Reported Xylazine Use Among Adults Aged ≥18 Years Evaluated for Substance Use Treatment - United States, July 2022-September 2023.

Xylazine has been increasingly detected in illegally manufactured fentanyl (IMF) products and overdose deaths in the United States; most xylazine-involved overdose deaths involve IMF. A convenience sample of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years was identified from those evaluated for substance use treatment during July 2022-September 2023. Data were collected using the Addiction Severity Index-Multimedia Version clinical assessment tool. Among 43,947 adults, 6,415 (14.6%) reported IMF or heroin as their primary lifetime substance-use problem; 5,344 (12.2%) reported recent (i.e., past-30-day) IMF or heroin use. Among adults reporting IMF or heroin as their primary lifetime substance-use problem, 817 (12.7%) reported ever using xylazine. Among adults reporting recent IMF or heroin use, 443 (8.3%) reported recent xylazine use. Among adults reporting IMF or heroin use recently or as their primary lifetime substance-use problem, those reporting xylazine use reported a median of two past nonfatal overdoses from any drug compared with a median of one overdose among those who did not report xylazine use; as well, higher percentages of persons who reported xylazine use reported other recent substance use and polysubstance use. Provision of nonjudgmental care and services, including naloxone, wound care, and linkage to and retention of persons in effective substance use treatment, might reduce harms including overdose among persons reporting xylazine use.

Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: Population Estimates - United States, 2022.

In 2022, 81,806 opioid-involved overdose deaths were reported in the United States, more than in any previous year. Medications for opioid use disorder (OUD), particularly buprenorphine and methadone, substantially reduce overdose-related and overall mortality. However, only a small proportion of persons with OUD receive these medications. Data from the 2022 National Survey on Drug Use and Health were applied to a cascade of care framework to estimate and characterize U.S. adult populations who need OUD treatment, receive any OUD treatment, and receive medications for OUD. In 2022, 3.7% of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years needed OUD treatment. Among these, only 25.1% received medications for OUD. Most adults who needed OUD treatment either did not perceive that they needed it (42.7%) or received OUD treatment without medications for OUD (30.0%). Compared with non-Hispanic Black or African American and Hispanic or Latino adults, higher percentages of non-Hispanic White adults received any OUD treatment. Higher percentages of men and adults aged 35-49 years received medications for OUD than did women and younger or older adults. Expanded communication about the effectiveness of medications for OUD is needed. Increased efforts to engage persons with OUD in treatment that includes medications are essential. Clinicians and other treatment providers should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment, including medications, for patients with OUD. Pharmacists and payors can work to make these medications available without delays.

CDC Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain - United States, 2022.

This guideline provides recommendations for clinicians providing pain care, including those prescribing opioids, for outpatients aged ≥18 years. It updates the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain - United States, 2016 (MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65[No. RR-1]:1-49) and includes recommendations for managing acute (duration of <1 month), subacute (duration of 1-3 months), and chronic (duration of >3 months) pain. The recommendations do not apply to pain related to sickle cell disease or cancer or to patients receiving palliative or end-of-life care. The guideline addresses the following four areas: 1) determining whether or not to initiate opioids for pain, 2) selecting opioids and determining opioid dosages, 3) deciding duration of initial opioid prescription and conducting follow-up, and 4) assessing risk and addressing potential harms of opioid use. CDC developed the guideline using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Recommendations are based on systematic reviews of the scientific evidence and reflect considerations of benefits and harms, patient and clinician values and preferences, and resource allocation. CDC obtained input from the Board of Scientific Counselors of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (a federally chartered advisory committee), the public, and peer reviewers. CDC recommends that persons with pain receive appropriate pain treatment, with careful consideration of the benefits and risks of all treatment options in the context of the patient's circumstances. Recommendations should not be applied as inflexible standards of care across patient populations. This clinical practice guideline is intended to improve communication between clinicians and patients about the benefits and risks of pain treatments, including opioid therapy; improve the effectiveness and safety of pain treatment; mitigate pain; improve function and quality of life for patients with pain; and reduce risks associated with opioid pain therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death.

Bridging the Gap Among Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pain Management in Cancer and Sickle Cell Disease.

Opioids are a critical component of pain relief strategies for the management of patients with cancer and sickle cell disease. The escalation of opioid addiction and overdose in the United States has led to increased scrutiny of opioid prescribing practices. Multiple reports have revealed that regulatory and coverage policies, intended to curb inappropriate opioid use, have created significant barriers for many patients. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and American Society of Clinical Oncology each publish clinical practice guidelines for the management of chronic pain. A recent JAMA Oncology article highlighted perceived variability in recommendations among these guidelines. In response, leadership from guideline organizations, government representatives, and authors of the original article met to discuss challenges and solutions. The meeting featured remarks by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, presentations on each clinical practice guideline, an overview of the pain management needs of patients with sickle cell disease, an overview of perceived differences among guidelines, and a discussion of differences and commonalities among the guidelines. The meeting revealed that although each guideline varies in the intended patient population, target audience, and methodology, there is no disagreement among recommendations when applied to the appropriate patient and clinical situation. It was determined that clarification and education are needed regarding the intent, patient population, and scope of each clinical practice guideline, rather than harmonization of guideline recommendations. Clinical practice guidelines can serve as a resource for policymakers and payers to inform policy and coverage determinations.

US Emergency Department Visits for Acute Harms From Prescription Opioid Use, 2016-2017.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the number of US emergency department visits for prescription opioid harms by patient characteristics, intent, clinical manifestations, and active ingredient. METHODS: We used data from medical record-based surveillance from a nationally representative 60-hospital sample. RESULTS: Based on 7769 cases, there were 267 020 estimated emergency department visits annually (95% confidence interval [CI] = 209 833, 324 206) for prescription opioid harms from 2016 to 2017. Nearly half of visits (47.6%; 95% CI = 40.8%, 54.4%) were attributable to nonmedical opioid use, 38.9% (95% CI = 32.9%, 44.8%) to therapeutic use, and 13.5% (95% CI = 11.0%, 16.0%) to self-harm. Co-implication with other pharmaceuticals and concurrent illicit drug and alcohol use were common; prescription opioids alone were implicated in 31.5% (95% CI = 27.2%, 35.8%) of nonmedical use visits and 19.7% (95% CI = 15.7%, 23.7%) of self-harm visits. Unresponsiveness or cardiorespiratory failure (30.0%) and altered mental status (35.7%) were common in nonmedical use visits. Gastrointestinal effects (30.4%) were common in therapeutic use visits. Oxycodone was implicated in more than one third of visits across intents. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity data can help target interventions, such as dispensing naloxone to family and friends of those with serious overdose, and screening and treatment of substance use disorder when opioids are prescribed long-term.

CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain - United States, 2016.

This guideline provides recommendations for primary care clinicians who are prescribing opioids for chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care. The guideline addresses 1) when to initiate or continue opioids for chronic pain; 2) opioid selection, dosage, duration, follow-up, and discontinuation; and 3) assessing risk and addressing harms of opioid use. CDC developed the guideline using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, and recommendations are made on the basis of a systematic review of the scientific evidence while considering benefits and harms, values and preferences, and resource allocation. CDC obtained input from experts, stakeholders, the public, peer reviewers, and a federally chartered advisory committee. It is important that patients receive appropriate pain treatment with careful consideration of the benefits and risks of treatment options. This guideline is intended to improve communication between clinicians and patients about the risks and benefits of opioid therapy for chronic pain, improve the safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce the risks associated with long-term opioid therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death. CDC has provided a checklist for prescribing opioids for chronic pain (http://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/38025) as well as a website (http://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/prescribingresources.html) with additional tools to guide clinicians in implementing the recommendations.

Vital Signs: Changes in Opioid Prescribing in the United States, 2006-2015.

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid-related overdose deaths increased sharply during 1999-2010 in the United States in parallel with increased opioid prescribing. CDC assessed changes in national-level and county-level opioid prescribing during 2006-2015. METHODS: CDC analyzed retail prescription data from QuintilesIMS to assess opioid prescribing in the United States from 2006 to 2015, including rates, amounts, dosages, and durations prescribed. CDC examined county-level prescribing patterns in 2010 and 2015. RESULTS: The amount of opioids prescribed in the United States peaked at 782 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per capita in 2010 and then decreased to 640 MME per capita in 2015. Despite significant decreases, the amount of opioids prescribed in 2015 remained approximately three times as high as in 1999 and varied substantially across the country. County-level factors associated with higher amounts of prescribed opioids include a larger percentage of non-Hispanic whites; a higher prevalence of diabetes and arthritis; micropolitan status (i.e., town/city; nonmetro); and higher unemployment and Medicaid enrollment. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE: Despite reductions in opioid prescribing in some parts of the country, the amount of opioids prescribed remains high relative to 1999 levels and varies substantially at the county-level. Given associations between opioid prescribing, opioid use disorder, and overdose rates, health care providers should carefully weigh the benefits and risks when prescribing opioids outside of end-of-life care, follow evidence-based guidelines, such as CDC's Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain, and consider nonopioid therapy for chronic pain treatment. State and local jurisdictions can use these findings combined with Prescription Drug Monitoring Program data to identify areas with prescribing patterns that place patients at risk for opioid use disorder and overdose and to target interventions with prescribers based on opioid prescribing guidelines.

A Detailed Exploration Into the Association of Prescribed Opioid Dosage and Overdose Deaths Among Patients With Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: High opioid dosage has been associated with overdose, and clinical guidelines have cautioned against escalating dosages above 100 morphine-equivalent mg (MEM) based on the potential harm and the absence of evidence of benefit from high dosages. However, this 100 MEM threshold was chosen somewhat arbitrarily. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of prescribed opioid dosage as a continuous measure in relation to risk of unintentional opioid overdose to identify the range of dosages associated with risk of overdose at a detailed level. METHODS: In this nested case-control study with risk-set sampling of controls, cases (opioid overdose decedents) and controls were identified from a population of patients of the Veterans Health Administration who were prescribed opioids and who have a chronic pain diagnosis. Unintentional fatal opioid analgesic overdose was measured from National Death Index records and prescribed opioid dosage from pharmacy records. RESULTS: The average prescribed opioid dosage was higher (P<0.001) for cases (mean=98.1 MEM, SD=112.7; median=60, interquartile range, 30-120), than controls (mean=47.7 MEM, SD=65.2; median=25, interquartile range, 15-45). In a ROC analysis, dosage was a moderately good "predictor" of opioid overdose death, indicating that, on average, overdose cases had a prescribed opioid dosage higher than 71% of controls. CONCLUSIONS: A clear cut-point in opioid dosage to distinguish between overdose cases and controls was not found. However, lowering the recommended dosage threshold below the 100 MEM used in many recent guidelines would affect proportionately few patients not at risk for overdose while potentially benefitting many of those at risk for overdose.

Public Health Detailing-A Successful Strategy to Promote Judicious Opioid Analgesic Prescribing.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate knowledge and prescribing changes following a 2-month public health detailing campaign (one-to-one educational visits) about judicious opioid analgesic prescribing conducted among health care providers in Staten Island, New York City, in 2013. METHODS: Three detailing campaign recommendations were (1) a 3-day supply of opioids is usually sufficient for acute pain, (2) avoid prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain, and (3) avoid high-dose opioid prescriptions. Evaluation consisted of a knowledge survey, and assessing prescribing rates and median day supply per prescription. Prescribing data from the 3-month period before the campaign were compared with 2 sequential 3-month periods after the campaign. RESULTS: Among 866 health care providers visited, knowledge increased for all 3 recommendations (P < .01). After the campaign, the overall prescribing rate decreased similarly in Staten Island and other New York City counties (boroughs), but the high-dose prescribing rate decreased more in Staten Island than in other boroughs (P < .01). Median day supply remained stable in Staten Island and increased in other boroughs. CONCLUSIONS: The public health detailing campaign improved knowledge and likely prescribing practices and could be considered by other jurisdictions to promote judicious opioid prescribing.

CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain--United States, 2016.

IMPORTANCE: Primary care clinicians find managing chronic pain challenging. Evidence of long-term efficacy of opioids for chronic pain is limited. Opioid use is associated with serious risks, including opioid use disorder and overdose. OBJECTIVE: To provide recommendations about opioid prescribing for primary care clinicians treating adult patients with chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care. PROCESS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated a 2014 systematic review on effectiveness and risks of opioids and conducted a supplemental review on benefits and harms, values and preferences, and costs. CDC used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess evidence type and determine the recommendation category. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Evidence consisted of observational studies or randomized clinical trials with notable limitations, characterized as low quality using GRADE methodology. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to the limited number of studies, variability in study designs and clinical heterogeneity, and methodological shortcomings of studies. No study evaluated long-term (≥1 year) benefit of opioids for chronic pain. Opioids were associated with increased risks, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death, with dose-dependent effects. RECOMMENDATIONS: There are 12 recommendations. Of primary importance, nonopioid therapy is preferred for treatment of chronic pain. Opioids should be used only when benefits for pain and function are expected to outweigh risks. Before starting opioids, clinicians should establish treatment goals with patients and consider how opioids will be discontinued if benefits do not outweigh risks. When opioids are used, clinicians should prescribe the lowest effective dosage, carefully reassess benefits and risks when considering increasing dosage to 50 morphine milligram equivalents or more per day, and avoid concurrent opioids and benzodiazepines whenever possible. Clinicians should evaluate benefits and harms of continued opioid therapy with patients every 3 months or more frequently and review prescription drug monitoring program data, when available, for high-risk combinations or dosages. For patients with opioid use disorder, clinicians should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment, such as medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The guideline is intended to improve communication about benefits and risks of opioids for chronic pain, improve safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce risks associated with long-term opioid therapy.

Decrease in rate of opioid analgesic overdose deaths - Staten Island, New York City, 2011-2013.

From 2000 to 2011, the rate of unintentional drug poisoning (overdose) deaths involving opioid analgesics increased 435% in Staten Island, from 2.0 to 10.7 per 100,000 residents. During 2005-2011, disparities widened between Staten Island and the other four New York City (NYC) boroughs (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens); in 2011, the rate in Staten Island was 3.0-4.5 times higher than in the other boroughs. In response, the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) implemented a comprehensive five-part public health strategy, with both citywide and Staten Island-targeted efforts: 1) citywide opioid prescribing guidelines, 2) a data brief for local media highlighting Staten Island mortality and prescribing data, 3) Staten Island town hall meetings convened by the NYC commissioner of health and meetings with Staten Island stakeholders, 4) a Staten Island campaign to promote prescribing guidelines, and 5) citywide airing of public service announcements with additional airing in Staten Island. Concurrently, the New York state legislature enacted the Internet System for Tracking Over-Prescribing (I-STOP), a law requiring prescribers to review the state prescription monitoring system before prescribing controlled substances. This report describes a 29% decline in the opioid analgesic-involved overdose death rate in Staten Island from 2011 to 2013, while the rate did not change in the other four NYC boroughs, and compares opioid analgesic prescribing data for Staten Island with data for the other boroughs. Targeted public health interventions might be effective in lowering opioid analgesic-involved overdose mortality rates.

Preventing childhood obesity: what are we doing right?

After decades of increases, the prevalence of childhood obesity has declined in the past decade in New York City, as measured in children participating in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and public school students, with the greatest reductions occurring in the youngest children. Possible explanations were changes in demographics; WIC, day care, and school food policies; citywide obesity prevention policies, media messages; and family and community food consumption. Although the decreases cannot be attributed to any one cause, the most plausible explanation is changes in food consumption at home, prompted by media messages and reinforced by school and child care center policy changes. Continued media messages and policy changes are needed to sustain these improvements and extend them to other age groups.

Evaluation of the New York City breakfast in the classroom program.

OBJECTIVES: We determined the impact of Breakfast in the Classroom (BIC) on the percentage of children going without morning food, number of locations where food was consumed, and estimated calories consumed per child. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional survey of morning food consumed among elementary school students offered BIC and not offered BIC in geographically matched high-poverty-neighborhood elementary schools. RESULTS: Students offered BIC (n = 1044) were less likely to report not eating in the morning (8.7%) than were students not offered BIC (n = 1245; 15.0%) and were more likely to report eating in 2 or more locations during the morning (51.1% vs 30%). Overall, students offered BIC reported consuming an estimated 95 more calories per morning than did students not offered BIC. CONCLUSIONS: For every student for whom BIC resolved the problem of starting school with nothing to eat, more than 3 students ate in more than 1 location. Offering BIC reduced the percentage of students not eating in the morning but may contribute to excess calorie intake. More evaluation of BIC's impact on overweight and obesity is needed before more widespread implementation.

HIV testing among patients infected with Neisseria gonorrhoeae: STD Surveillance Network, United States, 2009-2010.

We used data from the STD Surveillance Network to estimate HIV testing among patients being tested or treated for gonorrhea. Of 1,845 gonorrhea-infected patients identified through nationally notifiable disease data, only 51% were tested for HIV when they were tested or treated for gonorrhea. Among the 10 geographic sites in this analysis, the percentage of patients tested for HIV ranged from 22-63% for men and 20-79% for women. Nearly 33% of the un-tested patients had never been previously HIV-tested. STD clinic patients were more likely to be HIV-tested than those in other practice settings.

Effectiveness of gentamicin for gonorrhoea treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The development of resistance to multiple antimicrobial agents has limited treatment options for gonorrhoea. The potential emergence of cephalosporin resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae and cephalosporin allergy in some patients make it necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of other available antimicrobial agents. Gentamicin is widely available in the USA and is used for gonorrhoea treatment in several countries. We conducted a systematic review of the medical literature to assess the effectiveness of gentamicin for treatment of uncomplicated urogenital gonococcal infections. METHODS: Two reviewers assessed relevant articles and independently selected studies that met prespecified selection criteria (including systematic enrolment and assignment to treatment and culture-confirmed diagnosis and outcome). Summary measures for selected studies were pooled using inverse variance-weighted averages with fixed effects. Heterogeneity was assessed using I(2), which estimates proportion (0-100%) of variability attributable to heterogeneity between studies. Pooled percentage with negative follow-up culture was compared with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria for selection of recommended therapy (lower 95% CI of efficacy ≥95%). RESULTS: Twenty-nine potentially relevant studies were identified; three met inclusion criteria. Two studies used 240 mg intramuscular gentamicin and one used 280 mg. Percentages with negative culture after single-dose treatment were 90.7% (n=86), 91.4% (n=220) and 95.0% (n=40). Pooled percentage with negative culture after single-dose treatment was 91.5% (95% CI 88.1% to 94.0%, I(2)=0%). CONCLUSIONS: Gentamicin does not meet current CDC criteria for recommended treatment of gonorrhoea. However, if cephalosporin resistance emerges, gentamicin may be a useful alternative agent. Evaluation of additional regimens, including combination therapy, is warranted.