Associations of clinical personnel characteristics and controlled substance prescribing practices.

CONTEXT: Over 68,000 deaths were attributed to opioid-related overdose in 2020. Evaluative studies have shown that states that utilized Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) systems have decreased opioid-related deaths. With the growing use of PDMPs and an ongoing opioid epidemic, determining the demographics of physicians at risk of overprescribing can elucidate prescribing practices and inform recommendations to change prescribing behaviors. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess prescribing behaviors by physicians in 2021 based on four demographics utilizing the National Electronic Health Record System (NEHRS): physician's age, sex, specialty, and degree (MD or Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine [DO]). METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of the 2021 NEHRS to determine the relationship between physician characteristics and PDMP use on opioid-prescribing behaviors. Differences between groups were measured via design-based chi-square tests. We constructed multivariable logistic regression models to assess the relationships, via adjusted odds ratios (AOR), between physician characteristics and alternate prescribing patterns. RESULTS: Compared to female physicians, male physicians were more likely to alter their original prescription to reduce morphine milligram equivalents (MMWs) prescribed for a patient (AOR: 1.60; CI: 1.06-2.39; p=0.02), to change to a nonopioid/nonpharmacologic option (AOR: 1.91; 95 % CI: 1.28-2.86; p=0.002), to prescribe naloxone (AOR=2.06; p=0.039), or to refer for additional treatment (AOR=2.07; CI: 1.36-3.16; p<0.001). Compared to younger physicians, those over the age of 50 were less likely to change their prescription to a nonopioid/nonpharmacologic option (AOR=0.63; CI: 0.44-0.90; p=0.01) or prescribe naloxone (AOR=0.56, CI: 0.33-0.92; p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed a statistically significant difference between specialty category and frequency of prescribing controlled substances. After checking the PDMP, male physicians were more likely to alter their original prescription to include harm-reduction strategies. Optimizing the use of PDMP systems may serve to improve prescribing among US physicians.

Reduction in Schedule II opioid prescribing by primary care -providers, orthopedic and general surgeons, and pain -management specialists following the implementation of a State House Bill and an Institutional Controlled Substance Task Force.

OBJECTIVE: Prescription opioid misuse represents a social and economic challenge in the United States. We evaluated Schedule II opioid prescribing practices by primary care providers (PCPs), orthopedic and general surgeons, and pain management specialists. DESIGN: Prospective evaluation of prescribing practices of PCPs, orthopedic and general surgeons, and pain management specialists over 5 years (October 1, 2014-September 30, 2019) in an outpatient setting. METHODS: An analysis of Schedule II opioid prescribing following the implementation of federal and state guidelines and evidence-based standards at our institution. RESULTS: There were significantly more PCPs, orthopedic and general surgeons, and pain management specialists with a significantly increased number who prescribed Schedule II opioids, whereas there was a simultaneous significant decline in the average number of Schedule II opioid prescriptions per provider, Schedule II opioid pills prescribed per provider, and Schedule II opioid pills prescribed per patient by providers. The average number of Schedule II opioid prescriptions with a quantity >90 and Opana/Oxycontin prescriptions per PCP, orthopedic surgeon, and pain management specialist significantly decreased. The total morphine milligram equivalent (MME)/day of Schedule II opioids ordered by PCPs, orthopedic and general surgeons, and pain management specialists significantly declined. The ages of the providers remained consistent throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports the implementation of federal and state regulations and institutional evidence-based guidelines into primary care and medical specialty practices to reduce the number of Schedule II opioids prescribed. Further research is warranted to determine alternative therapies to Schedule II opioids that may alleviate a patient's pain without initiating or exacerbating a potentially lethal opioid addiction.

The synthetic CB1 cannabinoid receptor selective agonists: Putative medical uses and their legalization.

More than 500 molecules have been identified as components of Cannabis sativa (C. sativa), of which the most studied is Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). Several studies have suggested that Δ9-THC exerts diverse biological effects, ranging from fragmentation of DNA to behavioral disruptions. Currently, it is accepted that most of the pharmacological properties of Δ9-THC engage the activation of the cannabinoid receptors, named CB1 and CB2. Interestingly, multiple pieces of evidence have suggested that the cannabinoid receptors play an active role in the modulation of several diseases leading to the design of synthetic cannabinoid-like compounds. Advances in the development of synthetic CB1 cannabinoid receptor selective agonists as therapeutical approaches are, however, limited. This review focuses on available evidence searched in PubMed regarding the synthetic CB1 cannabinoid receptor selective agonists such as AM-1235, arachidonyl-2' chloroethylamide (ACEA), CP 50,556-1 (Levonantradol), CP-55,940, HU-210, JWH-007, JWH-018, JWH-200 (WIN 55,225), methanandamide, nabilone, O-1812, UR-144, WIN 55,212-2, nabiximols, and dronabinol. Indeed, it would be ambitious to describe all available evidence related to the synthetic CB1 cannabinoid receptor selective agonists. However, and despite the positive evidence on the positive results of using these compounds in experimental models of health disturbances and preclinical trials, we discuss evidence in regards some concerns due to side effects.

Epidiolex as adjunct therapy for treatment of refractory epilepsy: a comprehensive review with a focus on adverse effects.

Medically refractory epilepsy remains an area of intense clinical and scientific interest since a significant porportion of patients continue to suffer from debilitating seizures despite available therapies. In this setting, recent studies have focused on assessing the benefits of cannabidiol (CBD)-enriched cannabis, a plant based product without psychoactive properties which has been shown to decrease seizure frequency in animal models. More recently, several randomized controlled and open label trials have studied the effects of Epidiolex, a 99% pure oral CBD extract, on patients with refractory epilepsy. This in turn has led to the FDA approval of and more recently, to the Drug Enforcement Administration's placement of Epidiolex into schedule V of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). In this review, we summarize the major findings of several recent large-scale studies using this product with a focus on its adverse effects.

The Surprising Reach of FDA Regulation of Cannabis, Even After Descheduling.

As more states legalize cannabis, the push to "deschedule" it from the Controlled Substances Act is gaining momentum. At the same time, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the first conventional drug containing a cannabinoid derived from cannabis­cannabidiol (CBD) for two rare seizure disorders. This would all seem to bode well for proponents of full federal legalization of medical cannabis. But some traditional providers are wary of drug companies pulling medical cannabis into the regular small molecule drug development system. The FDA's focus on precise analytical characterization and on individual active and inactive ingredients may be fundamentally inconsistent with the "entourage effects" theory of medical cannabis. Traditional providers may believe that descheduling cannabis would free them to promote and distribute their products free of federal intervention, both locally and nationally. Other producers appear to assume that descheduling would facilitate a robust market in cannabis-based edibles and dietary supplements. In fact, neither of these things is true. If cannabis were descheduled, the FDA's complex and comprehensive regulatory framework governing foods, drugs, and dietary supplements would preclude much of this anticipated commerce. For example, any medical claims about cannabis would require the seller to complete the rigorous new drug approval process, the cost of which will be prohibitive for most current traditional providers. Likely also unexpected to some, there is no pathway forward for conventional foods containing cannabis constituents, with the (probably exclusive) exception of certain hemp seed ingredients, if those foods cross state lines. And it will certainly come as a shock to many that federal law already prohibits the sale of dietary supplements containing CBD--including those already on the market as well as those made from "hemp," which has recently been descheduled under the 2018 Farm Bill. This Article describes in detail the surprising reach of the FDA and then outlines three modest, but legal, pathways forward for cannabis-based products in a world where cannabis has been descheduled.

Controlled Substance Use Among Psychiatric Patients in a Rural North Carolina Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) visits for mental health and substance use disorders have been on the rise, with substance use disorders frequently coexisting with mental health disorders. This study evaluated substances commonly used/abused by patients presenting to the ED of a rural, regional medical center with subsequent admission for mental health treatment in Robeson County, North Carolina. METHODS: This retrospective, single-center study was approved by the Southeastern Health Institutional Review Board. We reviewed medical records of psychiatric patients presenting to the ED with ultimate admission to the inpatient psychiatric unit between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2016. Frequencies of controlled substances testing positive on urine drug and alcohol screenings in admitted patients were obtained and analyzed. We also made ethnic and gender comparisons. RESULTS: A total of 477 patients met inclusion criteria. The percentage of patients testing positive were as follows: tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) (40%); cocaine (28.7%); alcohol (15.1%); benzodiazepines (13%); opiates (9.6%); amphetamines (2.9%); barbiturates (2.3%); and methadone (0.8%). A relatively higher proportion of patients tested positive for THC than any other substance (p≤.0002). We found statistically significant differences for gender (p=.0004) and ethnicity (p<.0001) compositions regarding substance use/abuse. CONCLUSION: The majority of admitted psychiatric patients in this study tested positive for at least one controlled substance. The two substances that most often returned positive on the urine drug screen test in our sample were THC (marijuana) and cocaine. These findings may provide insight into concomitant substance abuse and psychiatric disorders, which could instigate public policy development of preventative health initiatives that explore the relationship between controlled substance use/abuse and mental health disorders in rural counties like Robeson County.

Engaging Integrated Health Teams to Decrease the Risk of Controlled Substance Use for Individuals With Serious Mental Illness.

The United States is facing an opioid epidemic that is virulent in its lethality and includes morbidity and mortality related to prescription opioids. Overuse of another class of drugs- benzodiazepines-has received less media attention, but also poses the threat of tolerance, dependence, and death, especially in combination with opioids or alcohol. These negative outcomes are not distributed evenly over the population but are especially prevalent in vulnerable populations. One such vulnerable population comprises individuals with serious mental illness. Professionals who serve this population are challenged by an often-fragmented health care system to collaborate with patients and other professionals to reduce risks and improve outcomes. This article examines strategies for addressing risks associated with the use of benzodiazepines and opioids in this population within the context of an integrated interprofessional team. Recommendations include (a) building consensus on the team, (b) providing education for all stakeholders, and (c) enhancing care coordination and patient access to effective treatments. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 56(12), 11-15.].

The Scheduling of Kratom and Selective Use of Data.

Kratom is a traditional drug from Southeast Asia that has been an emerging new substance in the United States. On August 30, 2016, the DEA announced the intention to emergency schedule kratom into Schedule I. To support this decision, the DEA cited an increase in drug seizures of kratom and an increase in calls to poison control concerning kratom. However, a short time later, on October 12, 2016, the DEA withdrew the intent to schedule kratom after public and congressional backlash. The withdrawal by the DEA was somewhat unprecedented. To better understand both decisions, the current article examines the evidence the DEA cited to support their decision to emergency schedule kratom and the degree and type of media coverage of kratom to determine if a media-driven drug panic occurred.

Opioid Prescribing Patterns and Patient Outcomes by Prescriber Type in the Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program.

Objective: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) were created to facilitate responsible use of controlled substances. In Oregon, physicians, physician's assistants (MDs/DOs/PAs), dentists, nurse practitioners (NPs), and naturopathic physicians (NDs) may prescribe opioids, but differences in prescribing practices, patient mix, and patient outcomes among prescriber types have not been characterized. Methods: De-identified Oregon PDMP data from October 2011 through October 2014 were linked with vital records and a statewide hospital discharge registry. The disciplines of registered prescribers were identified by board affiliations. Prescription profiles associated with opioid overdose risk were tabulated for patients with at least one registered prescriber. Opioid-related hospitalizations and deaths were identified using ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes. Results: There were 5,935 prescribers registered during the study period. Patients of NPs or NDs received more high-risk opioid prescriptions than patients of MDs/DOs/PAs. For example, they received greater proportions of high-dose prescriptions (NP 12.9%, ND 15%, MD/DO/PA 11.1%), and had greater opioid-related hospitalization (NP 1.7%, ND 3.1%, MD/DO/PA 1.2%; P < 0.005 for all). However, patients of NPs or NDs were also more likely to have four or more prescribers (NP 45.3%, ND 58.5%, MD/DO/PA 27.1%), and most of their patients' high-risk opioid prescriptions came from prescribers in other disciplines. Conclusion: Our analysis suggests significant differences in opioid prescription profiles and opioid-related hospitalization and mortality among patients receiving opioid prescriptions from nurse practitioners, naturopathic physicians, or medical clinicians in Oregon. However, these differences appear largely due to differences in patient mix between provider types rather than discipline-specific prescribing practices.

Drug Policy and Indigenous Peoples.

This paper identifies the principal concerns of indigenous peoples with regard to current international treaties on certain psychoactive substances and policies to control and eradicate their production, trafficking, and sale. Indigenous peoples have a specific interest in the issue since their traditional lands have become integrated over time into the large-scale production of coca, opium poppy, and cannabis crops, in response to high demand from the American and European markets, among others. As a consequence, indigenous peoples are persecuted because of their traditional use of these and other plant-based narcotics and hallucinogens. They are also victims of the drug producers who remove them from their lands or forcibly recruit them into the production process. As indigenous peoples are caught in the violent world of illicit drug production, law enforcement often targets them first, resulting in disproportionate rates of criminalization and incarceration.

Regulation of Controlled Substance Prescribing: An Overview for Certified Nurse-Midwives and Certified Midwives.

In addition to the regulation of prescriptive authority and prescribing practices conducted by individual states, the prescription of controlled substances is also regulated at the federal level by the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). While there are variations in state laws relative to controlled substance prescribing, federal law is uniform across states as established by the Controlled Substances Act (21 United States Code § 801-890) and the DEA Regulations (Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations). The only controlled substance for which states have authorized use that is outside the regulations set forth in the Controlled Substances Act is marijuana for the treatment of certain medical conditions. A review of statutes and administrative rules for all 50 states and the District of Columbia revealed that certified midwives (CMs) are authorized to prescribe controlled substances only in the state of New York, and there are variations across states in the regulation of controlled substance prescribing by certified nurse-midwives (CNMs). The purpose of this article is to examine the federal regulation of controlled substance prescribing by the US DEA and common variations in state regulations relative to controlled substance prescribing.

[Psychedelics and quasi-psychedelics in the light of contemporary research: medical cannabis, MDMA, salvinorin A, ibogaine and ayahuasca]. / Pszichedelikumok és kvázi-pszichedelikumok a modern kutatások tükrében: orvosi kannabisz, MDMA, szalvinorin A, ibogain és ayahuasca.

In lack of professional research and appropriate concepts our scientific knowledge of psychedelic agents is limited. According to the long-held official view these drugs are entirely harmful and have no medical use. However, a recent surge of clinical and pharmacological studies in the field indicates that many psychedelic-like agents have therapeutic potentials under proper circumstances. In this paper, from a biomedical and psychological perspective, we provide a brief review of the general effects and promising treatment uses of medical cannabis, 3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine (MDMA), salvinorin A, ibogaine and the dimethyltryptamine-(DMT)-containing ayahuasca. In Hungary - similarly to many other countries - these compounds are classified as "narcotic drugs" and their research is difficult due to strict regulations.

Prescription drug monitoring program inquiry in psychiatric assessment: detection of high rates of opioid prescribing to a dual diagnosis population.

OBJECTIVE: An epidemic of prescription drug abuse is disproportionately impacting the mentally ill. We examined the utility of a state prescription drug monitoring database for assessing recent controlled substance prescribing to patients presenting for dual diagnosis treatment. METHOD: In a community mental health center that provides integrated dual diagnosis care, we queried the Indiana Scheduled Prescription Electronic Collection and Tracking (INSPECT) system for all cases that were open as of August 2, 2011, and had been practitioner-diagnosed (per DSM-IV criteria) by January 2, 2012. INSPECT provided a record of controlled substance dispensations to each patient; diagnostic evaluation was conducted blind from prescription data compilation covering the prior 12 months. Demographic data, insurance status, and DSM-IV diagnoses were compiled from the clinic's electronic medical record. RESULTS: The sample (N = 201) was 51% female, 56% white, and two-thirds uninsured. Over 80% were dually diagnosed with substance use disorders and psychotic, mood, or anxiety disorders. Nicotine and alcohol disorders were identified in most, with about a third diagnosed with cannabis, cocaine, or opioid disorders. A majority of patients (n = 115) had been prescribed opioids in the prior year, with nearly 1 in 5 prescribed an opioid and benzodiazepine simultaneously. Patients were dispensed a mean of 4 opioid prescriptions and 213 opioid pills. More opioid prescriptions correlated with opioid dependence (OR = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.016-1.145), and more prescribers correlated with personality disorder diagnoses (OR = 1.112; 95% CI, 1.001-1.235). Higher rates and riskier patterns of controlled substance prescribing were identified in patients with Medicaid/Medicare insurance compared to uninsured patients. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription drug monitoring is a powerful tool for assessing addictions and high frequencies of patient exposures to prescribed opioids in a dual diagnosis clinic. Improved prevention and treatment strategies for addictions as facilitated by more research and clinical use of prescription drug monitoring in psychiatric care are warranted.