Increasing emergency department attendances in central London with methamphetamine toxicity and associated harms.

BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine is a stimulant drug of abuse with increasing prevalence of use worldwide leading to public health concern. While previous research by our group a decade ago found no evidence of increasing harms associated with methamphetamine use in the UK, there are conflicting data on whether or not this is still the case. This paper aims to identify trends in methamphetamine-related harms and characterise the clinical features of ED presentations involving methamphetamine with gamma-hydroxybutyrate/gamma-butyrolactone (GHB/GBL). METHODS: We retrospectively interrogated a database of all toxicology-related presentations to two central London EDs, extracting data on drugs involved for presentations relating to methamphetamine between 2005 and 2018 to enable analysis of trends. Further clinical data were extracted for presentations between 2014 and 2018 to give a 4-year case series. RESULTS: A total of 1244 presentations involving the use of methamphetamine were identified. The number of presentations rose from 4 in 2005 (1.9% of all recreational drug presentations) to 294 (16.2%) in 2018. A total of 850 cases were identified for the 2014-2018 case series, 94.9% were male with a median (range) age of 35.1 (16-67) years. The most common clinical features in the methamphetamine presentations were neuropsychiatric: agitation (41.5%), anxiety (35.2%), hallucinations (16.5%) and psychosis (14.8%). GHB/GBL was co-used in 54.2% of presentations and appeared to attenuate the neuropsychiatric features seen. Use of GHB/GBL was associated with a higher Poisoning Severity Score and requirement for level 2/3 (high dependency unit/intensive care unit (ICU)) care. CONCLUSION: ED attendances in central London relating to methamphetamine use have risen over the last decade. Combining methamphetamine with GHB/GBL is common and is associated with a higher Poisoning Severity Score and need for ICU level care. Further work is required to establish whether further resources need to be directed at this clinical and public health problem.

National audit of antidote stocking in UK emergency departments.

BACKGROUND: Previous audits of antidote stocking in UK hospitals have demonstrated variable but improving compliance with joint Royal College of Emergency Medicine and National Poisons Information Service guidance on antidote availability in emergency departments. The guidance was updated in 2017. AIM: To provide a current picture of compliance with the 2017 antidote guidance and compare this to previous audits. METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to all hospitals in the UK with an emergency department via medicines information and regional pharmacy procurement networks. Data were collected on availability and stock levels of category A (immediately available) and category B (available within 1 hour) antidotes. Additionally, data were collected on holdings of category C (held supra-regionally) antidotes and arrangements for sourcing these if not stocked locally. RESULTS: 233 hospitals were surveyed and 178 replies (76.4%) were received. There were 73 hospitals (41.7%) fully compliant with guidance for category A, 34 hospitals (19.1%) for category B and 18 hospitals (10.1%) for both categories A and B antidotes. Few hospitals stocked category C antidotes (1.1%-34.8%). Evidence of formalised regional holding arrangements for category C antidotes, as advised in the guidance, was noted in some areas but many regions remain without such agreements. CONCLUSIONS: Most hospitals remain not fully compliant with stocking recommendations for categories A and B antidotes, with limited recent improvement. Category C antidotes are stocked by few hospitals although awareness of where these can be sourced appears to be increasing. Emergency departments should review their antidote stocking arrangements to ensure compliance with guidance. Formal arrangements for stocking of the more rarely used category C antidotes at a regional level are also required, where not already in existence, in order to assure their availability in an equitable way across the country.

Cold water extraction of codeine/paracetamol combination products: a case series and literature review.

Introduction: Tampering with opioid containing medications for use other than their prescribed indication is well documented; however, the published literature has concentrated on stronger, prescription opioids. Less potent opioids, such as codeine, are available without prescription in many European countries in the form of combination analgesic products and these can also be altered, with reports in particular of "cold-water extraction" being a tampering method achievable using household kitchen equipment.Methods: We searched a database of patients attending two South London emergency departments for cases of self-reported ingestion of the products of cold-water extraction, with subsequent review of their case notes. We searched the scientific and grey literature to identify current knowledge of this technique.Results: We identified seven presentations in six patients, none of whom developed paracetamol toxicity or had concentrations suggesting ingestion of a significant dose of paracetamol. A review of the scientific literature on the method also demonstrated that the technique reduces recovered paracetamol in experimental laboratory settings. Additionally, the established literature characterizes the use of codeine in a recreational setting and reports one fatality associated with the method. Review of grey literature user-forums further describes recreational codeine use in relation to the method and frequent adverse events including hospital admission for paracetamol toxicity.Discussion: Whilst the method appears capable of providing a recreational dose of codeine with reduction in the recovered paracetamol, it cannot be considered safe. Pharmaceutical production methods have been successfully developed to prevent tampering through other means but none thus far have been directed at the cold water extraction technique.Conclusions: Clinicians should be aware of the potential toxicity from tampered nonprescription analgesics. There is also the need for public health education regarding the potential risks associated with these methods.