Screening problematic use of substances among young subjects attending an emergency department, and subsequent treatment seeking.

INTRODUCTION: Young individuals constitute a key population for the screening of problematic use of substances (PUS), but they are not likely to seek support and are hard to reach. Targeted screening programs should thus be developed in the places of care they may attend for other reasons, including emergency departments (EDs). We aimed to explore the factors associated with PUS in young people attending an ED; we measured the subsequent access to addiction care after ED screening. METHODS: This was a prospective interventional single-arm study which included any individual aged between 16 and 25 years who attended the main ED of Lyon, France. Baseline data were sociodemographic characteristics, PUS status using self-report questionnaires and biological measures, level of psychological health, and history of physical/sexual abuse. Quick medical feedback was provided to the individuals presenting a PUS; they were advised to consult an addiction unit, and contacted by phone at three months to ask whether they had sought treatment. Baseline data were used to compare PUS and non-PUS groups using multivariable logistic regressions, to provide adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), with age, sex, employment status, and family environment as the adjustment variables. The characteristics of PUS subjects who subsequently sought treatment were also assessed using bivariable analyses. RESULTS: In total, 460 participants were included; 320 of whom (69.6%) were presenting current substance use, and 221 (48.0%) with PUS. Compared to non-PUS individuals, PUS ones were more likely to be males (aOR=2.06; 95% CI [1.39-3.07], P<0.001), to be older (per one-year increase: aOR=1.09; 95% CI [1.01-1.17], P<0.05), to have an impaired mental health status (aOR=0.87; 95% CI [0.81-0.94], P<0.001), and to have a history of sexual abuse (aOR=3.33; 95% CI [2.03-5.47], P<0.0001). Only 132 (59.7%) subjects with PUS could be reached by phone at 3 months, among whom only 15 (11.4%) reported having sought treatment. Factors associated with treatment seeking were social isolation (46.7% vs. 19.7%; P=0.019), previous consultation for psychological disorders (93.3% vs. 68.4%; P=0.044), lower mental health score (2.8±1.6 vs. 5.1±2.6; P<0.001), and post-ED hospitalization in a psychiatric unit (73.3% vs. 19.7%; P<0.0001). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: EDs are relevant places to screen PUS in youth, but the level of seeking further treatment needs to be substantially improved. Offering systematic screening during an emergency room visit could allow for more appropriate identification and management of youth with PUS.

Patterns and determinants of cannabis use in youth visiting an urban emergency department in France.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis use frequently starts during adolescence and young adulthood and can induce psychosocial and health consequences. Young people constitute hard-to-reach populations. Emergency departments could constitute a key care setting to identify cannabis use and its consequences among young people. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the rate of cannabis use in the 16- to 25-year-old population visiting the emergency department for any reason and to assess the psychosocial factors associated with cannabis use. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study among young people who attended the emergency department, over 5-months. Data were sociodemographic characteristics, self-administered questionnaires for problematic substance use screening, and urine drug screening samples. They were classified in the cannabis use (CU) group if they had a positive urine screen or reported cannabis use in the previous month. Characteristics of individuals in the CU and non-CU groups were compared. RESULTS: A total of 460 participants were included, of whom 105 were in the CU group. Cannabis users were more likely to be male (aOR = 1.85; [1.18-2.90]), to be unemployed (aOR = 1.77; [1.03-3.04]), to have a lower mental health status score (aOR = 0. 82; [0.75-0.90]), to report a history of sexual abuse (aOR = 2.99; [1.70-5.25]), and to have a positive AUDIT screen (aOR = 4.23; [2.61-6.86]). CONCLUSIONS: The emergency department is a primary care setting for young people, which is conducive to screening for substance use. Cannabis users can be assessed and referred to adapt their treatment, given their lack of adherence to the traditional addictology care system.

Willingness to use a drug consumption room among people who use drugs in Lyon, France, a city with no open scene of drug use (the TRABOUL survey).

BACKGROUND: Drug consumption rooms (DCRs) have been developed in cities with open drug scenes, with the aim to reduce drug-related harm. In Lyon, France's second-largest city, there is no distinct drug use area, which raised doubts regarding the need for a DCR. METHODS: We conducted a face-to-face survey of 264 people who use drugs (PWUDs), recruited in harm reduction or addiction treatment centers, in the streets or in squats. We assess their willingness to use a DCR, and we collected sociodemographic and medical features. Bivariable comparisons and analyses adjusted for sociodemographic parameters explored the association between willing to use a DCR and other variables, thus providing crude (ORs) and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: In total, 193 (73.1%) PWUDs accepted to participate (mean age 38.5 ± 9.3 years; 80.3% men). Among them, 64.2% declared willing to use a DCR. Being treatment-seeker (aOR 0.20, 95% CI [0.08-0.51]; p < 0.001) and not living alone (aOR 0.29; 95% CI [0.10-0.86], p = 0.025) were negatively associated with willing to use a DCR. By contrast, receiving precarity social insurance (aOR 4.12; 95% CI [1.86-9.14], p < 0.001), being seropositive for hepatitis C (aOR 3.60; 95% CI [1.20-10.84], p = 0.022), being cannabis user (aOR 2.45; 95% CI [1.01-5.99], p = 0.049), and reporting previous problems with residents (aOR 5.99; 95% CI [2.16-16.58], p < 0.001) or with the police (aOR = 4.85; 95% CI [1.43-16.39], p = 0.011) were positively associated. CONCLUSIONS: PWUDs, especially the most precarious ones, largely supported the opening of a DCR in Lyon, a city with no open drug scene.

Proportion and conditions of use of intranasal take-home naloxone kits: A retrospective study in two French outpatient addiction centers, 2016-2020.

BACKGROUND: Take-home naloxone (THN) helps to revert the medical consequences of an opioid overdose among people who use drugs (PWUD). In France, an intranasal THN was available from July 2016 to Dec 2020, which was directly dispensed in addiction centers, after a specific education program. However, this intranasal THN was subsequently removed from the market. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively explore the post-dispensing proportion and conditions of use of intranasal THN kits, as well as the preferences for intranasal or intramuscular THN among French PWUD. METHODS: Based on medical records, all PWUD who benefit from a dispensation of at least one intranasal THN kit in two French outpatient addiction centers, between July 2016 and Dec 2020, were recontacted by phone in April-May 2021, and asked if they used their kits, and, if yes, how. An additional question also explores whether French PWUD preferred being provided with intranasal or intramuscular THN kits. RESULTS: Five hundred thirty-four (534) PWUD were provided a THN kits, but only 188 (35.2%) could be joined by phone. Of them, 26 (13.8%) did not remember being trained for and dispensed with a THN kit. Of the 160 PWUD interviewed, only six (3.7%) reported having used their kits because of an overdose, in three cases for themselves, and in three cases for someone else. In all the six situations, the victim of the overdose survived. One hundred and eleven (111; 59.0%) PWUD declared preferring intranasal THN form, while 30 (16.0%) preferred intramuscular kits, and 47 (25.0%) had no preference. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to what was found in other countries, the proportion of use of THN was low among treatment-seeking French PWUD. This might be due to a reduced likelihood of overdose in this population, or more possibly to an insufficient interest in THN benefits by French PWUD.

Gabapentinoid use in French most precarious populations: Insight from Lyon Permanent Access to Healthcare (PASS) units, 2016-1Q2021.

BACKGROUND: Gabapentinoids (i.e., gabapentin and pregabalin) are medications approved for epilepsy, chronic pain, or generalized anxiety disorder. Recently, there have been regular reports of misuse of pregabalin, and to a lesser extent, gabapentin, in particular among opioid and polydrug users. OBJECTIVES: To longitudinally explore the amounts of gabapentinoids dispensed in Lyon's Permanent Access to Healthcare (PASS) units, which offer permanent and free healthcare to precarious populations with no healthcare insurance coverage. METHODS: We collected the amounts of pregabalin and gabapentin dispensed in the three PASS units of Lyon and calculated the average doses dispensed monthly between 2016 and the first quarter of 2021 (1Q2021), with and without adjustment for the number of dispensing visits. RESULTS: The total doses of gabapentinoid dispensed every month in Lyon's PASS units displayed a 1233% increase for pregabalin, and a 1185% increase for gabapentin, between 2016 and 1Q2021. When adjusted for the number of visits, this increase reached a factor of 8.5 for pregabalin and 8.3 for gabapentin, respectively. However, while the increase in pregabalin dispensing was constant throughout the study period, gabapentin total dispensed doses were more fluctuating over time, and the rise of dispensations was thus less straightforward. CONCLUSION: Our study reveals a local but substantial increase in gabapentinoid use in populations with no social insurance. These findings should be confirmed more widely and plead for the systematic collection of anonymous patient data in free healthcare centers in France.

Factors of Interest in Extended-Release Buprenorphine: Comparisons Between Incarcerated and Non-Incarcerated Patients with Opioid Use Disorder.

PURPOSE: Extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) covers a range of formulations of buprenorphine-based treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) that release the medication over a period of one week, one month, or six months. OUD is particularly prevalent among incarcerated populations, and previous findings have shown that incarcerated subjects were not less interested in XR-BUP than non-incarcerated subjects. However, no study has ever investigated whether the factors of interest in XR-BUP were similar in incarcerated and non-incarcerated populations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out post-hoc analyses using data from the "AMBRE" survey, which was conducted among 366 individuals with OUD, that were recruited in 68 French addiction settings, including six prison medical centers. The reasons for interest in XR-BUP were compared between incarcerated and non-incarcerated interviewees, using logistic regressions models, which provided raw and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Adjustment variables were gender, age category, level of education, and type of current medication for OUD, respectively. RESULTS: Data from 317 participants (ie, 221 non-incarcerated, and 96 incarcerated individuals) were included in the analyses. Adjusted comparisons found that "no longer taking a daily treatment" (aOR= 2.91; 95% CI= 1.21-6.98) and "having a more discreet medication" (aOR= 1.76; 95% CI= 1.01-3.10) were reasons that appealed more to incarcerated participants than to non-incarcerated ones. On the other hand, the potential reduction of withdrawal symptoms (aOR= 0.54; 95% CI= 0.29-0.99) or the risk of misuse (aOR= 0.56; 95% CI= 0.34-0.94) associated with XR-BUP treatment were considered more important by non-incarcerated individuals than by incarcerated ones. CONCLUSION: Incarcerated interviewees were interested in XR-BUP for different reasons than those outside prison. In particular, incarcerated patients were more interested in practicability and discretion features, and less in improving recovery or reducing misuse than non-incarcerated patients.

Validation of the Opioid Overdose Knowledge (OOKS) and Attitudes (OOAS) Scales in French, Spanish, and German Languages, among a Sample of Opioid Users.

INTRODUCTION: Improving the knowledge and attitudes of people facing an opioid overdose is one of the key prevention measures for reducing overdose occurrence and severity. In this respect, the Opioid Overdose Knowledge Scale (OOKS) and Opioid Overdose Attitudes Scale (OOAS) have been developed and validated in English to assess and improve knowledge and attitudes of opioid users and their families and care providers, in case of an overdose. Here, the OOKS and OOAS scales have been translated into French, Spanish, and German, and the different versions of the 2 scales have been assessed regarding their psychometric properties. METHODS: The translation procedure of the scales was based on the international recommendations, including a back translation by a native English speaker. Subsequently, 80 (Spain: 29, France: 27, Germany: 24) former or current heroin users, aged from 20 to 61 years (M = 39.4 ± 9.23), completed the OOKS and OOAS versions of their native language, in test-retest, without specific between-assessment training. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's α, while test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The correlation between the OOKS and OOAS scores of a same language was assessed using Spearman's (ρ) coefficient. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the OOKS was found to be good to very good, with Cronbach's α ranging from 0.62 to 0.87. Test-retest reliability was also very good, with ICCs ranging from 0.71 to 0.82. However, results were less reliable for the OOAS, as internal consistency was questionable to acceptable, with Cronbach's α ranging from 0.12 to 0.63, while test-retest ICCs were very good for the French (0.91) and Spanish (0.99) versions and barely acceptable for the German version (0.41). No significant correlation was found between the OOKS and OOAS scores, irrespective of the version concerned. CONCLUSION: While satisfactory results were found for the 3 versions of the OOKS, results on the OOAS were relatively inconsistent, suggesting a possible gap between knowledge and attitudes on overdose among opioid users.

Determinants of interest in extended-released buprenorphine: A survey among 366 French patients treated with buprenorphine or methadone.

AIM: To explore the factors determining the interest in extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) injections among patients receiving opioid agonist treatment (OAT) in France. METHODS: 366 patients receiving OAT for opioid use disorder, recruited in 66 French centers, were interviewed from 12/2018 to 05/2019. A structured questionnaire assessed their interest in XR-BUP using a [1-10] Likert scale. 'More' vs. 'less' interested groups were defined using the median score of interest, and their characteristics were explored using adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95 % confidence interval (95 %CI). Independent variables were as follows: sociodemographic characteristics, OAT-related features (e.g., type of OAT and prescriber, dosing, or duration of treatment), OAT representations, and personal objectives of treatment. RESULTS: The median interest in XR-BUP was 7 (interquartile range: 3-9) out of 10. The participants who were 'more interested' (i.e. those scoring ≥7) showed no substantial difference in sociodemographic characteristics, relative to the 'less interested' participants. However, they more frequently reported forgetting to take their OAT (OR = 1.81; CI95 % = 1.06-3.10) or reported experiencing situations where taking their OAT was impractical (aOR = 1.69; CI95 % = 1.05-2.73). Their treatment objective was more focused on stopping illicit drugs (aOR = 1.67; 95 %CI = 1.02-2.70), reducing health risks (aOR = 3.57; 95 %CI = 1.67-7.69) and craving (aOR = 2.38; 95 %CI = 1.39-4.02) or improving family (aOR = 1.81; 95 %CI = 1.03-3.13) or professional (aOR = 2.22; 95 %CI = 1.43-3.85) recovery. CONCLUSIONS: In France, where the access to OAT is relatively unrestricted, the majority of participants were interested in XR-BUP formulations. Being interested was associated with treatment objectives focused on abstinence and recovery, and with experiencing constraints in taking a daily oral OAT.

[Prolonged-release buprenorphine formulations: Perspectives for clinical practice]. / Buprénorphine d'action prolongée : quelles perspectives pour la pratique clinique ?

Buprenorphine and methadone are the two main opioids agonist treatments approved for opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine is a partial agonist of the mu-opioid receptors, which has been merely available through sublingual form until now. In practice, the use of buprenorphine is smoother than that of methadone, and it induces reduced risks of overdose. However, sublingual buprenorphine also exposes to risks (e.g., withdrawal, misuse) and constraints (e.g., daily intake). Three new galenic formulations of prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) are being commercialized and should allow some improvements in patients' comfort and safety. This narrative review aims to describe the main technical features and efficacy and safety data of these PRBs, as well as patients' and professionals' expectancies and concerns, using data of the scientific literature and the regulatory texts. PRBs consist of one subcutaneous implant and two subcutaneous injection depots. Sixmo®/Probuphine® is a six-month-long implant which needs to be surgically placed and removed and is approved for subjects previously treated with a maximum daily dose of 8mg of sublingual buprenorphine, and can be used only for two successive periods of six months before the subject needs to be switched back to sublingual form. Sublocade® is a one-month-long depot formulation that is indicated in switch from sublingual buprenorphine, and which proposes only two dose schemes, i.e., 100 and 300mg monthly. Buvidal®/Brixadi® is a one-week- or one-month-long depot formulation with multiple dosages, which can be used in initiation or in switched from sublingual formulations. While opioid users report some concerns with a risk of coercive use of long-acting forms of buprenorphine, both users and professionals deem that these new specialties could be particularly appreciated in stabilized patients bothered with the daily intake of the treatments, or specific situations at risk of treatment dropout (e.g., following hospital discharge or prison release).

Prolonged-release buprenorphine formulations: Perspectives for clinical practice.

Buprenorphine and methadone are the two main opioid agonist treatments approved for opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine is a partial agonist of the mu opioid receptors, which has been merely available through sublingual form until now. In practice, the use of buprenorphine is smoother than that of methadone, and it induces reduced risks of overdose. However, sublingual buprenorphine also exposes to risks (e.g., withdrawal, misuse) and constraints (e.g., daily intake). Three new galenic formulations of prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) are being commercialized and should allow some improvements in patients' comfort and safety. This narrative review aims to describe the main technical features and efficacy and safety data of these PRBs, as well as patients' and professionals' expectancies and concerns, using data of the scientific literature and the regulatory texts. PRBs consist of one subcutaneous implant and two subcutaneous injection depots. Sixmo®/Probuphine® is a six-month-long implant which needs to be surgically placed and removed and is approved for subjects previously treated with a maximum daily dose of 8mg of sublingual buprenorphine, and can be used only for two successive periods of six months before the subject needs to be switched back to sublingual form. Sublocade® is a one-month-long depot formulation that is indicated in switch from sublingual buprenorphine, and which proposes only two dose schemes, i.e., 100 and 300mg monthly. Buvidal®/Brixadi® is a one-week- or one-month-long depot formulation with multiple dosages, which can be used in initiation or in switched from sublingual formulations. While opioid users report some concerns with a risk of coercive use of long-acting forms of buprenorphine, both users and professionals deem that these new specialties could be particularly appreciated in stabilized patients bothered with the daily intake of the treatments, or specific situations at risk of treatment dropout (e.g., following hospital discharge or prison release).

[Feedback from two French addiction centers and national survey on the intranasal naloxone (Nalscue®) in the prevention of opioid overdoses]. / Retour d'expérience de deux CSAPA et enquête nationale sur la naloxone intranasale (Nalscue®) dans la prévention des overdoses aux opioïdes.

OBJECTIVE: France has temporarily authorized addictology centers to use a form of intranasal naloxone (Nalscue®) to prevent opioid overdoses. The objectives of this work are to present both the characteristics of the patients included in this device in two hospitals centers and the results of the national survey on addiction center's contribution to this new risk reduction tool. METHODS: Patient data are those requested under Nalscue® study (inclusion period July 2016 to January 2018). The survey is an online questionnaire distributed to all addiction centers with an email address. RESULTS: Over this period, in the two addiction centers, 370 kits (35% of the national total) were distributed to 330 patients including 312 opioid users. Of these users, 15% report injecting and 85% are poly-consumers. In 14% of the cases, a patient's relative was formed to administrate the Nalscue®. Forty kits (30 given away, 6 lost, 4 administered) were renewed to 35 users. Of the 462 addiction centers contacted, 82 (18%) responded. Among 76 structures specialized in opioid addictions, two did not feel concerned and one had no knowledge of the antidote. Fifty-five structures were formed by the pharmaceutical firm. Nine hundred forty-seven patients (58% of the total) were included by 37 centers. Forty-four centers ordered 2458 kits and dispensed 1116 (including kits given out of study). Thirteen structures reported use of Nalscue®. CONCLUSION: The interest of intranasal naloxone is no longer to be demonstrated in a context of opioid overdose, but the preauthorized framework did not allow a major diffusion of the antidote within the population most at risk. Let us hope that the availability in pharmacy can promote its distribution and thus reduce the number of deaths.