Buprenorphine adherence and illicit opioid use among patients in treatment for opioid use disorder.

Background: Buprenorphine is a partial mu opioid agonist medication that has been shown to decrease non-prescribed opioid use, cravings, and opioid related morbidity and mortality. There is an assumption that full adherence is needed to achieve ideal treatment outcomes, and that non-adherence is associated with ongoing opioid use. However, literature documenting the strength of that assertion is lacking.Objectives: Evaluate the association between daily buprenorphine adherence and illicit opioid use.Methods: Secondary analysis of a 12-week randomized controlled trial of adults with opioid use disorder who recently initiated buprenorphine. Weekly study visits included self-report of daily buprenorphine adherence over the past 7 days (Timeline Follow Back method) and urine drug tests (UDT). A log-linear regression model accounting for clustering by participant was used to assess the association between buprenorphine adherence and illicit opioid use. Buprenorphine adherence was measured as a continuous variable (0-7 days).Results: Among 78 participants (56 men, 20 women, 2 nonbinary) with 737 visits, full 7-day adherence was reported at 70% of visits. The predominant form of non-adherence was missed doses (92% of cases). Each additional day of adherence was associated with an 8% higher rate of negative UDT for illicit opioids (RR = 1.08; 95% CI:1.03-1.13, p = .0002).Conclusion: In this sample of participants starting buprenorphine, missed doses were not uncommon. Fewer missed days was significantly associated with a lower risk of illicit opioid use. These findings suggest that efforts to minimize the number of missed days of buprenorphine are beneficial for treatment outcomes.

Polysubstance Use Among Patients Treated With Buprenorphine From a National Urine Drug Test Database.

Importance: Polysubstance use is a concern for patients treated for opioid use disorder (OUD). While buprenorphine can curtail harmful opioid use, co-occurring use of nonprescribed substances, such as cocaine, methamphetamine, and other opioids, may negatively affect treatment outcomes. Objective: To characterize factors associated with urine drug positivity for nonprescribed substances among patients prescribed buprenorphine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included patients who had been prescribed buprenorphine and who provided urine specimens for urine drug testing (UDT), as ordered by clinicians in primary care or behavioral health or at substance use disorder treatment centers, from 2013 to 2019. Specimens were analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to assess positivity for several commonly used substances. Exposures: Buprenorphine prescription. Main Outcomes and Measures: Positivity for buprenorphine and several nonprescribed substances. Unadjusted trends in positivity for each nonprescribed substance were compared between specimens that did and did not test positive for buprenorphine. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with positivity; factors included patient age, sex, setting of care, payer, collection year, and census division. Results: The study included first UDT specimens from 150 000 patients, of whom 82 107 (54.74%) were men and 77 300 (51.53%) were aged 18 to 34 years. Across all specimens, 128 240 (85.49%) were positive for buprenorphine, and 71 373 (47.58%) were positive for 1 or more nonprescribed substances. From 2013 to 2019, positivity rates increased for most substances (eg, fentanyl: from 131 of 21 412 [0.61%] to 1464 of 13 597 [10.77%]). Factors associated with positivity varied widely by substance; for example, fentanyl positivity was highest for men (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.06-1.21), patients aged 18 to 24 years (OR for patients ≥55 years, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.39-0.54), patients living in New England (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07-1.33), and patients with Medicaid (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.31), whereas oxycodone positivity was greatest for women (OR for men, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.89), patients older than 55 years (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.22-1.64), patients living in the South Atlantic (OR, 1.45, 95% CI, 1.33-1.58), and patients with private insurance (OR for Medicaid, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.84). Patients whose specimens were positive for buprenorphine were significantly less likely to be positive for other opioids (eg, fentanyl: OR for buprenorphine-negative samples, 6.71; 95% CI, 6.29-7.16; heroin: OR for buprenorphine-negative samples, 9.93; 95% CI, 9.31-10.59). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, patterns of nonprescribed substance positivity among patients prescribed buprenorphine varied widely. This study highlights the utility of UDT in public health surveillance efforts related to patients treated with buprenorphine for OUD.

A cross-sectional analysis of fentanyl analog exposures among living patients.

Background: Synthetic opioids, including fentanyl analogs, contribute to an increasing proportion of opioid-related deaths. Highly potent analogs pose an increased risk for fatal overdose. The prevalence of fentanyl analog exposures in patients with known opioid exposure is unknown.Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the exposure prevalence for fentanyl analogs in living patients with positive urine screens for opiates or fentanyl.Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of urine high performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectroscopy (HPLC-MS/MS) results from patients with a positive urine screen for opiates or fentanyl at a large public healthcare system in Chicago, Illinois. Samples with positive screens were non-continuously tested by HPLC-MS/MS for 5 selected months in 2018 and 2019.Results: A total of 219 urine samples which screened positive for fentanyl or opiates underwent HPLC-MS/MS testing. At least one fentanyl analog was detected in 65.3% (n = 143) of samples with 26.0% (n = 57) testing positive for multiple analogs. The most common analogs, intermediates, or metabolites were: 4-ANPP (n = 131); 2-furanylfentanyl (n = 22); acryl fentanyl (n = 21); butyrylfentanyl (n = 15); cyclopropylfentanyl (n = 15); and carfentanil (n = 13). Of samples which screened positive for fentanyl (n = 188), 70.2% (132) tested positive for at least one fentanyl analog. Of samples which screened negative for fentanyl but positive for opiates (n = 31), 35.5% (n = 11) tested positive for fentanyl analogsConclusion: Fentanyl analog exposure is common in patients with positive urine screens for fentanyl or opiates. Screening living patient samples for synthetic opioids has future toxicosurveillance implications and these data underscore the increased risks from illicit opioid use.

Laboratory-Generated Urine Toxicology Interpretations: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians frequently order urine drug testing (UDT) for patients on chronic opioid therapy (COT), yet often have difficulty interpreting test results accurately. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of a laboratory-generated urine toxicology interpretation service for clinicians prescribing COT. STUDY DESIGN: Type II hybrid-convergent mixed methods design (implementation) and pre-post prospective cohort study with matched controls (effectiveness). SETTING: Four ambulatory sites (2 primary care, 1 pain management, 1 palliative care) within 2 US academic medical institutions. METHODS: Interpretative reports were generated by the clinical chemistry laboratory and were provided to UDT ordering providers via inbox message in the electronic health record (EHR). The Partners Institutional Review Board approved this study.Participants were primary care, pain management, and palliative care clinicians who ordered liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry UDT for COT patients in clinic. Intervention was a laboratory-generated interpretation service that provided an individualized interpretive report of UDT results based on the patient's prescribed medications and toxicology metabolites for clinicians who received the intervention (n = 8) versus matched controls (n = 18).Implementation results included focus group and survey feedback on the interpretation service's usability and its impact on workflow, clinical decision making, clinician-patient relationships, and interdisciplinary teamwork. Effectiveness outcomes included UDT interpretation concordance between the clinician and laboratory, documentation frequency of UDT results interpretation and communication of results to patients, and clinician prescribing behavior at follow-up. RESULTS: Among the 8 intervention clinicians (median age 58 [IQR 16.5] years; 2 women [25%]) on a Likert scale from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree"), 7 clinicians reported at 6 months postintervention that the interpretation service was easy to use (mean 5 [standard deviation {SD}, 0]); improved results comprehension (mean 5 [SD, 0]); and helped them interpret results more accurately (mean 5 [SD, 0]), quickly (mean 4.67 [SD, 0.52]), and confidently (mean 4.83 [SD, 0.41]). Although there were no statistically significant differences in outcomes between cohorts, clinician-laboratory interpretation concordance trended toward improvement (intervention 22/32 [68.8%] to 29/33 [87.9%] vs. control 21/25 [84%] to 23/30 [76.7%], P = 0.07) among cases with documented interpretations. LIMITATIONS: This study has a low sample size and was conducted at 2 large academic medical institutions and may not be generalizable to community settings. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretations were well received by clinicians but did not significantly improve laboratory-clinician interpretation concordance, interpretation documentation frequency, or opioid-prescribing behavior.

Trends in Urine Drug Monitoring Among Persons Receiving Long-Term Opioids and Persons with Opioid Use Disorder in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Practice guidelines recommend urine drug monitoring (UDM) at least annually in the setting of chronic opioid therapy as an objective assessment of substance use. However, empirical evidence on who gets tested and how often testing occurs is lacking. OBJECTIVES: This study investigates 10-year UDM trends in the United States based on 2 factors: (1) the duration of prescription opioid treatment, and (2) having an opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnosis and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) prescriptions. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional study. SETTING: Research was conducted using administrative claims data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database for the period 2007 to 2016. The dataset contained information on the plan enrollment and health care claims from 50 states and the District of Columbia. METHODS: To examine trends in UDM based on the duration of prescription opioid treatment, persons receiving prescription opioid analgesics were categorized into 4 groups based on the number of days covered: (a) less than 90 days, (b) 90 to 179 days, (c) 180 to 269 days, and (d) at least 270 days. To examine trends based on an OUD diagnosis and MOUD prescriptions, persons diagnosed with OUD were identified and categorized based on the presence of MOUD prescriptions as follows: (a) OUD with buprenorphine (BPN) and naltrexone (NTX) in the same year; (b) OUD with BPN only; (c) OUD with NTX only; (d) OUD with chronic prescription opioid analgesics (>= 90 days); (e) OUD without prescription opioid analgesics, BPN, or NTX; and (f) chronic prescription opioid analgesics (>= 90 days) without an OUD diagnosis. For analysis, the percent receiving UDM was estimated per group per year. Then the data were restricted to those receiving at least one UDM to estimate the average number of UDM per person. RESULTS: Data included an average of 364,485 persons per year receiving prescription opioid analgesics for chronic use, and 10,277 per year receiving an OUD diagnosis. Among those receiving prescription opioid analgesics, less than 50% received UDM. For those receiving at least one UDM, one additional UDM was performed per person as the duration of opioids increased by 90 days. Among persons with OUD, the percent receiving UDM was the highest for those receiving both BPN and NTX (87%), followed by those receiving BPN only (80%), chronic opioids (79%), NTX only (72%), and those not receiving any MOUD/opioids (54%). LIMITATIONS: Methadone dispensing for OUD treatments was not captured in administrative claims data. CONCLUSIONS: Although recommended for patients with chronic pain, UDM is provided less than half of the time for these patients. However, once patients received at least one UDM, they would continue to receive it on a fairly regular basis. Compared with those with chronic pain, persons diagnosed with OUD are more likely to receive UDM at a more frequent interval.

Evidence of increased Fentanyl use during the COVID-19 pandemic among opioid agonist treatment patients in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Amid the opioid crisis, the health care system is restructuring to prevent and treat COVID-19. Individuals in opioid agonist treatment (OAT) are uniquely challenged because of disruption to treatment, medication diversion, and isolation during the pandemic. METHODS: Between January and September 2020, we utilized the electronic medical record from a chain of 67 opioid agonist treatment clinics in Ontario, Canada, to examine routinely collected urine drug screen results of patients in opioid agonist treatment by Public Health Units. RESULTS: We present evidence of a 108% increase in the percentage of fentanyl positive urine drug screens from April to September (p< 0.001). During the same period, health regions in northern and southwestern Ontario, areas with a high concentration of rural communities, have seen the most notable increase in the percent of fentanyl positive urine drug screen results. CONCLUSION: The use of fentanyl increased by 108% among OAT patients in Ontario during the COVID 19 pandemic. We argue that the persistent increase of fentanyl exposure over time, specifically in the OAT population, suggests that reduced monitoring may decrease OAT's effectiveness and negatively impact patient outcomes.

The Increasing Prevalence of Fentanyl: A Urinalysis-Based Study Among Individuals With Opioid Use Disorder in New York City.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Opioid-related overdose deaths in North America have increased drastically, partially due to the increased prevalence of illicitly manufactured fentanyl. The current study sought to assess the prevalence and intentionality of fentanyl use among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: For this secondary analysis (study 1) we screened a total of 1118 urine samples from 316 participants with OUD from 2016 to 2019. Fentanyl knowledge and intentionality of use were assessed in a separate OUD sample (study 2; N = 33). RESULTS: In study 1, 34.6% of all urine samples tested positive for fentanyl. Overall, 149 (47.2%) participants provided more than or equal to one urine sample that tested fentanyl-positive, and 93 (29.4%) provided more than or equal to two fentanyl-positive samples. The number of fentanyl-positive samples, relative to the number of samples tested each year, increased by 330% from year 1 to 3. Study 2 found all participants had pre-existing knowledge that drugs may be adulterated with fentanyl, yet 67% were surprised by their own fentanyl-positive test result. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Like previous studies, our data indicate the high prevalence of fentanyl exposure and low perception of fentanyl-related risk among individuals with OUD, respectively, suggesting that opioid overdose harm reduction efforts may need to focus more on drug users' understanding of risks related to fentanyl use and adulteration of drugs. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: The current studies provide longitudinal data on fentanyl exposure prevalence and risk perception that is uniquely granular by assessing OUD treatment status, and by identifying potential associations between fentanyl exposure with the presence of other drug use and nonfatal overdose. (Am J Addict 2021;30:65-71).

Method for Successfully Inducting Individuals Who Use Illicit Fentanyl Onto Buprenorphine/Naloxone.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Individuals exposed to fentanyl are at risk of precipitated withdrawal using typical buprenorphine/naloxone induction procedures. METHODS: This case series describes buprenorphine/naloxone inductions of four individuals who tested positive for fentanyl. RESULTS: Buprenorphine-precipitated withdrawal was observed in two individuals who completed a conventional buprenorphine/naloxone induction strategy. Two more individuals completed a revised buprenorphine/naloxone induction strategy that did not precipitate withdrawal. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Using multiple 2 mg doses of buprenorphine/naloxone in patients already in mild/moderate withdrawal improved outcomes. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Persons who use illicit fentanyl might be less likely to experience precipitated withdrawal from this revised buprenorphine/naloxone induction strategy. (Am J Addict 2021;30:83-87).

Down the drain: Reconsidering routine urine drug testing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the move to telemedicine for office-based opioid treatment have made the practice of routine urine drug tests (UDT) obsolete. In this commentary we discuss how COVID-19 has demonstrated the limited usefulness and possible harms of routine UDT. We propose that practitioners should stop using routine UDT and instead use targeted UDT, paired with clinical reasoning, as part of a patient-centered approach to care.

The use of lateral flow immunoassays for the detection of fentanyl in seized drug samples and postmortem urine.

The opioid crisis has continued to progress in the United States and the rest of the world. As this crisis continues, there is a pressing need for a rapid and cost-effective method for detecting fentanyl. Recent studies have suggested that lateral flow immunoassays (LFIs) could fill this technology gap. These qualitative paper-based assays contain antibodies designed to react with fentanyl and provide positive or negative results within a matter of minutes. In this study, two different LFI configurations for the detection of fentanyl were examined (dipsticks and cassettes) for effectiveness of detection using seized drug samples and postmortem urine samples. In the current study, 44 seized drug samples (32 fentanyl-positive, 12 fentanyl-negative) and 14 postmortem urine samples (10 fentanyl-positive, 4 fentanyl-negative) were analyzed. All 32 fentanyl-containing seized drug samples and 10 postmortem fentanyl-positive urine samples displayed positive LFI results with both LFI configurations. The fentanyl dipsticks displayed a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 75%, and an efficiency of 93.2% for seized drug samples and a sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of 100% for postmortem urine. Analysis of the fentanyl cassettes displayed a sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of 100% for seized drug samples and a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 75%, and an efficiency of 92.9% for postmortem urine samples. These data point to the utility of LFIs as a quick and low resource-dependent option for presumptive detection of fentanyl in real-world situations.

Delayed Norfentanyl Clearance During Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: We report a case of delayed norfentanyl clearance in a 33-year-old pregnant woman. Norfentanyl is the major metabolite of fentanyl. CASE: A multigravid woman with opioid use disorder presented at 7 weeks of gestation for treatment. Despite opioid abstinence, her urine was positive for norfentanyl on 10 distinct gas chromatography-mass spectrometry urine screens. The results demonstrated a steady decrease of norfentanyl over the course of 70 days after her last fentanyl usage, far exceeding expected rates of fentanyl clearance. CONCLUSION: This case highlights the importance of acknowledging pregnancy, genetic, or medication-induced changes to fentanyl pharmacokinetics when interpreting urine tests, especially given the potential sequelae of a false-positive urine test result.

Use of Amphetamine-Type Stimulants Among Emergency Department Patients With Untreated Opioid Use Disorder.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Concurrent use of amphetamine-type stimulants among individuals with opioid use disorder can exacerbate social and medical harms, including overdose risk. The study evaluated rates of amphetamine-type stimulant use among patients with untreated opioid use disorder presenting at emergency departments in Baltimore, MD; New York, NY; Cincinnati, OH; and Seattle, WA. METHODS: Emergency department (ED) patients with untreated opioid use disorder (N=396) and enrolled between February 2017 and January 2019 in a multisite hybrid type III implementation science study were evaluated for concurrent amphetamine-type stimulant use. Individuals with urine tests positive for methamphetamine, amphetamine, or both were compared with amphetamine-type stimulant-negative patients. RESULTS: Overall, 38% of patients (150/396) were amphetamine-type stimulant positive; none reported receiving prescribed amphetamine or methamphetamine medications. Amphetamine-type stimulant-positive versus -negative patients were younger: mean age was 36 years (SD 10 years) versus 40 years (SD 12 years), 69% (104/150) versus 46% (114/246) were white, 65% (98/150) versus 54% (132/246) were unemployed, 67% (101/150) versus 49 (121/246) had unstable housing, 47% (71/150) versus 25% (61/245) reported an incarceration during 1 year before study admission, 60% (77/128) versus 45% (87/195) were hepatitis C positive, 79% (118/150) versus 47% (115/245) reported drug injection during 1 month before the study admission, and 42% (62/149) versus 29% (70/244) presented to the ED for an injury. Lower proportions of amphetamine-type stimulant-positive patients had cocaine-positive urine test results (33% [50/150] versus 52% [129/246]) and reported seeking treatment for substance use problems as a reason for their ED visit (10% [14/148] versus 19% [46/246]). All comparisons were statistically significant at P<.05 with the false discovery rate correction. CONCLUSION: Amphetamine-type stimulant use among ED patients with untreated opioid use disorder was associated with distinct sociodemographic, social, and health factors. Improved ED-based screening, intervention, and referral protocols for patients with opioid use disorder and amphetamine-type stimulant use are needed.

Urine Drug Testing among Opioid-Naïve and Long-Term Opioid Nevada Medicaid Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend that, when prescribing opioids, providers use urine drug testing (UDT) for harm reduction. Objective: To identify whether Medicaid beneficiaries in Nevada at increased risk for opioid misuse received UDT. Methods: We used Nevada Medicaid claims data (2017-2018) to describe UDT among three samples: opioid naïve patients (N = 11,326), opioid naïve patients with a second follow-up prescription (N = 8,910), and long-term opioid patients (N = 19,173). Predictors of opioid misuse include past diagnoses of mental health and substance use, demographic characteristics and potentially risky behaviors. Outcomes include receiving UDT prior to opioid prescription among the two naïve samples and within six months for the long-term sample. We report predicted probabilities (PP) from logistic regressions and hazard ratios (HR) and Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: A small percentage of patients received UDT (naïve sample: 2.5%; naïve with a second follow-up prescription sample: 3.5%; long-term sample: 9.9%). Adults with alcohol disorders and other substance use disorders had the highest PP of UDT, among both the naïve (alcohol related disorder: 3.1%; other substance use disorder: 7.7%) and the naïve with a second follow-up prescription (alcohol related disorder: 4.1%; other substance use disorder: 11.7%) samples. Among the long-term sample, similar predictors were significant. Conclusions: Although there was an association between having risk factors for opioid misuse (e.g. past alchohol disorders and other substance use disorder diagnoses) and receiving UDT, the percentage of patients who received UDT was unexpectedly low, pointing to the need to increase guideline adherence and implementation among providers who prescribe opioids.

Protracted renal clearance of fentanyl in persons with opioid use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: The illicit opioid supply in the U.S. is increasingly adulterated with fentanyl. As such, persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) may be regularly exposed to fentanyl, however, the pharmacokinetics of repeated fentanyl exposure are not well understood. The current study aimed to quantify renal clearance of fentanyl in OUD patients presenting to residential treatment. METHODS: Participants (N = 12) who presented to a 28-day residential treatment program were enrolled if they tested positive for fentanyl at intake. Urine samples were collected every 2-3 days and were quantitatively tested for fentanyl, norfentanyl, and creatinine via liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Fentanyl clearance was defined as the time since last illicit opioid use and the median time between last positive and first negative fentanyl urine screen. RESULTS: Participants had a mean and standard deviation (SD) age of 28.9 (11.0), were 67 % male, and 83 % white. The mean (SD) time for fentanyl and norfentanyl clearance was 7.3 (4.9) and 13.3 (6.9) days, respectively. One participant continued to test positive for fentanyl for 19 days and norfentanyl for 26 days following their last use, and left treatment without testing negative for norfentanyl. CONCLUSION: Fentanyl clearance in persons with OUD is considerably longer than the typical 2-4 day clearance of other short-acting opioids. The findings of this study might explain recent reports of difficulty in buprenorphine inductions for persons who use fentanyl, and point to a need to better understand the pharmacokinetics of fentanyl in the context of opioid withdrawal in persons who regularly use fentanyl.

Effects of time-based administration of abstinence reinforcement targeting opiate and cocaine use.

Polydrug use is a common problem among patients in opioid-substitution treatment. Polydrug use has been reduced by administering abstinence-reinforcement contingencies in a sequence, such that a single drug is targeted until abstinence is achieved, and then an additional drug is targeted. The present study examined effects of administering abstinence-reinforcement contingencies sequentially based on time rather than on achieved abstinence. Participants accessed paid work (about $10/hr maximum) in the Therapeutic Workplace by providing urine samples 3 times per week. The urine samples were tested for opiates and cocaine. During an induction period, participants earned maximum pay independent of drug abstinence. Then, maximum pay depended upon urine samples that were negative for opiates. Two weeks later, maximum pay depended upon urine samples that were negative for both opiates and cocaine. Opiate and cocaine abstinence increased following administration of the respective contingencies. The time-based administration of abstinence reinforcement increased opiate and cocaine abstinence.

Effect of positive urine fentanyl screen on attitudes toward heroin use.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown if targeted risk reduction counseling in the health care setting, after documented exposure to fentanyl, can affect behavior change to reduce risks and increase utilization of evidence-based overdose prevention strategies. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of results (7/2018-6/2019) from questionnaire-facilitated counseling by recovery coaches in the emergency department (ED) and primary care settings following disclosure of a urine toxicology positive for fentanyl. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of N = 101 respondents were neither aware of nor expecting fentanyl in their substances of use. Fifty-three (70 %) of those initially unaware answered that learning about exposure to and the risks from fentanyl changed their thoughts about reducing or abstaining from use. A greater proportion of patients seen in the ED expressed desire to stop or reduce opioid use as compared to ambulatory clinic patients (91 % vs. 46 %, p < 0.001). Of those not already engaged in treatment, 18 % and 15 % were interested in medication and behavioural health treatment, respectively, and each of them indicated a change in thought based on the counseling. Forty-five percent of individuals not yet receiving naloxone endorsed interest in receiving it, and 22 % of all respondents were somewhat or very interested in access to safe consumption sites. CONCLUSION: This study suggests a novel clinical utility in toxicology screens to inform behavior in the setting of illicit fentanyl exposure. In addition to linkages to evidence-based treatment, linkages to harm-mitigating strategies associated with ongoing substance use may be critical to a comprehensive overdose prevention strategy in the clinical setting.

Abstinence-contingent wage supplements to promote drug abstinence and employment: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Poverty, unemployment and substance abuse are inter-related problems. This study evaluated the effectiveness of abstinence-contingent wage supplements in promoting drug abstinence and employment in unemployed adults in outpatient treatment for opioid use disorder. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was conducted in Baltimore, MD, from 2014 to 2019. After a 3-month abstinence initiation and training period, participants (n=91) were randomly assigned to a usual care control group that received employment services or to an abstinence-contingent wage supplement group that received employment services plus abstinence-contingent wage supplements. All participants were invited to work with an employment specialist to seek employment in a community job for 12 months. Abstinence-contingent wage supplement participants could earn training stipends for working with the employment specialist and wage supplements for working in a community job, but had to provide opiate and cocaine-negative urine samples to maximise pay. RESULTS: Abstinence-contingent wage supplement participants provided significantly more opiate and cocaine-negative urine samples than usual care control participants (65% vs 45%; OR=2.29, 95% CI 1.22 to 4.30, p=0.01) during the 12-month intervention. Abstinence-contingent wage supplement participants were significantly more likely to have obtained employment (59% vs 28%; OR=3.88, 95% CI 1.60 to 9.41, p=0.004) and lived out of poverty (61% vs 30%; OR=3.77, 95% CI 1.57 to 9.04, p=0.004) by the end of the 12-month intervention than usual care control participants. CONCLUSION: Abstinence-contingent wage supplements can promote drug abstinence and employment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02487745.

Determination of thallium in urine, blood, and hair in illicit opioid users in Iran.

CONTEXT: Heavy metals, including thallium and lead, are introduced to illicit drug users' body as a result of using drugs such as cocaine and heroin. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine urine, blood, and hair thallium (Tl) concentrations in illicit opioid users along with the relevant clinical signs and symptoms consistent with thallotoxicosis and to compare them with the corresponding variables in the control non-opioid user group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This case-control study was conducted on 50 illicit opioid users who had abused opioids continuously for more than a year, referred to Amirie Drug Abuse Treatment Clinic in Kashan, Iran. The control group included 50 non-opioid users. Thallium concentrations in urine, blood, and hair were assessed in both groups (n = 100) using electrothermal (graphite furnace) atomic absorption spectrometry (ET AAS, GF AAS). RESULTS: In the studied group, the median (interquartile range) concentrations of thallium in urine, blood, and hair were 54.8 ± 79.9 µg/L, 14.5 ± 11.1 µg/L, and 5.4 ± 3.7 µg/g, respectively; these values were 4.8 ± 5.2 µg/L, 2.5 ± 2.4 µg/L, and 1.4 ± 1.1 µg/g, respectively, in the control group. There were significant differences in urine, blood, and hair thallium concentrations between the study group and the control group (p < 0.001). There were significant correlations between duration of illicit opioid use and urine thallium concentrations (r = 0.394, p = 0.005) and hair thallium concentrations (r = 0.293, p = 0.039), but not with blood thallium concentrations (r = 0.246, p = 0.085). Urine and blood thallium concentrations of illicit opioid users with clinical signs and symptoms consistent with thallotoxicosis of weakness (p = 0.01), depression (p = 0.03), and headache (p = 0.03) were higher than users without these problems. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The results of the study showed that thallium concentrations in urine, blood, and hair in illicit opioid users were significantly higher than the comparable concentrations in the control group. This can be due to the use of illicit opioids adulterated with thallium. Also, this study showed long-term illicit opioid use may lead to thallium exposure. In addition, cigarette smoking was associated with increased thallium exposure.