.21%) in the amphetamine group (hazard ratio with amphetamine use, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.31 to 2.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Among adolescents and young adults with ADHD who were receiving prescription stimulants, new-onset psychosis occurred in approximately 1 in 660 patients. Amphetamine use was associated with a greater risk of psychosis than methylphenidate. (Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health and others.).

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.

Examining social supply among nonmedical prescription stimulant users in the San Francisco Bay Area

In the US, prescription stimulants are prescribed for a variety of conditions including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and narcolepsy. Over the last two decades, dramatic increases in stimulant prescriptions have led to greater availability and increased risk for diversion and nonmedical use. Our own and other investigators' findings indicate that many drug "suppliers" do not fit into the traditional image of drug "dealers." These suppliers typically do not identify themselves as "dealers," but instead understand their drug distribution as sharing with people they know. Coomber and colleagues' (2007; 2013) concept of "social supply" raises the question: When friends supply or facilitate supply of drugs to friends, is this really dealing? Further, if dealing and supplying are distinct kinds of social transactions, should different types of criminal justice approaches be applied? Social supply extends our understanding of drug dealing as a complex social activity. In this article, we examine the issue of social supply among nonmedical users of prescription stimulants. We conducted a 36-month National Institute on Drug Abuse-funded project to conduct a qualitative, mixed methods study of 150 adult nonmedical prescription stimulant users in the San Francisco Bay Area. We explore intersecting factors, including life stage and social location, that contribute to decisions to use prescription stimulants nonmedically, motivations to use, knowledge about risks and benefits of prescription stimulant use, any adverse health or social consequences experienced, availability, acquisition and diversion of prescription stimulants, and differences in attitudes and behaviours. For this analysis, we rely on participants' narratives concerning prescription stimulant acquisition practices and how they understood these interactions, purchases, and exchanges with the suppliers of prescription stimulants in their social networks. The authors argue that acknowledging the distinction between social supply and "proper" drug dealing would redress the disparity between drug sharing and profiteering particularly regarding criminal sentencing.

Personal and perceived peer use and attitudes towards the use of nonmedical prescription stimulants to improve academic performance among university students in seven European countries

BACKGROUND

Overestimations of non-prescribed stimulant use of peers are well documented in the USA and have also been identified as predictive of personal stimulant consumption. This study aimed to examine whether overestimations of peer use and approval of the use are associated with personal use and attitude towards the use of non-prescribed stimulants among European university students.

METHOD

The EU funded 'Social Norms Intervention for the prevention of Polydrug usE (SNIPE)' study was conducted in seven European countries. In a web-based questionnaire, 4482 students were asked about their personal use and their attitude towards non-prescribed stimulant use, as well as the perceived peer use and peer attitude.

RESULTS

59% of students thought that the majority of their peers used non-prescribed stimulants more frequently than themselves, and only 4% thought that the use of the majority was lower than their personal use. The perception that the majority of peers had used non-prescribed stimulants at least once was significantly associated with higher odds for personal use of non-prescribed stimulants (OR: 3.30, 95% CI: 2.32-4.71). In addition, the perception that the majority of peers approved of the non-prescribed use of stimulants was associated with a 4.03 (95% CI: 3.35-4.84) times higher likelihood for personal approval.

DISCUSSION

European university students generally perceived the non-prescribed use of stimulants of peers to be higher than their personal use. This perception, as well as a perception of higher approval in the peer group, was associated with a higher likelihood of personal non-prescribed stimulant medication use and approval.

Misperceptions of peer pill-popping: the prevalence, correlates, and effects of inaccurate assumptions about peer pharmaceutical misuse

Peer behaviors may significantly influence personal behavior yet individuals may not accurately estimate their peers' actions. Overestimations of peer substance use may encourage initiation or exacerbate extant problems. The present study examines misperceptions of peer pharmaceutical misuse and explores the relationship between reported misuse and perceptions of misuse for four categories of prescription drugs. Data collected from 2,349 college students in the Southeastern United States were analyzed and results indicated that overall perceptions of misuse were significantly higher than actual misuse. These findings suggest that intervention efforts may benefit from addressing misperceptions of pharmaceutical misuse. Study limitations and implications are addressed.