Rise, and pronounced regional variation, in methylphenidate, amphetamine, and lisdexamfetamine distribution in the United States

Medical Cannabis Legalization: No Contribution to Rising Stimulant Rates in the USA

INTRODUCTION

There has been a pronounced increase in the use of Schedule II stimulants to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the United States over the last two decades. Interestingly, chronic medical cannabis (MC) use can present with cognitive impairments that resemble ADHD symptoms. This study aimed to determine if MC legalization increased prescription stimulant distribution.

METHODS

Information on the distribution of methylphenidate, amphetamine, and lisdexamfetamine for 2006 to 2021 was extracted from the Drug Enforcement Administration's comprehensive database and the three-year population-corrected slopes of stimulant distribution before and after MC program implementation were compared.

RESULTS

We found a significant main effect of time (p<0.001); however, contrary to the hypothesis, the sales status of states' MC, did not influence slopes of distribution (p=0.391). There was a significantly large interaction effect of time and MC sales status on slopes of distribution (p<0.001). Slopes of distribution rates of stimulants were significantly lower in states that proceeded to legalize MC prior to MC program implementation than those states that did not (p=0.022). After MC program implementation, however, the distribution rates of the Schedule II stimulants were not significantly different when comparing states with MC sales to those without (p=0.355).

DISCUSSION

These findings suggest that MC program legalization did not contribute to certain states having rapid increases in Schedule II stimulant distribution rates over time. Other factors, including the liberalization of the adult ADHD diagnostic criteria in the DSM-5 and the introduction of Binge Eating Disorder, also likely contributed to elevations in stimulant distribution.

Regional Disparities in Prescription Methamphetamine and Amphetamine Distribution Across the United States

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this report were to characterize the regional and state differences in prescription methamphetamine and amphetamine distribution in the US.

METHODS

Prescription methamphetamine and amphetamine distribution was obtained from the Drug Enforcement Administration for 2019.

RESULTS

Total per capita drug weight distribution of amphetamine was 4,000 times higher than methamphetamine. Regionally, total per capita drug weight for methamphetamine was highest in the West (32.2% of total distribution) and lowest in the Northeast (17.4%). The total per capita drug weight for amphetamine was highest in the South (37.0% of total distribution) and lowest in the Northeast (19.4%). Distribution of methamphetamine was 16.1% while amphetamine was 54.0% of its production quota.

CONCLUSION

Overall, prescription amphetamine distribution was common while prescription methamphetamine distribution was rare. The patterns observed in distribution are likely the result of stigmatization, differences in accessibility, and the efforts of initiatives such as the Montana Meth Project.

Rise of escitalopram and the fall of citalopram

Introduction

Citalopram and escitalopram are among the most used medications and are key treatments for many psychiatric disorders. Previous findings suggest citalopram and escitalopram prescription rates are changing because of the patent for citalopram ending as opposed to evidence of a clear therapeutic advantage, which is called evergreening. This retrospective study focuses on characterizing the chronologic and geographic variation in the use of citalopram and escitalopram among US Medicaid and Medicare patients. We hypothesized that prescription rates of citalopram will decrease with a concurrent increase in escitalopram, consistent with evergreening.

Methods

Citalopram and escitalopram prescription rates and costs per state were obtained from the Medicaid State Drug Utilization Database and Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data. Annual prescription rates outside a 95% confidence interval were considered significantly different from the average.

Results

Overall, a decreasing trend for citalopram and an increasing trend for escitalopram prescription rates were noted in both Medicare and Medicaid patients. Cost differences between generic and brand were noted for both drugs, with generic forms being cheaper compared to the brand-name version.

Discussion

Despite limited evidence suggesting that citalopram and escitalopram have any meaningful differences in therapeutic or adverse effects, there exists a noticeable decline in the use of citalopram that cooccurred with an increase in escitalopram prescribing, consistent with our hypothesis. Moreover, among these general pharmacoepidemiologic trends exists significant geographic variability. There was disproportionate spending (relative to their use) on the brand versions of these medicines compared to their generic forms.

Trends in amphetamine prescriptions given at discharge in emergency departments: A national analysis (2012-2019)

OBJECTIVES

In parallel with the opioid epidemic, there has been a resurgence in abuse, medical complications, and deaths related to amphetamines. The opioid epidemic began with increasing rates of prescription products that evolved overtime to include heroin and more recently, fentanyl analogues. Current trends in amphetamine prescriptions are less well described. We sought to determine if there has been a change in amphetamine prescriptions given at discharge in U.S. emergency departments (EDs) in recent years.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of data provided by the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) from 2012 to 2019. We computed total number of visits that were given amphetamine prescriptions (amphetamine salts, methylphenidate derivatives, and dexmethylphenidate) at discharge for each year. We computed the total number and rate of visits (of all ED visits) that had both amphetamines and opioids prescribed at discharge over the years. We computed data normality using Shapiro Wilke's test and used descriptive statistics such as mean to describe the data distribution as applicable. We used spearman's rho (SR) or pearson's correlation (PC) as applicable to describe trends in data. All p-values were one-tailed and were reported at a 0.05 significance level. All analyses were conducted in IBM SPSS version 28.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

From 2012 to 2019, there were an estimated 817,895 ED visits where an amphetamine prescription was given at discharge, with an overall strong increase in rate over time (SR = 0.71, p = 0.02). At the beginning of the study period (2012) there were 83,503 (0.06%) visits and in 2019 there were 186,539 (0.12%) visits (123% absolute increase). On average, there were 102,237 (SD: 52,725) visits with discharge amphetamine prescriptions per year. There was a strong, linear increase in number of visits that involved a discharge amphetamine salt prescription (PC = 0.92, p = 0.001). In 2012, there were a total of 23,676 visits and in 2019, a total of 124,773 visits (427% increase). There was no trend in visits where both an amphetamine and opioid were prescribed (PC: 0.61, p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

There have been increases in discharge prescriptions for amphetamines in the ED over time. This was largely driven by prescriptions for amphetamine salts. Future research initiatives should continue to monitor this trend and in prescriptions and associated abuse in the setting of rising amphetamine abuse.

An Analysis of Oxycodone and Hydrocodone Distribution Trends in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia Between 2006 and 2014

Objective Opioid medications are widely recognized for their use in analgesia and their addictive properties that have led to the opioid epidemic. Areas with historically high prescribing patterns have been shown to suffer more from the crisis. There is also regional variability in these trends. This study is a county level analysis of oxycodone and hydrocodone use in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia between 2006 and 2014. Materials and methods A retrospective analysis of oxycodone and hydrocodone distributed as collected by the Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) Washington Post Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia. Raw drug weights in each county were adjusted to "daily average dose" (grams/county population/365) using publicly available population estimates for all state counties. Purchasing data collected from ARCOS was used to compare distribution trends during this period. This study was limited in that ARCOS report quantity of drug distribution rather than average dose of script written.  Results There was a 57.59% increase in the weight of oxycodone and hydrocodone prescribed between 2006 and 2014. Oxycodone prescriptions increased by 75.50% and hydrocodone by 11.05%. Oxycodone increased across all three states between 2006 and 2010 and declined until 2014. Hydrocodone also increased but to a lesser extent than oxycodone. There was substantial variability in daily average dose of both opioids at the county level in all states. Pharmacies accounted for largest portion of oxycodone (69.17%) and hydrocodone (75.27%) purchased in the region. Hospitals accounted for 26.67% of oxycodone and 22.76% of hydrocodone purchased. Practitioners and mid-level providers, including Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants, did not significantly contribute to this increase. Conclusion In the states of Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia, the distribution of the prescription opioids oxycodone and hydrocodone increased by 57.59%. Daily average dose increased between 2006 and 2010 in all three states, followed by a decline until 2014. Variability in daily average dose by county highlights the relationship between geography and likelihood of receiving high-dose opioids. Increased monitoring at regional health centers and improving substance abuse treatment infrastructure at the county level may be a more efficient strategy in combating the opioid epidemic. Future research is needed to understand the socioeconomic trends that may influence prescribing trends of opioid medications.

Psychiatrists' Cognitive and Affective Biases and the Practice of Psychopharmacology: Why Do Psychiatrists Differ From One Another in How They View and Prescribe Certain Medication Classes?

Cognitive and affective biases impact clinical decision-making in general medicine. This article explores how such biases might specifically affect psychiatrists' attitudes and prescribing patterns regarding two medication classes (stimulants and benzodiazepines) and addresses related issues. To supplement personal observations, selective PubMed narrative literature searches were conducted using relevant title/abstract terms, followed by snowballing for additional pertinent titles. Acknowledging that there are many more types of biases, we describe and use clinical vignettes to illustrate 17 cognitive and affective biases that might influence clinicians' psychopharmacological practices. Factors possibly underlying these biases include temperamental differences and both preprofessional and professional socialization. Mitigating strategies can reduce the potentially detrimental impacts that biases may impose on clinical care. How extensively these biases appear, how they differ among psychiatrists and across classes of medication, and how they might be most effectively addressed to minimize harms deserve further systematic study.