Prevalence of opioid analgesic injection among rural nonmedical opioid analgesic users.

Center on Drug and Alcohol Research, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, 915B South Limestone Street, Lexington, KY 40536-9824, USA.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence (Impact Factor: 3.28). 03/2007; 87(1):98-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.07.008
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence and correlates of opioid analgesic injection (OAI) in a cohort of rural opioid analgesic users.
Cross-sectional study of 184 participants from rural Appalachian Kentucky.
The majority of participants were male (54.9%), white (98.4%) and the median age was 30 years (interquartile range: 24-37). The self-reported lifetime prevalence of injection drug use (IDU) was 44.3%, with 35.3% of respondents reporting injection of oral opioid analgesic formulations. The prevalence of self-reported hepatitis C (HCV) was 14.8%, significantly greater than those not injecting opioid analgesics (1.7%) (p<0.001). Receptive needle sharing, distributive needle sharing and sharing of other injection paraphernalia was reported by 10.5%, 26.3%, and 42.1% of those currently injecting, respectively.
Opioid analgesic injection was more prevalent in this rural population than has been found in previous reports. This study suggests a rising problem with injecting among rural opioid users, a problem more typically associated with urban drug users. Educating injectors of opioid analgesics on safe needle practices is necessary in order to curb the transmission of HIV, HCV, and other infectious diseases. Further study on the longitudinal course of opioid analgesic injection in this population appears warranted.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Prescription opioid abuse is a significant public health concern that requires strategies to reduce its impact, including development of abuse deterrent formulations. OxyContin®, an extended-release oxycodone (ERO) formulation, has been widely abused. This study assessed the effects of reformulated ERO, designed to be more difficult to manipulate for purposes of intranasal and intravenous abuse, on patterns of opioid abuse among a sample of individuals from rural Appalachia with a history of ERO abuse. Methods Structured interviews assessing opioid abuse (past 30-day abuse and retrospectively reported abuse prior to the reformulation in August 2010) were completed by 189 individuals between December 2010 and September 2011. Results The past 30-day prevalence and frequency of reformulated ERO abuse through any route (33%, 1.9 days/month), snorting (5%, 0.2 days/month), and injecting (0.5%, <0.1 days/month) were low and infrequent compared to that of IR oxycodone (any route: 96%, 19.5 days/month; snorting: 70%, 10.3 days/month; injecting: 51%, 10.5 days/month) and retrospectively reported abuse of original ERO in August 2010 (any route: 74%, 13.4 days/month; snorting: 39%, 6.0 days/month; injecting: 41%, 8.6 days/month). After the reformulation, the prevalence of original ERO abuse significantly declined while abuse of reformulated ERO remained steadily low. Heroin abuse was rare in this sample. Conclusions In this sample, abuse of reformulated ERO was low, and lower than abuse of original ERO retrospectively and IR oxycodone concurrently, particularly through injecting and snorting routes of administration. There was no evidence to suggest that reformulated ERO became a substitute for original ERO.
    Drug and alcohol dependence 06/2014; · 3.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The non-medical use of pharmaceutical opioids is associated with a range of negative health consequences, including the development of dependence, emergency room presentations and overdose deaths. Drawing on life history data from a broader qualitative study of the non-medical use of painkillers, this brief report presents two cases of transitions from recreational or non-medical pharmaceutical opioid use to intravenous heroin use by young adults in Australia. Although our study was not designed to assess whether recreational oxycodone use is causally linked to transitions to intravenous use, polyopioid use places individuals at high risk for progression to heroin and injecting. Our first case, Jake, used a range of analgesics before he transitioned to intravenous use, and the first drug he injected was methadone. Our second case, Emma, engaged in a broad spectrum of polydrug use, involving a range of opioid preparations, as well as benzodiazepines, cannabis and alcohol. Both cases transitioned from oral to intravenous pharmaceutical opioids use and subsequent intravenous heroin use. These cases represent the first documented reports of transitions from the non-medical or recreational use of oxycodone to intravenous heroin use in Australia. As such, they represent an important starting point for the examination of pharmaceutical opioids as a pathway to injecting drug use among young Australians and highlight the need for further research designed to identify pharmaceutical opioids users at risk of transitions to injecting and to develop interventions designed to prevent or delay these transitions. [Dertadian G, Maher L. From oxycodone to heroin: Two cases of transitioning opioid use in young Australians. Drug Alcohol Rev 2013].
    Drug and Alcohol Review 11/2013; · 1.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand changing illicit drug use patterns in rural Appalachia since a new formulation of OxyContin® was released with the goal of deterring diversion and misuse. Participants (n = 25) from a longitudinal study of rural drug users (N = 192) were approached to participate in semistructured qualitative interviews between April and June 2011. The primary finding is that the majority of participants switched from using the original formulation OxyContin to immediate-release oxycodone. We discuss the implications and limitations of these findings.
    Substance Use &amp Misuse 12/2013; 49(6). · 1.23 Impact Factor