Article

Disaggregating the Burden of Substance Dependence in the United States

Laboratory of Epidemiology, Division of Intramural Clinical and Biological Research, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research (Impact Factor: 3.31). 03/2011; 35(3):387-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2011.01433.x
Source: PubMed
Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Howard B Moss, Jul 03, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
92 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The recent proposal to dissolve the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism and National Institute on Drug Abuse and create a new institute for substance use, abuse, and addiction will require significant effort by the staff of both institutes, the Advisory Councils, and outside experts to overcome complex challenges that could threaten its success. Although integration of the grants portfolios can be achieved, harmonization of goals and policies related to legal use of alcohol versus illegal consumption of drugs will present serious challenges. Consolidating the infrastructure of the 2 existing institutes would entail avoiding encroachment on grant funding. A new institute for substance use, abuse, and addiction would require an enormous amount of cooperation from other institutes as the portfolios of research on alcohol, tobacco, and other drug abuse should logically be transferred to the new institute. In the near term, a structural reorganization would be less efficient and more costly than the individual institutes are currently. Increasing efficiency and reducing costs over time will necessitate careful strategic planning. Success in this difficult task would be made easier and less costly by first implementing carefully placed building blocks of increasing functional reorganization. The newly created institute should increase opportunities for specialization within disorders of addiction, attract new leadership, and build a novel strategic plan that will energize scientists and staff and incorporate ideas of stakeholders to advance the public good in preventing and treating alcohol, tobacco, and all addictions. Attention must be paid to the devil in the details.
    Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research 04/2011; 35(4):572-80. DOI:10.1111/j.1530-0277.2011.01493.x · 3.31 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Frontiers in Psychiatry 01/2011; 2:2. DOI:10.3389/fpsyt.2011.00002
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Widespread concern about illicit drugs as an aspect of workplace performance potentially diminishes attention on employee alcohol use. Alcohol is the dominant drug contributing to poor job performance; it also accounts for a third of the worldwide public health burden. Evidence from public roadways--a workplace for many--provides an example of work-related risk exposure and performance lapses. In most developed countries, alcohol is involved in 20-35% of fatal crashes; drugs other than alcohol are less prominently involved in fatalities. Alcohol biomarkers can improve detection by extending the timeframe for estimating problematic exposure levels and thereby provide better information for managers. But what levels and which markers are right for the workplace? In this paper, an established high-sensitivity proxy for alcohol-driving risk proclivity is used: an average eight months of failed blood alcohol concentration (BAC) breath tests from alcohol ignition interlock devices. Higher BAC test fail rates are known to presage higher rates of future impaired-driving convictions (driving under the influence; DUI). Drivers in alcohol interlock programmes log 5-7 daily BAC tests; in 12 months, this yields thousands of samples. Also, higher programme entry levels of alcohol biomarkers predict a higher likelihood of failed interlock BAC tests during subsequent months. This paper summarizes the potential of selected biomarkers for workplace screening. Markers include phosphatidylethanol (PEth), percent carbohydrate deficient transferrin (%CDT), gammaglutamyltransferase (GGT), gamma %CDT (γ%CDT), and ethylglucuronide (EtG) in hair. Clinical cut-off levels and median/mean levels of these markers in abstinent people, the general population, DUI drivers, and rehabilitation clinics are summarized for context.
    Drug Testing and Analysis 02/2012; 4(2):76-82. DOI:10.1002/dta.384 · 2.82 Impact Factor