Outcomes associated with scheduling or up-scheduling controlled substances

The impact of codeine rescheduling on non-opioid analgesic use by people who regularly use codeine: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Codeine was rescheduled in Australia to prescription only in February 2018. Initial studies reported an increase in population level paracetamol and ibuprofen sales following codeine upscheduling. However, to date no study has been able to investigate changes in non-opioid analgesic use at the individual patient level to determine if sales data reflect actual consumption patterns.

AIM

To address this gap, we aimed to determine the impact of codeine rescheduling on non-opioid analgesic use in people who regularly used over-the-counter codeine, primarily for pain, prior to the rescheduling change.

METHOD

We conducted a prospective cohort study with 260 participants who reported regular over-the-counter codeine consumption at cohort entry. Surveys were completed at baseline (November 2017, 3 months before rescheduling) and at 1 month (February 2018), 4 months (June 2018), and 12 months (February 2019), following rescheduling. The primary outcomes were mean daily doses of non-opioid analgesics, captured through a 7 day medication diary.

RESULTS

The mean daily paracetamol dose decreased from 1754.4 mg (95% CI 1300.5-2208.3) at baseline to 1023.8 mg (95% CI 808.5-1239.1) at the final time-point (+ 12 months) (p = .009). The mean daily ibuprofen dose decreased from 305.1mg (95% CI 217.9-392.4) at baseline to 161.2 mg (95% CI 98.5-224.0) 12 months after rescheduling (p = .03). No significant change in doses of other medications remained was found.

CONCLUSION

In people who regularly consumed over-the-counter codeine, doses of non-opioid analgesics either reduced or remained stable following codeine rescheduling, suggesting concerns of medication substitution or overuse following the change were not realised.

The Baltic and Nordic responses to the first Taliban poppy ban: Implications for Europe & synthetic opioids today

The 2000-2001 and the 2022-2023 Taliban opium bans were and could be two of the largest ever disruptions to a major illegal drug market. To help understand potential implications of the current ban for Europe, this paper analyzes how opioid markets in seven Baltic and Nordic countries responded to the earlier ban, using literature review, key informant interviews, and secondary data analysis. The seven nations' markets responded in diverse ways, including rebounding with the same drug (heroin in Norway), substitution to a more potent opioid (fentanyl replacing heroin in Estonia), and substitution to one with lower risk of overdose (buprenorphine replacing heroin in Finland). The responses were not instantaneous, but rather evolved, sometimes over several years. This variety suggests that it can be hard to predict how drug markets will respond to disruptions, but two extreme views can be challenged. It would be naive to imagine that drug markets will not adapt to shocks, but also unduly nihilistic to presume that they will always just bounce back with no lasting effects. Substitution to another way of meeting demand is possible, but that does not always negate fully the benefits of disrupting the original market. Nonetheless, there is historical precedent for a European country's opioid market switching to synthetic opioids when heroin supplies were disrupted. Given how much that switch has increased overdose rates in Canada and the United States, that is a serious concern for Europe at present. A period of reduced opioid supply may be a particularly propitious time to expand treatment services (as Norway did in the early 2000s).

Misuse of Over the Counter and Prescription Only Medication by Adults Accessing Specialist Treatment Services in the UK: A Narrative Synthesis

Background

Concerns about the misuse of over the counter (OTC) and prescription only medication (POM) are due to their impact upon physical/mental wellbeing, drug interactions and drug-related deaths. Improving an understanding of the pattern of use by people accessing specialist substance misuse services (SMSs) should enable improvements to treatment provision.

Aim

To review the literature on the misuse of OTC/POM among adults accessing SMS, including the pattern of use, types of medication and associated characteristics.

Methods

This review is reported in line with PRISMA. The protocol has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020135216) and separately published. A search of Cochrane, OVID Medline, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases and grey literature was undertaken. Only English language publications outlining OTC/POM misuse by adults in receipt of psychological/pharmacological interventions for substance misuse were included. Two reviewers conducted the title, abstract and full-text reviews using predetermined selection criteria and a piloted data extraction form to ensure a consistent approach. A third reviewer resolved disagreements and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool assessed for bias. Ethical approval was not required.

Results

Thirteen studies with notable heterogeneity were included in the narrative synthesis after non-UK-based and ineligible publications were excluded, from the 143 potentially relevant papers. To reduce bias all studies were included in the analysis and GRADE-CERQual was applied. 'High confidence' was identified for all review findings, despite moderate methodological limitations. Antihistamine, benzodiazepine and opioid misuse was mentioned most frequently. Usage patterns and supply sources varied. Adverse consequences and polypharmacy are concerning. Withdrawal symptoms perpetuated misuse, often alongside illicit substance use, comorbid psychiatric/pain disorders and street drug shortages.

Conclusion

OTC/POM misuse is common amongst adults accessing SMS. A renewed approach to withdrawal management is required. The limited number of studies may impact on generalisability but allowed for a more detailed review. Restricting to UK studies improved relevance due to drug market variations and availability of medicines in different countries. Further UK-based research on OTC/POM misuse in SMS is needed to build upon the current paucity in the published literature.

Surveying Over the Counter and Prescription Only Medication Misuse in Treatment Services During COVID-19

Background:

A greater understanding of Over the Counter (OTC) and Prescription Only Medication (POM) misuse amongst adults accessing substance misuse services (SMS) during COVID-19 is required to identify how SMS can better meet the needs of the people who require treatment.

Aim:

To use a questionnaire to explore OTC/POM misuse during COVID-19 in adults accessing community SMS in England.

Methods:

In 2020 to 2021 anonymous self-administered online/paper questionnaires which collated quantitative and qualitative data were completed. They were piloted for suitability and ethical approval was obtained. Thematic analysis was conducted for qualitative data and chi-square tests used to assess the relationship between quantitative variables.

Results:

Participants were Caucasian (94.6% British), majority male (58.9%), aged 18 to 61 years. Most were prescribed medication for problematic substance use, with a 92.5% self-reported adherence rate. The misuse of benzodiazepines (22.2%) codeine products (30.8%) and pregabalin (14.5%) predominated and 37.5% misused 2 or more medicines. Administration was usually oral and concomitant use of other substances was common: alcohol 44.6% (52% daily), tobacco/vaping 73.2% and illicit substances 58.9%. There were statistically significant associations identified, including between changes during COVID-19 to OTC/POM misuse and illicit use. Only 56 questionnaires were included in the analysis: we believe this low number was because of infection control measures, limited footfall in services, pressures on staff limiting their capacity to distribute the paper questionnaires and reliance upon telephone consultations limiting online distribution. Increasing OTC/POM misuse and obtaining illicit supplies were reported when access to usual supplies were restricted; however, changes to doses/dispensing arrangement liberalisation in response to COVID-19 were positively viewed.

Conclusion:

OTC/POM misuse, including polypharmacy and concomitant use of other substances occurred during COVID-19: SMS need to be vigilant for these issues and mitigate the associated risks for example with harm reduction interventions. Further qualitative research is required to explore the issues identified.