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

Marek C. Chawarski, Kathryn Hawk, E. Jennifer Edelman, Patrick O'Connor, Patricia Owens, Shara Martel, Edouard Coupet, Lauren Whiteside, Judith I. Tsui, Richard Rothman, Ethan Cowan, Lynne Richardson, Michael S. Lyons, David A. Fiellin, Gail D'Onofrio

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)782-787
Number of pages6
JournalAnnals of emergency medicine
Volume76
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2020

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Use of Amphetamine-Type Stimulants Among Emergency Department Patients With Untreated Opioid Use Disorder'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this