Effects of kratom on driving: Results from a cross-sectional survey, ecological momentary assessment, and pilot simulated driving Study.

OBJECTIVES: Despite widespread kratom use, there is a lack of knowledge regarding its effects on driving. We evaluated the self-reported driving behaviors of kratom consumers and assessed their simulated-driving performance after self-administering kratom products. METHODS: We present results from: 1) a remote, national study of US adults who regularly use kratom, and 2) an in-person substudy from which we re-recruited participants. In the national study (N = 357), participants completed a detailed survey and a 15-day ecological momentary assessment (EMA) that monitored naturalistic kratom use. For the remote study, outcomes were self-reported general and risky driving behaviors, perceived impairment, and driving confidence following kratom administration. For the in-person substudy, 10 adults consumed their typical kratom products and their driving performance on a high-fidelity driving simulator pre- and post-kratom administration was evaluated. RESULTS: Over 90% of participants surveyed self-reported driving under the influence of kratom. Most reported low rates of risky driving behavior and expressed high confidence in their driving ability after taking kratom. This was consistent with EMA findings: participants reported feeling confident in their driving ability and perceived little impairment within 15-180 min after using kratom. In the in-person substudy, there were no significant changes in simulated driving performance after taking kratom. CONCLUSIONS: Using kratom before driving appears routine, however, self-reported and simulated driving findings suggest kratom effects at self-selected doses among regular kratom consumers do not produce significant changes in subjective and objective measures of driving impairment. Research is needed to objectively characterize kratom's impact on driving in regular and infrequent consumers.

Ecological Momentary Assessment of Self-Reported Kratom Use, Effects, and Motivations Among US Adults.

Importance: Kratom products, which are sold legally in most of the US, contain alkaloids with opioidergic, adrenergic, and serotonergic activity. Millions of people use kratom to relieve pain, improve mood, or self-manage substance use disorders (SUDs). Kratom use has primarily been examined via surveys, in which recall biases among satisfied users may lead to minimization of transient negative outcomes. Further prospective study of kratom use, such as with ecological momentary assessment (EMA), is needed. Objective: To characterize proximal motivators, effects, and patterns of kratom use and to assess whether use frequency is associated with motivations, effects, past-year criteria for SUD for kratom (KUD), or other substance use. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this prospective cross-sectional study, an intensive longitudinal smartphone-based EMA in which participants' current behaviors and experiences were repeatedly sampled in real time was conducted between July 1 and October 31, 2022. Participants comprised a convenience sample of US adults who used kratom at least 3 days per week for at least 4 weeks at the time of online screening. Criteria for past-year KUD were based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. Data analysis was performed between November 2022 and November 2023. Exposure: The exposure was 13 401 kratom-use events across 15 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: A baseline survey covering demographics, health, kratom attitudes and behaviors, use motivations, other substance use, and KUD was administered before EMA. Data for the following EMA entries were then collected: event-contingent entries for kratom use (product, dose, and proximal motivations), follow-up entries (short-term effects and consequences of use events), random-prompt entries (mood), beginning-of-day entries (effects of kratom on sleep), and end-of-day entries (daily subjective descriptions of kratom effects). Bayesian regression was used to estimate means and credible intervals. Results: A total of 357 participants completed the EMA. Their mean (SD) age was 38.0 (11.1) years; more than half were men (198 [55.5%]). Participants reported overall motivators of use on the baseline survey that involved managing psychiatric and SUD problems, but proximal motivators evaluated during the EMA involved situation-specific needs such as increasing energy and productivity and decreasing pain. Acute effects were considered congruent with daily obligations. Use patterns, despite having some distinguishing features, were generally similar in their motivators and effects; participants used kratom predominantly during the daytime and seemed to find use frequencies that suited their needs. Higher use patterns were associated with symptoms of physical dependence (eg, withdrawal or tolerance). Co-used substances included caffeine, nicotine, vitamins, and cannabis. Conclusions and Relevance: Most participants in this study reported using kratom in a seemingly nonproblematic way. When such use appeared problematic, the key element was usually that withdrawal avoidance became a proximal motivator. Longitudinal studies examining changes in kratom use patterns and effects over time are needed.

Responses to a "Typical" Morning Dose of Kratom in People Who Use Kratom Regularly: A Direct-Observation Study.

INTRODUCTION: Use of kratom has outpaced systematic study of its effects, with most studies reliant on retrospective self-report. METHODS: We aimed to assess acute effects following kratom use in adults who use regularly, and quantify alkaloids in the products, urine, and plasma. Between July and November 2022, 10 adults came to our clinic and orally self-administered their typical kratom dose; blinding procedures were not used. Physiological measures included blood pressure, respiratory rate, heart rate, pulse oximetry, temperature, and pupil diameter. Subjective outcomes included Subjective Opioid Withdrawal Scale, Addiction Research Center Inventory, and Drug Effects Questionnaire. Psychomotor performance was also assessed. RESULTS: Participants were 6 men and 4 women, mean age 41.2 years. Nine were non-Hispanic White; 1 was biracial. They had used kratom for 6.6 years (SD, 3.8 years) on average (2.0-14.1). Sessions were 190.89 minutes on average (SD, 15.10 minutes). Mean session dose was 5.16 g (median, 4.38 g; range, 1.1-10.9 g) leaf powder. Relative to baseline, physiological changes were minor. However, pupil diameter decreased (right, b = -0.70, P < 0.01; left, b = -0.73, P < 0.01) 40-80 minutes postdose and remained below baseline >160 minutes. Subjective Opioid Withdrawal Scale pre-dosing was mild (5.5 ± 3.3) and decreased postdose (b = [-4.0, -2.9], P < 0.01). Drug Effects Questionnaire "feeling effects" increased to 40/100 (SD, 30.5) within 40 minutes and remained above baseline 80 to 120 minutes (b = 19.0, P = 0.04), peaking at 72.7/100; 6 participants rated euphoria as mild on the Addiction Research Center Inventory Morphine-Benzedrine-scale. Psychomotor performance did not reliably improve or deteriorate postdosing. CONCLUSIONS: Among regular consumers, we found few clinically significant differences pre- and post-kratom dosing. Alkaloidal contents in products were within expected ranges.

Activity space during treatment with medication for opioid use disorder: Relationships with personality, mood, and drug use.

INTRODUCTION: Activity space in people with substance use disorders (SUDs) has been assessed for theoretical reasons and for detection/prevention of relapse. In this observational study, we relate passively obtained activity space measures to mental states and behaviors relevant to the success of treatment for opioid use disorder. Our long-term goal is to use such data to assess risk in real time and to recognize when SUD patients might benefit from a just-in-time intervention. METHODS: We used GPS data from 238 urban residents in the first 16 weeks of stabilization on medication for opioid use disorder to test preregistered hypotheses about activity space (distance traveled, number of locations, time spent moving, and psychosocial-hazard levels of neighborhoods where participants spent time) in relation to certain static variables (personality, mood propensities) and time-varying treatment-relevant behaviors such as craving and use of opioids and cocaine. RESULTS: The most consistent findings were that 1) mobility decreased over the course of the study; 2) neuroticism was associated with overall lower mobility; 3) trait-like positive mood (averaged from momentary ratings) was associated with higher mobility; 4) participants who used cocaine more frequently had lower mobility; 5) early in treatment, participants spent less time moving (i.e., were more sedentary) on days when they were craving. Some of these findings were in the expected direction (i.e., the ones involving neuroticism and positive mood), and some were opposite to the expected direction (i.e., we expected cocaine use to be associated with higher mobility); others (e.g., changes in mobility over time or in relation to craving) involved nondirectional hypotheses. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time information that patients actively provide is valuable for assessing their current state, but providing this information can be burdensome. The current results indicate that certain static or passively obtained data (personality variables and GPS-derived mobility information) are relevant to time-varying, treatment-relevant mental states and drug-related behavior, and therefore might be useful when incorporated into algorithms for detecting need for intervention in real time. Further research should assess how population-specific these relationships are, and how these passive measures can best be combined with low temporal-density, actively-provided data to obtain valid, reliable assessments with minimal burden.

Kratom's Emergence and Persistence Within the US Polydrug Epidemic.

Purpose of Review: Use of "kratom" products, derived from the bioactive botanical Mitragyna speciosa have increased amidst US polydrug use epidemics. Kratom alkaloids interact with opioid, serotonergic, adrenergic, and other receptors and regular users have described experiencing a wide range of effects. Some with polydrug use histories have reported using kratom as a substitute for other drugs or to nonmedically self-manage substance use disorder (SUD) symptoms. Data describing this remain scare and come from self-report. We review this literature describing kratom use as a drug substitute, or as a nonmedical "self-treatment" for attenuating dependence or SUD symptoms. Recent Findings: Kratom products have been documented as being used as a licit and illicit opioid substitute. Use to reduce alcohol or stimulant consumption is less well documented. Although prior and current polydrug use appear common among a some kratom users, it is unclear if co-use is contemporaneous or concomitant. Temporal order of use initiation is typically undocumented. Use for energy and recreation are also increasingly reported. Summary: Data on kratom consumption come primarily from self-report with significant limitations. Until controlled human laboratory studies have been conducted, we can presently only describe what is known about human kratom use based on self-report. Such data describe real-world kratom use, leaving unaddressed human abuse liability or therapeutic potential of kratom alkaloids. Clinicians should be mindful of use motivations among people with SUD histories, sensitively assessing use. The paucity of data highlights the urgent need to increase funding and research for understanding kratom's effects in humans.

Novel methods for the remote investigation of emerging substances: Application to kratom.

The botanical product commonly called "kratom" is still relatively novel to the United States. Like other natural products marketed as supplements, kratom is highly variable, both in terms of the alkaloids naturally occurring in kratom leaves and in terms of processing and formulation. Kratom products sold in the United States are not well-characterized, nor are daily use patterns among regular users. Surveys and case reports have comprised most of the literature on kratom use among humans. To advance our understanding of real-world kratom use, we developed a protocol for the remote study of regular kratom-using adults in the United States. Our study had three aspects implemented in one pool of participants nationwide: an in-depth online survey, 15 days of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) via smartphone app, and the collection and assay of the kratom products used by participants during EMA. Here, we describe these methods, which can be used to investigate myriad drugs or supplements. Recruiting, screening, and data collection occurred between July 20, 2022 and October 18, 2022. During this time, we demonstrated that these methods, while challenging from a logistical and staffing standpoint, are feasible and can produce high-quality data. The study achieved high rates of enrollment, compliance, and completion. Substances that are emerging or novel, but still largely legal, can be productively studied via nationwide EMA combined with assays of shipped product samples from participants. We discuss challenges and lessons learned so other investigators can adapt these methods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Examining the paradoxical effects of kratom: a narrative inquiry.

Introduction: Surveys and case reports have documented kratom use in the United States (US) for over a decade. However, those reports have generally not examined in depth the role kratom plays in the lives of those who use it regularly for sustained periods. Until there are controlled studies of the pharmacology and subjective effects of kratom alkaloids in humans, one of the best sources of insight on kratom-product use remains qualitative data with nuanced descriptions of kratom effects from those who use it regularly. Method: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with adults who regularly use kratom products, as part of a laboratory study of kratom-product self-administration. This qualitative component of the study was conducted as a narrative case-report series (n = 10). Results: Despite some differences among participants, all experienced acute combination effects that were largely, even simultaneously, analgesic and stimulatory. Most participants had decreased their dosages over time, and one planned to quit. Five of the 10 participants met DSM-5-based criteria for kratom-use disorder (3 mild, 1 moderate, 1 severe, by symptoms counts). When kratom was inadvertently taken in larger than intended doses, participants described a constellation of symptoms that they called "the wobbles" (a jittery feeling accompanied by what seemed to be nystagmus); this was rare, but could be of scientific and clinical interest as a possible manifestation of serotonin syndrome. Most participants described tolerance but considered kratom generally safe at low-moderate doses, providing perceived benefits with less potential risk for adverse effects compared to pharmaceuticals or illicit drugs. Discussion: In-depth interview data like these help confirm and clarify findings from larger survey studies and clinician-driven case reports. They are needed to inform the policy practice regarding kratom and may also help inform future experimental designs.

Need for clarity and context in case reports on kratom use, assessment, and intervention.

This Letter to the Editor is a response to Broyan and colleagues who recently published a Case Report presenting data on 28 patients in the United States who identified kratom as their primary substance of use and who were subsequently induced on buprenorphine/naloxone for a reported diagnosis of kratom use disorder. We applaud the authors for helping to advance the science on kratom and recognize the difficulties in conducting kratom-related clinical assessment and research. However, a number of inconsistences and generalizations were identified in this Case Report, which also lacked some critical context. Importantly, such inconsistencies and generalizations can be observed throughout kratom-specific case reports. We feel this is now an important opportunity to highlight these issues that are present in the Broyan and colleagues Case report but emphasize that they are not unique to it. We do this with the hope that by acknowledging these issues it can help inform editors, clinicians, and researchers who may not be familiar with kratom and, as a result of this unfamiliarity, may inadvertently present findings in a manner that could confuse readers and even misinform clinical researchers and practitioners.