Archive for the ‘Opioid Addiction’ Category

Happy Anniversary to Me

 

 

 

 

 

 

This blog entry is about random thoughts careening through my brain today.

Last week marked the eight-year anniversary of this blog. I started it in 2010, to promote a book I had written. The book did OK, but it’s out of date now. Things happen rapidly in the field of opioid use disorder treatment.

My blog has turned into a bigger thing than I ever planned. I enjoyed writing it more than I thought I would, and people were more receptive to the type of information I presented than I imagined they would be. People tell me my blog filled a void by providing information about medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder.

I’m glad. This makes me happy.

While there are other blogs about Suboxone, most are oriented towards patient problems and questions. I hope my blog entries help patients and their families gather more information, but I also want to edify treatment professionals, including other physicians, nurses, therapists, and counselors. To be able to do this, I must keep reading the latest information and going to conferences in the field of Addiction Medicine. Since this field is my passion, that’s been no sacrifice to make; plus, it keeps me up to date for my own patients.

But the writing can be vexing. Sometimes writing flows like lava down the side of a volcano, but sometimes I write a sentence three times before I’m happy with it. This has improved with more consistent writing, but there are days that I still sumo-wrestle with sentences.

Terms we use in this field have changed over eight years. If I want to re-blog something from more than six years ago, I need to read it carefully before posting again. I’ve missed a few “opioid addiction” phrases and readers have pointed out my error with some enthusiasm. Fair enough. Language is important. The proper term now is “opioid use disorder,” and patients are not “addicts.” They are people with opioid use disorder.

Some blog entries are informational and don’t change, so I recycle them: how to treat insomnia without medications, how clonidine works, and the like. Other blog entries are out of date within in year, like statistics on opioid use disorders and overdose deaths, and state laws around opioid and buprenorphine prescribing.

Buprenorphine’s reputation has changed. In 2010, many fewer people knew what this drug was. Now we have internet memes about Suboxone, and plenty of websites with data and opinion. We’ve had some excellent news pieces about the medication buprenorphine, and some websites set up only to tell the world how awful buprenorphine is. Everyone has an opinion, it seems.

Diversion of buprenorphine products has become a frequent topic, fueled by the perception that much of this medication is making its way to the black market.

My own opinion about medications for opioid use disorder and how treatment should be organized have changed. I’ve become more avid about harm reduction, but more conservative about where patients start treatment. I’ve also come to believe most new patients with opioid use disorders should be started on medication at opioid treatment programs, then referred to office-based programs once they stabilize, like the Vermont hub-and-spoke model. I realize those two views aren’t consistent.

We have too many lawmakers trying to legislate the care provided at treatment programs, but I understand why they feel it’s necessary. Some treatment programs cry “harm reduction” as an excuse for sloppy patient care while making large profits. Medicine in the U.S. is a for-profit enterprise, and no doctor should be blamed for making a profit; however, there’s profit and then there’s obscene profit.

I’ve met some of the best, brightest, and most dedicated people in the world in this field of medicine. I’ve also met some real con artists and shady characters in this field, working only for personal prestige and money. It seems to draw people from both extremes, and I try to maximize my contact with the former and minimize my contact with the latter.

I’ve developed a thicker skin writing the blog. I don’t post the worst of the comments, like the woman who commented that I would burn in hell for prescribing medication for opioid use disorder. She’s entitled to her opinion, but it’s my blog and I don’t have to air her view, particularly since it seemed spew-y and irrational.

I don’t post comments insulting to people with opioid use disorder, unless it’s to educate readers about how much misinformation still exists in the world.

Patients sometimes write negative comments about their care providers, and I usually encourage them to talk to their physician. If they don’t get satisfaction with that, I tell them to vote with their feet and go elsewhere. The trouble is, there may be only one provider in their area. What does the patient do then?

We do need more primary care physicians prescribing buprenorphine, but they must be respectful of the patients they treat. If as a physician you can’t understand that some behavioral issues are associated with opioid use disorders, you shouldn’t be working in the field.

The nation must educate physicians in all fields about medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder. Treatment for opioid use disorder has for too long been in its own silo, far away from mainstream medicine. Most physicians don’t know anything about MAT, except that they are opposed to it. These physicians MUST be educated. Our patients must be able to get good medical care without judgment.

Negative comments from other physicians about MAT undermine our patient’s progress and their self-esteem. It also prevents my patients from getting good medical care from primary care providers, surgeons, and especially emergency department physicians.

Physicians must start referring people with the illness of substance use disorder for treatment, rather than telling these patients they are bad people because they haven’t stopped yet. They must be taught to give my patients the same understanding and forbearance as patients with other chronic medical illnesses with behavioral components.

I’m happy with all the attention that new outlets have been paying to opioid use disorder and its treatment over the past several years. I also wish this attention could have been started around fifteen years ago, before thousands died from this problem.

Opioid Addiction from Different Perspectives

Perspective is Essential

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was asked to speak as a member of a panel about opioid use disorder, at the annual addiction conference at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNCC) this month, called the McLeod Institute. This conference was named after Dr. Jonnie McLeod, a great leader in the field who passed away several years ago.

I’ve spoken at this conference several times before, and it’s always a treat. It lifts my spirits to see new recruits entering the field of substance use disorder treatments, all fresh-faced and enthusiastic.

One whole day of the conference was devoted to the problem of opioid use disorders, and I’m sorry I couldn’t attend the morning’s events. After lunch, the five of us on the panel took our seats.

At one end was the operator of an abstinence based, 12-step oriented non-profit outpatient treatment program, one of the best in Charlotte. To his left was a Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer whose focus was on interdiction of heroin flooding the streets of Charlotte. Then there was me, and to my left was Donna Hill, program director for Project Lazarus in Wilkes County. At the extreme left was Jennifer, a social worker from New Jersey with many years of experience in the substance use disorder counseling field.

We all introduced ourselves and said a little about how we approached the treatment of opioid use disorders. When it was my turn, I did my usual spiel about how treatment of opioid use disorder with medications including methadone and buprenorphine and naltrexone are the most evidence-based treatments available, yet still have the most stigma against them. I told them our country overused treatments that don’t work, sometimes over and over. I told the audience I worked for an opioid treatment program and had my own office-based practice where I prescribe buprenorphine.

The whole point of the panel was to allow the audience to hear the different viewpoints on our nation’s problem with opioid use disorders, and the panelists didn’t disappoint.

Of course the director of the 12-step oriented, abstinence-based outpatient program advocated for that form of treatment. He made some neutral-to-negative comments about MAT, but he wasn’t as vehement as I expected.

The police officer, not being involved in treatment, mainly gave facts about how awful the heroin problem is in Charlotte. He said it was one of the two hubs, along with Columbus, OH, that drug cartels were using as a base for sales to all the other towns in the Eastern U.S. He explained how the purity had risen and how fentanyl and carfentanil were now being added to heroin or being sold as heroin, because they were cheaper to make and many times more potent. He repeated the account of a police officer who had to be treated for a severe overdose that happened just from brushing heroin off his sweater. (I did read about that on the internet and had some questions regarding the story but wasn’t about to quibble with a man with a gun.)

Donna from Project Lazarus probably could have justified talking the longest, since Project Lazarus is active in so many aspects of treatment, prevention, education, and community outreach, among other things. She gave a nice summary of all the things Project Lazarus does, and encouraged people to call them if they wished to set up a similar organization in another place.

Jennifer the social worker said some good things about how all of us treating opioid use disorder need to work together and communicate, but then, in my opinion, she blew it when she said she disapproved of how treatment programs take advantage of people with opioid use disorders by charging them money to be in treatment. At first I didn’t know exactly who she was targeting but when she said clinics discouraged patients from getting off methadone and buprenorphine only because it was bad for their business, I felt my ire rising.

You know I had something to say about that.

I got a little heated, and said I didn’t think it was fair to imply opioid treatment programs were unethical because they charge patients money to be in treatment. I said other medical specialties charge money for their services, and that this was the way this country approached healthcare. I went on to say that opioid treatment programs don’t keep patients on methadone because it’s a business model; it’s because patients who leave methadone treatment at an OTP have an eight-fold increase in the risk of dying, and a high risk of relapse with all the misery that can come with it: poorer mental and physical health, fractured relationships, damaged self-esteem, lowered personal productivity.

After all, I said, is there any other medication for any other disease that reduces the risk of death by eight times, that has the stigma against it that methadone does?

OK…it’s possible I’m more lucid as I’m writing this than I was in the moment, but I blurted out something to this effect.

Other than that incident, I was relatively well-behaved.

I liked all my fellow panel members, even though we didn’t agree about everything. We all agreed on the most important thing – we all want to keep people from dying from opioid use disorder, and we all want them to find a good quality of life in their recovery.

I stayed to listen to the second panel, composed of people in recovery from opioid use disorder. There were six people on that panel, and of the six, five were either neutral or critical of methadone or buprenorphine. These five people all said that 12-step recovery in Narcotics Anonymous allowed them to quit using drugs and live a successful recovery.

The last patient was different. She gave a brief history of her recovery, and said that though she found 12-step recovery helpful, she needed methadone to return her to a place where she could function normally. She described being off opioids for some months, but being plagued with post- acute withdrawal that ultimately lead to a relapse. Now, she considers methadone a necessary medication for her, and said if she had to be on it for the rest of her life in order to feel normal, she could accept that.

I was so impressed with this lady’s courage. It had to be hard to follow five peoples’ stories that all centered on abstinence-based recovery with her story of being in a form of treatment with so much stigma against it. I was very pleased by what she was saying, and felt like she was speaking for all the people who have benefitted from medication-assisted treatment.

I was disappointed there wasn’t more diversity on this panel. I don’t doubt the other five peoples’ recovery stories, but they were very similar. One of them spoke very negatively about methadone, but later revealed she misused her methadone to an extreme degree and came off a relatively high dose “cold turkey,” which of course is not recommended. Another six people in recovery from opioid use disorder may have the opposite experience with 12-step recovery and medication-assisted treatment

I was socializing with some of the panel members before leaving, and to my surprise, the operator of the non-profit abstinence-based outpatient program told me he was sorry if it sounded like he was trying to bash methadone treatment. I was surprised and pleased, and thanked him.

I’m glad I was there, and I’m glad to see fresh recruits joining the effort to help people with opioid use disorder in their recovery.

Suboxone Manufacturer Sued for Anticompetitive Practices

Pharma Lies

 

 

 

I read a brief news item online about the drug manufacturer getting sued, but I didn’t get detailed information until I read last week’s issue of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Weekly (ADAW).

Here’s the scoop: the Attorneys General for thirty-six states are suing Reckitt-Benckiser (RB, now called Indivior), because the company attempted to block generics from entering the market after RB’s patent for sublingual buprenorphine products expired.

Reckitt-Benckiser manufactured Suboxone and Subutex, which were the initial buprenorphine products that came to market in 2002, after the DATA 2000 law was passed.

As a reminder, before DATA 2000 was passed, it was illegal to treat opioid use disorder in an office setting with an opioid prescription. Doctors have gone to jail for this. Before DATA 2000, opioid treatment programs (OTP) were the only setting where prescribing (methadone was the only approved medication) for opioid addiction was permitted, and these OTPs have always been strictly regulated by multiple governmental agencies.

The FDA has approved only one medication, buprenorphine, to be used under DATA 2000, and only the sublingual form was approved. Then earlier this year, a second form of buprenorphine was approved to treat opioid addiction: the six-month, sustained release implantable rods impregnated with buprenorphine, known as Probuphine.

Buprenorphine taken by other routes of administration aren’t covered by DATA 2000, and therefore can’t be used to treat opioid addiction. These forms include the name brands Butrans patch, Belbucca oral film, and IV/IM buprenorphine used for pain control.

Reckitt-Benckiser’s patent for sublingual buprenorphine tablets was set to expire around 2008. Years before that, RB worked on finding a different delivery system, and the film version of Suboxone came out in mid-2010. This new form had its own patent, so that RB was the only company that could manufacture and sell that form of their medication.

However, since their sublingual tablet had come off patient, other drug companies could make generics, which would bring down the price to consumers of this life-saving medication.

But the Attorneys General allege RB tried to block the release of the generic tablets. RB told their drug salespeople to tell doctors that children were dying from ingesting buprenorphine tablets, and that the risk of prescribing this form of treatment was too great. They said the safest way to treat patients was with the film, which comes individually wrapped in a foil packet. And remember, only RB manufactured this film.

On May 12, 2012, I blogged about Reckitt-Benckiser’s attempt to persuade me to prescribe only the film. In that blog post, I describe how the drug representative told me that sublingual tablets were now suddenly too dangerous to prescribe, due to pediatric overdoses. She also told me it was much better for patients to be prescribed the film, since people addicted to pills could be triggered by tablets.

Her credibility took a big hit that day, because she’d promoted the hell out of her company’s tablet form of Suboxone and Subutex to me for years. I called her out on the inconsistency and disingenuousness of her statements, promulgated by her company, and I blogged about it.

At her next visit, she told me she was “disappointed that I chose such a public forum to describe our conversation.”

It was the first time someone chastised me for something I wrote on my blog, and I was elated. I felt like a real journalist!

She hasn’t visited my office since, and I haven’t missed her. She’s a nice lady, which is the only reason I put up with her in the first place. Right or wrong, I‘ve always found drug reps to be tedious.

I harbor no illusions about what drug reps do. Their job is to sell their product. When I worked in primary care, I was lied to on a regular basis by drug reps. For example, when the drug rep for a company that sold Prempro told me that estrogen replacement therapy reduced the risk of breast cancer. I remember being shocked into silence as I frowned at him, wondering if he thought I was really, really stupid.

Back to the point of this blog. So in 2012, R-B tried to prevent the generic from coming onto the market by saying the pediatric overdose problem was so bad that only the films (still under patent with R-B) should be prescribed

The lawsuit alleges consumers had to pay higher prices due to RB’s efforts to block generic tablets. These states want Indivior, formerly Reckitt-Benckiser, to pay back billions of dollars of profit obtained through unfair practices.

The lawsuit alleges the company manufactured claims of pediatric safety as a way to manipulate doctors into switching their patients over to the film, instead of continuing to prescribe the tablet form of the medication, which would have generic versions coming onto the market soon.

The drug company, as well as the company that developed the film technology, both say they did nothing wrong, and that their product has saved countless lives.

So…what is the price difference for different forms of buprenorphine? I did some current comparisons for my area on www.goodrx.com, recording the lowest price on the site for people with no insurance. Here are the results:

Generic buprenorphine: dose of 16mg per day, #60 tabs: $133

Generic combination product, buprenorphine/naloxone, dose of 16mg per day, #60 tabs: $243

Name brand Suboxone Film, same dose of 16mg per day, #60 films: $455

Name brand Zubsolv, dose of 5.7mg, two per day, #60 tabs: $455

Name brand Bunavail buccal film, 4.2mg, two per day (highest recommended maintenance dose) #60 films: $455

I’m sure readers find it remarkable, as I do, that all three of the name brand forms are the same price. It’s also interesting that the cheapest form, generic buprenorphine monoproduct, is only 28% of what the name brands all cost.

Here’s something more fascinating – BlueCross/Blue Shield of NC requires prior authorization for every one of their covered patients who are prescribed buprenorphine. For years, this insurance company will ONLY authorize payment for the name brand Suboxone in film form. They refuse to pay for the cheaper generic, either mono or combination forms.

I don’t know why BC/BS decided to only cover the name brand Suboxone films.

I could understand if they wouldn’t pay for the monoproduct, due to concerns that it’s more desirable on the black market, and the insurance company may not want to contribute to this problem. But why do they object to the generic combo product? Perhaps they worked out a special, cheaper deal, or perhaps they were swayed by drug manufacturer patter.

It’s hard for me to see that Reckitt-Benckiser/Indivior did anything different than what other drug companies do routinely. Of course their drug salespeople exaggerated the danger of pediatric exposure to buprenorphine tablets in an effort to influence doctors to prescribe only the films. But their claims were so weak and transparent that it would be a gullible doctor indeed who fell for the company line.

And since when do doctors accept what a drug company salesperson tells them at face value? I’m not saying outright lying by drug company representatives should ever be OK, but…it happens.

The drug companies make big bucks, but they counter by saying they spend so much money in research and development of new drugs, and if it weren’t for their work, we wouldn’t have all these new medications that we have that are extending peoples’ lives.

That’s somewhat of a legitimate point, but at what point do we say the drug companies are making adequate profits or excessive profits? And at what point does an exaggeration about a medication become a lie?

 

Great Book About Opioid Addiction!!!

I orginally started this blog to promote the book I wrote about pain pill addiction. As it’s turned out, the blog has been much more popular than the book (it isn’t exactly flying off the shelves), so I’d like to remind blog readers – again – that if you like the blog, you’ll love my book.

You can order it from Barnes & Noble, or Amazon. But I’m selling it for a much-discounted rate of $13.95 on EBay. That’s with shipping included.

http://shop.ebay.com/i.html_from=R40&_trksid=p5197.m570.l1313&_nkw=pain+pill+addiction&_sacat=See-All-Categories

National Prescription Drug Action Plan

Yesterday, government officials proclaimed the formation of collaborative plan to address this nation’s problem with prescription opioid abuse and addiction. Speakers included Mr. Gil Kerlikowske, the director of the ONDCP (Office of National Drug Control Policy), Dr. Howard Koh, from the department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Dr. Margaret Hamburg from the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA), and Ms. Michele Leonhart, administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

 Speakers recited pertinent statistics regarding the state of opioid addiction and abuse in the U.S.  It’s now the faster growing public health problem in our country. Around 28,000 citizens died from unintentional drug overdose in 2007, the latest year for which data is available.  More people in the U.S. now die of unintentional drug overdose than gunshot wounds. In seventeen states and Washington D.C., unintentional overdose deaths outnumber deaths from motor vehicle accidents.

 The plan has four main points. First, both patients and prescribers of controlled substances will be provided with better education about these potentially dangerous medications. The drug manufacturers will be asked to develop educational products for both patients and providers for education, which will be reviewed by the FDA before approved for release. The medications included will likely include sustained-release oxycodone, oxymorphone, hydromorphone, and methadone. Fentanyl patches will also be included. The ONDCP is seeking to introduce legislation that will change the Controlled Substances Act in order to make training mandatory for doctors who prescribe long-acting opioids.

 Second, the national government will push the few remaining states that don’t have function prescription monitoring programs to put them in place, and to be able to share data with adjacent states.

 Third, the government will support more medication “take back” days in communities across the U.S. Citizens will be encouraged to bring old medication to community sites in order for proper disposal. Previous take back days have been very successful, with tons of pills collected and disposed. This will reduce the number of prescription opioid pills available for diversion. Surveys reveal that round 70% of the pills obtained by people misusing prescription medication for the first time are obtained from friends and family members, often without permission, from old prescription bottles.

 Fourth, state and federal agencies plan to crack down further on rogue doctors and clinics that are “pill mills.” This will require participation from state medical boards, law enforcement, and the DEA.

 At the end of this presentation, Karen Perry, founder of NOPE, told the story of her son, a bright young college student who died of an unintentional drug overdose. She described how his death affected her and his siblings. Her face was etched with the grief that can only come from such a profound loss

 The goal of this plan is to achieve a 15% reduction in prescription opioid misuse in this country by at within the next five years.

 I’m so pleased to see this announcement. Back in 2001, when I first started treating prescription opioid addiction, I was amazed at the numbers of people seeking treatment for this disorder. Studies since then have shown the situation has gotten much worse.

 There will be problems with this plan. Many doctors will not be happy they must have mandatory training in order to be able to prescribe some controlled substances (probably schedule II). Some will stand up on their hind legs and protest this new regulation, if it is passed by congress. But after seeing the prescribing habits of some of my brethren and sistren, it’s obvious we need this. We don’t get much education about appropriate prescribing of opioids, recognizing addiction, and referral for treatment. I’ve blogged before about this (see February 10th’s entry)

 I’ve been blathering on to anyone who will listen about the need for prescription monitoring plans (see prior blog entries for March 6, 8, and 31), so I’m delighted more attention is being paid to this. But I still worry about how states will communicate with each other. For example, my practice is close to South Carolina, yet that state has denied me access to their database. The only allow access to doctors licensed in South Carolina. I use the prescription monitoring program in my state both at the two Opioid Treatment Programs where I work and in my own office, where I see Suboxone patients. I’ve been using it since 2007.

I support the pill “take back” programs. While such events probably won’t do much for those with established addiction, they can help reduce the number of new users and experimental users. Remember, opioid overdose deaths don’t just happen to addicts. Youngsters experimenting with opioids can die from overdoses. In fact, new users dabbling with these pills, because they think they’re safer than “street” drugs, may be more likely to die because they don’t have any tolerance to opioids.

 We need good judgment and balance when shutting down pill mills. How can the DEA tell a pill mill from a legitimate pain treatment practice? I believe this is best done by other doctors. In this state, the medical board does investigations, which I feel is more appropriate than having investigations done by law enforcement. Law enforcement personnel just don’t have the training to tell the difference between appropriate care and careless prescribing with disregard for patients. Let other doctors do that. Granted, a few places will be so obvious that little investigation is needed.

 We don’t want the opioid pendulum to swing to the opposite side again, and become completely opioiphobic. These pain medications are addictive, but are also godsends in the right setting and used in the right way. Let’s take care not to throw out the good with the bad. The best people to set policy in this area are well-trained doctors who approach this issue with common sense and balance.

 Coming as late as it does in this epidemic, I could be negative and say the government has had an epiphany of the obvious. But I do know it takes time for all of these agencies to come together in a cooperative manner and form a plan of action. I’m just thankful that action is finally being taken.

Are Opioid Pill Addicts Different From Heroin Addicts?

Most of the opioid addicts I have treated over the last ten years have been addicted to pills, not heroin. But information about prognosis and treatment of opioid addiction was gleaned from studies with heroin addicts. I’ve often wondered if the old data fits the new patients.           

Over the last ten years, the number of people addicted to prescription opioids has ballooned. Prescription opioids are now more likely to cause or contribute to drug overdose deaths than heroin or cocaine. As prescription opioids outpace heroin in many parts of the country, scientists have wondered if there are significant differences between these prescription addicts and heroin addicts. Biologically, addiction to heroin or prescription opioids would appear to be the same disease, because both types of drugs are opioids, and opioids affect the body the same way. But do all opioid addicts respond the same to treatment?

 In the latest issue of Addiction, there was an article describing a study that compared different groups of opioid users. The researchers described four separate groups: opioid users of only heroin, opioid users of only prescription opioids, opioid users of both heroin and prescription opioids, and drug users that used only non-opioid drugs. In this study, drug users weren’t further classified as addicts, abusers, or occasional users. (1)

This study of over nine thousand drug users found that users of both prescription opioids and heroin were more likely to use other, non-opioid drugs than the other three groups. These addicts seemed to have worse mental health issues than the other groups, too, while users of non-opioid drugs tended to have less severe mental health issues than opioid addicts of all types.

The prescription opioid-only addicts were found to use significantly more non-opioid prescription drugs, while the heroin-only addicts were significantly less likely than prescription opioid addicts to abuse sedatives and tranquilizers, like benzodiazepines, than the other two groups of opioid users.

 This last fact definitely squares with what I’ve been seeing. So many of my patients are struggling or have struggled with benzodiazepine addiction. I wonder if opioid pill users are at increased the risk of overdose death when treated with methadone, compared to the heroin-only users of past decades.

This article, at the very least, shows there are significant differences in clinical features for at least three types of opioid users. It’s possible people who are addicted to prescription opioid pills have different prognoses and different responses to treatment than heroin-only addicts. Hopefully we’ll see further studies to guide our treatments.

1. Wu, LT; Woody, GE; Yang, C; Blazer, DG; “How Do Prescription Opioid Users Differ From Users of Heroin or Other Drugs in Psychopathology: Results From the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions,” Journal of Addiction Medicine, Vol. 5, No. 1, March 2011.

Am I Addicted to Prescription Pain Pills?

I am a guest blogger on addictionblog.org, and recently had a well-received article published on that site about how to know if you are addicted. I thought I’d repeat a version of that column here.

 There’s so much confusion about the differences between the disease of addiction to opioid pain pills and mere physical dependency on pain pills. Even some doctors don’t understand the differences, regretfully. Any person who regularly takes opioid pain pills for a period of weeks to months, for whatever reason, will develop a physical dependency to these drugs. That’s a biologic event. But addiction is much more than just the physical process. With addiction, there’s also a psychological component. People with addiction think about the drug often, spend time using and recovering from the drug, and continue to use the drug even though bad things happen. In physical dependency alone, this doesn’t happen.

 Here are a few specific questions that I ask patients, that help me decide if they have the disease of addiction:

  • Do I take more medication than prescribed? Do I take early doses, or extra doses?
  • Do I take medication in ways it’s not intended? For example, do I snort it, or chew it for faster onset? Do I inject it?
  • Do I get medication from friends, family, or acquaintances because I run out of my prescription pills early?
  • Do I become intoxicated, or high, from my medication? Without telling my doctor?
  • Do I drink alcohol with medication, even though the pharmacist advised against this?
  • Do I look forward to my next dose of medication?
  • Do I get impaired from my medication, to the point I’m unable to function normally?
  • Do I take pain medication to treat bad moods, anxiety, or to get to sleep?
  • Do I use street drugs like cocaine, marijuana, or others?
  • Have I driven when under the influence of pills, when I know I shouldn’t be driving?
  • Do I get prescriptions from more than one doctor, without telling them about each other?
  • Do I spend a great deal of time worrying about running out of medication?
  • Do I spend a great deal of time thinking about my medication, and how it makes me feel? 

One “yes” answer to any of these questions is worrisome, though not necessarily diagnostic of addiction. I think of addiction as a continuum, and it’s easier to diagnose with multiple “yes” answers. For example, people taking prescriptions may have a few worrisome symptoms, like taking an extra pill occasionally. Perhaps they did this because of a temporary increase in pain. Without any other symptoms, I probably wouldn’t diagnose addiction. At the other end of the spectrum, if a patient is crushing pills to inject or snort, I feel confident making the diagnosis of addiction.

 Sometimes addiction only becomes apparent over time. This is why doctors need to see patients frequently who are prescribed potentially addicting medication, like pain pill, stimulant, and benzodiazepines.

 If you had one or more “yes” answers to the above questions, please see a doctor who knows something about addiction, because untreated addiction usually gets worse. In fact, it can even be fatal.

Governor Scott’s Flamingo Express to Misery

Flamingo Express of Florida

All I could think was, “What can he be thinking???”

 I was reading an article about the governor of Florida and his bizarre decision to block the formation of a prescription monitoring program in his state. (1)

 Prescription monitoring programs are databases that contain lists of controlled substances a patient receives, the prescribing doctors, and the dispensing pharmacies. Usually, only approved physicians can get access to these databases. Prescription monitoring programs help prevent “doctor shopping,” which is the term describing the actions of a patient who goes from one doctor to another to get prescription pills, usually opioids, without telling the doctors about each other. Addicts do this to supply their ever-increasing tolerance for the drugs. Drug dealers do this to get pills to sell and make money.

 Forty-two states have approved the formation of prescription monitoring databases, and thirty-four states have operational databases. Florida was one of the last to approve the formation of such a program, in 2009, long after this recent wave of prescription pain pill addiction burned through the country. Now, the new Florida governor wants to cut this program out completely, before it even starts.

 How big of a deal is this?

In the latest survey, 5.3 million people in the U.S. used prescription pain pills nonmedically over the past month. This means they used them in ways not intended, or for reasons not intended by the prescriber… for example, to get high. In the last year, 2.2 million people misused these prescription pain pills for the first time. Our young people are particularly at risk; between 2002 and 2009, the percentage of 12 to 17 years olds misusing prescription opioids rose from 4.1% to 4.8%. Not all of these people will become addicted, thankfully. Some will only experiment, and be able to stop before addiction develops. Many won’t be able to stop taking pills, and will progress into the misery of addiction. Others will die of drug overdoses. (2)

 Why pick on Florida?

Florida is infamous for its pain clinics. As a reporter for Time Magazine pointed out, there are more pain clinics in South Florida than there are McDonald’s franchises. In 2009, 98 of the top 100 prescribers of oxycodone in the nation were all located in Florida. Altogether, these doctors prescribed 19 million dosage units of oxycodone in 2009. Estimates of the numbers of pain clinics located in South Florida vary, but most sources say between 150 and 175. (3, 4) Many of these clinics are “pill mills,” where doctors freely prescribe controlled substances with little regard to usual prescribing standards and guidelines.

 Are all these clinics pill mills?

No. Some of the pain clinics are legitimate, and their doctors follow best practice guidelines, providing quality care to patients with pain. But careful monitoring and screening for adverse events, including the development of addiction, takes time. A conscientious doctor, trying  to do a good job, isn’t going to be able to see fifty pain patients in one day.

 I’ve talked to addicts who were previously patients at these pill mills. They describe how they were shuffled through rapidly, sometimes not even seeing the doctor. Some addicts say they were asked what pills they wanted, and quickly written that prescription, with little or no conversation beyond that. That was the extent of the visit. 

But Florida’s problem doesn’t stay in Florida. Appalachian states like Kentucky, West Virginia, and North Carolina all have addicts who buy these prescription pain pills after they’re transported out of Florida. The DEA sees so many pain pills being transported from Florida to Appalachian states that they call it the “Flamingo Express.” In one of the methadone clinics where I work, I’ve noticed a peculiar upswing in the reported use of Opana, a brand name for the drug oxymorphone. It’s not a drug I’ve seen prescribed much in NC. When I ask patients where the pills come from, many say, “Florida.”

 Governors of several states, including West Virginia and Kentucky, along with congressmen from New York and Rhode Island, have sent a letter to Florida’s Governor Scott, urging him to reconsider his decision to torpedo plans for a prescription monitoring program. Since the leading cause of death in West Virginians for those under the age of 45 is drug overdose, I can see why this governor is protesting Governor Scott’s poor decision. (4)

 It’s estimated that setting up a prescription monitoring program costs about one million dollars. The Florida Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Fund, Inc., a non-profit organization dedicated to raising money for the program, says on their website that they’ve already raised at least half of that from donations. Other states have received the Harold Rogers grant money, available from the federal government to set up these monitoring databases. This leads me to question the excuse of “budget cuts” as the reason for Governor Scott’s poor decision.

 I’ve also seen internet stories that mention the governor’s fear of invasion of privacy. This is a legitimate concern, but there are ways to safeguard the information in such a database, and laws that can regulate who has access. I’m no fan of the government peering into my business, but this database is essential, given the overwhelming numbers of people struggling with pain pill addiction. For a description of the ways in which the North Carolina prescription monitoring database has helped me help my patients, please see the preceding blog entry. It’s been a lifesaver.  

  1. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-03-05/news/fl-prescription-drug-forum-20110305_1_pill-mills-prescription-drug-monitoring-program-attorney-general-pam-bondi (accessed 3/6/11)
  2. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2010). Results from the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Volume I. Summary of National Findings (Office of Applied Studies, NSDUH Series H-38A, HHS Publication No. SMA 10-4586Findings). Rockville, MD.
  3. Thomas R. Collins, Invasion of the Pill Mills in South Florida, Time, Tuesday, Apr. 13, 2010,  Ft. Lauderdale, FL
  4.  http://manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?   ContentRecord_id=f62482b4-f6dd-4adc-8b49-1563d8fa605b&ContentType_id=ec9a1142-0ea4-4086-95b2-b1fc9cc47db5&Group_id=e3f09d56-daa7-43fd-aa8b-bd2aeb8d7777&MonthDisplay=2&YearDisplay=2011 (accessed 3/8/11)

The Facts About Methadone

methadone

The treatment of opioid addiction (heroin or prescription pain pills) with methadone still has an unwarranted stigma attached to it.  I wanted to devote at least one blog entry to a summary of the most well-known studies that support this evidence-based treatment. When people speak against methadone, they usually say they don’t “believe” in it, without being able to give any scientific basis for their stance. 

Well, this is why I do “believe” in it. It’s not opinion. It’s science.

 Amato L, Davoli, et. al., An overview of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of opiate maintenance therapies: available evidence to inform clinical practice and research. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 2005; 28 (4):321-329. In this overview of meta-analyses and other reviews, they conclude that methadone maintenance is more effective in the treatment of opioid addiction than methadone detoxification, buprenorphine, or no treatment. Higher doses of methadone are more effective than low or medium doses. 

Bale et. al., 1980; 37(2):179-193. “Therapeutic Communities vs Methadone Maintenance” Archives of General Psychiatry Opioid-addicted veterans who presented to the hospital for treatment were assigned to either inpatient detoxification alone, admission to a therapeutic community, or to methadone maintenance. One year later, patients assigned to therapeutic communities or methadone maintenance did significantly better than patients whose only treatment was detoxification. Patients in these two groups were significantly more likely to be employed, less likely to be in jail, and less likely to be using heroin, than the patients who got only detox admission. Patients in the therapeutic communities needed to stay at least seven weeks to obtain benefit equal to patients assigned to methadone maintenance. 

Ball JC, Ross A., The Effectiveness of Methadone Maintenance Treatment. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag Inc., 1991. This landmark study observed six hundred and thirty-three male patients enrolled in six methadone maintenance programs. Patients reduced their use of illicit opioids 71% from pre-admission levels, with the best results (no heroin use) seen in patients on doses higher than 70 milligrams. Longer duration of treatment with methadone showed the greatest reductions in heroin use. Of patients who left methadone maintenance treatment, 82% relapsed back to intravenous heroin use within one year. This study also found a dramatic drop in criminal activity for addicts in methadone treatment. Within one year, the number of days involved in criminal activity dropped an average of 91% for addicts maintained on methadone. This study showed that methadone clinics vary a great deal in their effectiveness. The most effective clinics had adequate dosing, well-trained and experienced staff with little turnover, combined medical, counseling and administrative services, and a close and consistent relationship between patients and staff.

 Caplehorn JRM, Bell J. Methadone dosage and retention of patients in maintenance treatment. The Medical Journal of Australia 1991;154:195-199. Authors of this study concluded that higher doses of methadone (80 milligrams per day and above) were significantly more likely to retain patients in treatment.

 Caplehorn JR, Dalton MS, et. al., Methadone maintenance and addicts’ risk of fatal heroin overdose. Substance Use and Misuse, 1996 Jan, 31(2):177-196. In this study of heroin addicts, the addicts in methadone treatment were one-quarter as likely to die by heroin overdose or suicide. This study followed two hundred and ninety-six methadone heroin addicts for more than fifteen years. 

Cheser G, Lemon J, Gomel M, Murphy G; Are the driving-related skills of clients in a methadone program affected by methadone? National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, 30 Goodhope St., Paddington NSW 2010, Australia. This study compared results of skill performance tests and concluded that methadone clients aren’t impaired in their ability to perform complex tasks.

 Clausen T, Waal H, Thoresen M, Gossop M; Mortality among opiate users: opioid maintenance therapy, age and causes of death. Addiction 2009; 104(8) 1356-62. This study looked at the causes of death for opioid addicts admitted to opioid maintenance therapy in Norway from 1997-2003. The authors found high rates of overdose deaths both prior to admission and after leaving treatment. Older patients retained in treatment died from medical reasons, other than overdose.

 Condelli, Dunteman, 1993: examined data from TOPS, the Treatment Outcome Prospective Study, assessed patients entering treatment programs from 1979 – 1981 and found data on improvement similar to DARP; longer duration of treatment in methadone maintenance shows lower use of illicit opioids. 

Dole VP, Nyswander ME, Kreek, MJ, Narcotic Blockade. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1966; 118:304-309. Consisted of thirty-two patients, with half randomized to methadone and the other half to a no-treatment waiting list. The methadone group had much higher rates of abstention from heroin, much lower rates of incarceration, and higher rates of employment.

 Faggiano F, Vigna-Taglianti F, Versino E, Lemma P, Cochrane Database Review, 2003 (3) Art. No. 002208. This review article was based on a literature review of randomized controlled trials and controlled prospective studies that evaluated the efficacy of methadone at different doses. The authors concluded that methadone doses of 60 – 100mg per day were more effective than lower doses at prevention of illicit heroin and cocaine use during treatment.

 Goldstein A, Herrera J, Heroin addicts and methadone treatment in Albuquerque: a year follow-up. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 1995 Dec; 40 (2): p. 139-150. A group of heroin addicts were followed over twenty years. One-third died within that time, and of the survivors, 48% were on a methadone maintenance program. The author concluded that heroin addiction is a chronic disease with a high fatality rate, and methadone maintenance offered a significant benefit.

 Gordon NB, Appel PW., Functional potential of the methadone-maintained person. Alcohol, Drugs and Driving 1995; 11:1: p. 31-37. This is a literature review of studies examining performance and reaction time of patients maintained on methadone, and confirms that these patients don’t differ from age-matched controls in driving ability and functional capacity.

 Gowing L, Farrell M, Bornemann R, Sullivan LE, Ali R., Substitution treatment of injecting opioid users for prevention of HIV infection. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2008, Issue 2, Ar. No. CD004145. Authors reviewed twenty eight studies, concluded that they show patients on methadone maintenance have significant reductions in behaviors that place them at risk for HIV infection.

 Gronbladh L, Ohlund LS, Gunne LM, Mortality in heroin addiction: Impact of methadone treatment, Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Volume 82 (3) p. 223-227. Treatment of heroin addicts with methadone maintenance resulted in a significant drop in mortality, compared to untreated heroin addicts. Untreated addicts had a death rate 63 times expected for their age and gender; heroin addicts maintained on methadone had a death rate of 8 times expected, and most of that mortality was from diseases acquired prior to treatment with methadone. 

Gunne and Gronbladh, 1981: The Swedish Methadone Maintenance Program: A Controlled Study, Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 1981; 7: p. 249 – 256. This study conducted a randomized controlled trial on inpatient opioid addicts to methadone maintenance with intensive vocational rehabilitation counseling, or a control group that were referred to drug-free treatment.  Over 20 years, this study consistently showed significantly higher rates of subjects free from illicit opioids, higher rates of employment, and lower mortality in the group maintained on methadone than the control group.

 Hartel D, Selwyn PA, Schoenbaum EE, Methadone maintenance treatment and reduced risk of AIDS and AIDS-specific mortality in intravenous drug users. Abstract number 8546, Fourth Annual Conference on AIDS, Stockholm, Sweden, June 1988. This was a study of 2400 opioid addicts followed over fifteen years. Opioid addicts maintained on methadone at a dose of greater than 60mg showed longer retention in treatment, less use of heroin and other drugs, and lower rates of HIV infection. 

Hubbard RL, Marsden ME, et.al., Drug Abuse Treatment: A National Study of Effectiveness. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1989. Shows decreased use of illicit drugs (other than opioids) while in methadone treatment, and increased again after discharge.

 Kosten TR, Rounsaville BJ, and Kleber HD. Multidimensionality and prediction of treatment outcome in opioid addicts: a 2.5-year follow-up. Comprehensive Psychiatry 1987;28:3-13. Addicts followed over two and a half years showed that methadone maintenance resulted in significant improvements in medical, legal, social, and employment problems.

 Lenne MG, Dietze P, Rumbold GR, et.al. The effects of the opioid pharmacotherapies methadone, LAAM and buprenorphine, alone and in combination with alcohol on simulated driving. Drug Alcohol Dependence 2003; 72(3):271-278. This study found driving reaction times of patients on methadone and buprenorphine don’t differ significantly from non-medicated drivers; however, adding even a small amount of alcohol (.05%) did cause impairment.

 Marsch LA. The efficacy of methadone maintenance in reducing illicit opiate use, HIV risk behavior and criminality: a meta-analysis Addiction 1998; 93: pp. 515-532. This meta-analysis of studies of methadone concludes that methadone treatment reduces crime, reduces heroin use, and improves treatment retention.

 Mattick RP, Breen C, Kimber J, et. al.,Methadone maintenance therapy versus no opioid replacement therapy for opioid dependence. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,  2003; (2): CD002209. This is a meta-analysis of studies of methadone treatment. The authors concluded that treatment of opioid dependence with methadone maintenance is significantly more effective than non-pharmacologic therapies. Patients on methadone maintenance are more likely to be retained in treatment and less likely to be using heroin. This study did not find a reduction in crime between the two groups. 

Metzger DS, Woody GE, McLellan AT, et. al. Human immunodeficiency virus seroconversion amoung intravenous drug users in- and out- of- treatment: an 18-month prospective follow up. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome 1993;6:1049-1056. Patients not enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment converted to HIV positivity at a rate of 22%, versus a rate of 3.5% of patients in methadone maintenance treatment.

 Powers KI, Anglin MD. Cumulative versus stabilizing effects of methadone maintenance. Evaluation Review 1993: Heroin addicts admitted to methadone maintenance programs showed a reduction in illicit drug use, arrests, and criminal behavior, including drug dealing. They showed increases in employment. Addicts who relapsed showed fewer improvements in these areas. 

Scherbaum N, Specka M, et.al., Does maintenance treatment reduce the mortality rate of opioid addicts? Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr, 2002, 70(9):455-461. Opioid addicts in continuous treatment with methadone had a much lower mortality rate (1.6% per year) than opioid addicts who left treatment (8.1% per year).

 Sees KL, Delucchi KL, et.al. “Methadone maintenance vs 180-day psychosocially enriched detoxification for treatment of opioid dependence” Journal of the American Medical Association, 2000, 283:1303-1310. Compared the outcomes of opioid addicted patients randomized to methadone maintenance or to180-day detoxification using methadone, with extra psychosocial counseling. Results showed better outcomes in patients on maintenance. Patients on methadone maintenance showed greater retention in treatment and less heroin use than the patients on the 180 day taper. There were no differences between the groups in family functioning or employment, but maintenance patients had lower severity legal problems than the patients on taper.

 Sells SB, Simpson DD (eds). The Effectiveness of Drug Abuse Treatment. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1976: This was an analysis of information from DARP, the Drug Abuse Reporting Program, which followed patients entering three types of treatment from 1969 to 1972 and showed that methadone maintenance was effective at reducing illicit drug use and criminal activity. This study also demonstrated that addicts showed more improvement the longer they were in treatment. 

Strain EC, Bigelow GE, Liesbon IA, et. al. Moderate- vs high –dose methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence. A randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association 1999; 281: pp. 1000-1005. This study showed that methadone maintenance reduced illicit opioid use, and more of a reduction was seen with the addition of psychosocial counseling. Methadone doses of 80mg to 100mg were more effective than doses of 50mg at reducing illicit opioid use and improving treatment retention. 

Stine, Kosten; Medscape Psychiatric and Mental Health eJournal: article reminds us that though it’s clear that better outcomes for methadone patients are seen with higher doses (more than 80mg), many opioid treatment programs still underdose their patients.

 Zanis D, Woody G; One-year mortality rates following methadone treatment discharge. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 1998: vol.52 (3) 257-260. Five hundred and seven patients in a methadone maintenance program were followed for one year. In that time, 110 patients were discharged and were not in treatment anywhere. Of these patients, 8.2% were dead, mostly from heroin overdose. Of the patients retained in treatment, only 1% died. The authors conclude that even if patients enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment have a less-than-desired response to treatment, given the high death rate for heroin addicts not in treatment, these addicts should not be kicked out of the methadone clinic.

 Do these studies mean that methadone works for every opioid addict? I don’t think so. Every medication has side effects and dangers. Methadone is no different. For a variety of reasons, methadone may not work for some addicts.  But this treatment has helped many addicts. At the very least, it can keep them alive until a better treatment comes along.

Great New Book to Recommend!

by Rebecca Janes, LMHC, LADC

So there I was, cruising Amazon.com, looking for new books about opioid addiction and treatment, when I saw an intriguing title: Methadone: The Bad Boy of Drug Treatment.

I ordered it, and just finished it.

I fully recommend this book for anyone interested in learning more about methadone treatment. It’s written by Rebecca Janes, LMHC, LADC. The book’s cover says she has around fifteen years’ experience working in methadone treatment centers. She’s obviously knowledgeable about the studies supporting treatment of opioid addiction, and she’s able to summarize this knowledge succinctly. She explains complicated ideas in simple ways that make sense.

 It’s a small book, at 120 pages, and doesn’t have many references, but it covers most essential areas. The price is $12.95, and it’s published by Outskirts Press. As I said, you can buy it on Amazon, where it’s also available as a Kindle edition for only $2.99.

 The first chapter is dedicated to correcting mistaken impressions the general public has about methadone treatment, and Chapter Two corrects myths addicts often tell each other. Chapter Three describes what does not work in treatment, and Chapter Four tells what does work. Chapter Five tackles more controversial aspects, such as appropriate treatment of pain and anxiety for patients maintained on methadone.

 Patients on methadone will find this an ideal book to give to important people in their lives who nag them about getting off methadone. It’s great for parents and other relatives. It would be ideal to give to doctors with negative or judgmental attitudes, since it’s a quick read, and doctors aren’t likely to want to spend much time reading about a treatment they don’t believe in. It would be a great book to recommend to probation officers and social workers who don’t have much knowledge about methadone and its use. 

The only criticisms I have of the book are its few references, and it doesn’t cover buprenorphine at all. But then, if you want more in-depth information about opioid addiction, methadone, and buprenorphine, complete with references, you should buy my book: Pain Pill Addiction: Prescription for Hope. You can get it for $13.95 on EBay, shipping included. Or have I mentioned this before?