Prescription drug monitoring programs evaluation: A systematic review of reviews.

BACKGROUND: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are used to mitigate harms from high-risk medicines including misuse, prescription shopping, overdoses, and death. Previous systematic reviews report inconsistent findings. We undertook a systematic review of reviews to 1) describe and identify the methods and outcome measures used to evaluate PDMPs, 2) summarise existing evidence on outcomes and factors that influence PDMP success or benefit realisation. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PROSPERO were used to identify systematic reviews on PDMPs. Twelve papers met the inclusion criteria. Data extracted included review aim, study designs, settings, outcome measures, and key findings. Quality was assessed using AMSTAR 2 quality assessment tool. RESULTS: Review papers were categorised as outcome or process evaluation reviews. Process evaluation reviews described implementation processes, barriers and facilitators to PDMP use and/or implementation. Most (57%) papers described barriers which frequently included usability and data integration. Outcome evaluation papers reported impact of PDMPs on outcomes, which were opioid-focused, and findings were highly variable. Most reviews (67%) were rated as low quality, limiting the conclusions that can be drawn. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent methods and outcome measures were used to evaluate PDMPs. No economic evaluations of PDMPs were found. Standardising assessment and reporting of results may improve the quality and confidence in an evidence-base to inform future roll-out and evaluation of PDMPs. Targeting barriers such as system-related challenges and negative end-user perceptions could improve sustained uptake of PDMPs, and potentially facilitate benefits realisation, including mitigating harms of high-risk prescription medicines.

Current Insights on the Impact of Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate (GHB) Abuse.

Recreational gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) use, although less common than other substance use, is increasingly recognised and is over-represented in emergency toxicology presentations. This narrative review summarizes GHB pharmacology, current patterns of use, potential harms and management of GHB toxicity and withdrawal. There is a complex interplay between GHB and GABA as GHB is both a prodrug and metabolite of GABA and GHB activates both GHB and GABA receptors. GHB is rapidly absorbed, with effects seen within minutes of ingestion. Metabolism is non-linear at higher doses. While GHB is listed as a controlled substance, its precursor's gamma-butyrolactone (GBL) and 1,4-butanediol (1,4-BD) are easily available as both have industrial applications. National surveys indicate low rates of GHB use, with identification of high-risk populations in men who have sex with men and polysubstance users. GHB is one of the three drugs most commonly used in chemsex. GHB is often co-ingested with other interacting psychoactive substances. Acute toxicity is dose-dependent, and management is supportive care. Withdrawal management is generally with benzodiazepines with addition of baclofen for more severe withdrawal. Barbiturates may have a role. Titration and tapering of pharmaceutical GHB is commonly used in the Netherlands. Complicated withdrawal with delirium may require intensive care and treatment with intravenous sedation. There are high rates of relapse after withdrawal and medications for longer-term management are currently being investigated. Chronic use is associated with poorer mental, physical and sexual health, social dysfunction and poor work performance. Laboratory detection is complicated as GHB is an endogenous substance with a short half-life, and therefore not often routinely assayed in the clinical setting. Future research should focus on improving GHB detection and management of GHB withdrawal and dependence. Interventions specific for high-risk groups should be developed and assessed.

Role and impact of brain computed tomography in the management of drug overdoses and guideline recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: Patients presenting with overdoses commonly receive computed tomography brain (CTB) scans in their assessment. There is no current guideline or validated decision support tool for neuroimaging in overdose patients. We investigated the proportion of overdose patients who received a CTB scan and its impact on management. METHODS: A single site retrospective study was conducted to analyse drugs and alcohol overdose-related presentations over a 2 year period. Outcome measures were the proportion of patients who received a CTB scan and the proportion of those who had an associated change in management. A decision support tool to guide the indications for CTB in overdose patients was developed based on this. RESULTS: A total of 7521 drugs and alcohol-related presentations were screened, where 4086 were overdoses. This involved 3200 patients. CTB scans were conducted in 519 (12.7%) of presentations. The majority of patients with CTB did not have head injury (n = 325, 62.5%). Of 519 CTB scans, 25 (4.8%) were abnormal of which 20 (3.9%) were associated with a change in management. A decision support tool was devised and tested and provided a relatively high yield where a CTB could be justified. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of overdose patients received CTB scans. There was only a low yield in terms of management alteration. We propose that clinicians adopt a guided approach using a decision support tool to minimise unnecessary CTB scans.

Restarting antidepressant and antipsychotic medication after intentional overdoses: need for evidence-based guidance.

Intentional drug overdoses with antidepressant and antipsychotic medications are an increasingly common problem. Currently, there is little guidance with regard to reintroduction of these medications after intentional overdoses. We have used published toxicological and pharmacokinetic data to obtain factors which control the recovery from overdoses. From such data, we have proposed guidance regarding their reintroduction, provided there are no adverse effects or contraindications. Tentatively, we suggest that when adverse effects from the overdose are lost, treatment could recommence after a further mean half-life of elimination. Most antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs are metabolized by cytochrome P450 enzymes and, where cytochrome P450 inhibitors are co-ingested, serial plasma concentrations should optimally be obtained in order to assess a suitable time for reintroduction of the psychoactive drugs. We hope the proposals presented will stimulate research and discussion that lead to better guidance for clinicians concerning reintroduction of psychoactive medication after intentional overdose.

Urine drug screening for early detection of unwitting use of fentanyl and its analogues among people who inject heroin in Sydney, Australia.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: North America has witnessed a dramatic rise in fatal opioid overdoses due to the unwitting consumption of non-pharmaceutical fentanyl and its analogues. While some of the drivers of this crisis-including profitability and access to high-potency opioids through internet sources-also apply in Australia, to our knowledge, there have been no ongoing surveillance studies of local populations. Therefore, this pilot study aimed to detect unintentional fentanyl consumption among people who inject heroin through instant urine screening, and determine the feasibility and acceptability of voluntary urinalysis of clients at the Medically Supervised Injecting Centre, Kings Cross, Sydney. DESIGN AND METHODS: Brief surveys and urine drug screens were conducted with 67 participants in Wave 1 (October 2017) and 51 participants in Wave 2 (March 2018). Urine samples were tested with BTNX Rapid Response™ fentanyl urine strip test at a detection level of 20 ng/mL norfentanyl. These strips also cross-react to numerous fentanyl analogues. RESULTS: There were no cases where positive urine tests suggested unwitting fentanyl use detected in this study. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: These negative findings contrast sharply with similar Canadian studies. While no cases of fentanyl-laced heroin use have been detected so far, we have demonstrated that this surveillance design is low-cost, feasible and scalable approach to monitoring the considerable public-health threat of undetected fentanyl and its analogues in Australia. Further validation of cross-reactivity of test strips would strengthen this method.