2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Addressing adolescent substance use with a public health prevention framework: the case for harm reduction

      review-article
      a , b , , b , c , d , e , a , b , f
      Annals of Medicine
      Taylor & Francis
      Adolescents, harm reduction, substance use disorder, addiction

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Adolescence is a developmental stage defined in part by risk-taking. Risk-taking is critical to normal development and has important benefits including trying new activities and exploring new relationships. Risk-taking is also associated with the initiation of substance use. Because substance use often begins in adolescence, much focus has been on primary prevention with the goal of preventing initial substance use. Secondary or tertiary prevention approaches, such as counselling to eliminate substance use or offering treatment, are common approaches for adolescents with problematic substance use or a substance use disorder. While this is important, for some adolescents, treatment or cessation of use may not be desired. In these cases, Healthcare Practitioners (HCPs) can offer clear advice that incorporates harm reduction. Harm reduction, which is often applied for adults who use substances, reduces the negative impacts associated with drug use without requiring abstinence. Harm reduction is crucial to keeping adolescents safe and healthy and can offer opportunities for future engagement in treatment. The objective of this review is to describe strategies for integrating harm reduction principles in clinical settings that are developmentally appropriate. A patient-centered, harm reduction approach can validate perceived benefits of substance use, offer strategies to minimise harm, and advise reduction of use and abstinence.

          KEY MESSAGES:
          • Substance use often begins in adolescence and traditional approaches are often rooted in prevention framework.

          • Harm reduction should be incorporated for adolescents with problematic substance use or a substance use disorder.

          • This review offers strategies for integration of harm reduction principles tailored towards adolescents.

          Related collections

          Most cited references90

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Neurobiology of addiction: a neurocircuitry analysis.

          Drug addiction represents a dramatic dysregulation of motivational circuits that is caused by a combination of exaggerated incentive salience and habit formation, reward deficits and stress surfeits, and compromised executive function in three stages. The rewarding effects of drugs of abuse, development of incentive salience, and development of drug-seeking habits in the binge/intoxication stage involve changes in dopamine and opioid peptides in the basal ganglia. The increases in negative emotional states and dysphoric and stress-like responses in the withdrawal/negative affect stage involve decreases in the function of the dopamine component of the reward system and recruitment of brain stress neurotransmitters, such as corticotropin-releasing factor and dynorphin, in the neurocircuitry of the extended amygdala. The craving and deficits in executive function in the so-called preoccupation/anticipation stage involve the dysregulation of key afferent projections from the prefrontal cortex and insula, including glutamate, to the basal ganglia and extended amygdala. Molecular genetic studies have identified transduction and transcription factors that act in neurocircuitry associated with the development and maintenance of addiction that might mediate initial vulnerability, maintenance, and relapse associated with addiction.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Mortality risk during and after opioid substitution treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

            Objective To compare the risk for all cause and overdose mortality in people with opioid dependence during and after substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine and to characterise trends in risk of mortality after initiation and cessation of treatment. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and LILACS to September 2016. Study selection Prospective or retrospective cohort studies in people with opioid dependence that reported deaths from all causes or overdose during follow-up periods in and out of opioid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine. Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and assessed study quality. Mortality rates in and out of treatment were jointly combined across methadone or buprenorphine cohorts by using multivariate random effects meta-analysis. Results There were 19 eligible cohorts, following 122 885 people treated with methadone over 1.3-13.9 years and 15 831 people treated with buprenorphine over 1.1-4.5 years. Pooled all cause mortality rates were 11.3 and 36.1 per 1000 person years in and out of methadone treatment (unadjusted out-to-in rate ratio 3.20, 95% confidence interval 2.65 to 3.86) and reduced to 4.3 and 9.5 in and out of buprenorphine treatment (2.20, 1.34 to 3.61). In pooled trend analysis, all cause mortality dropped sharply over the first four weeks of methadone treatment and decreased gradually two weeks after leaving treatment. All cause mortality remained stable during induction and remaining time on buprenorphine treatment. Overdose mortality evolved similarly, with pooled overdose mortality rates of 2.6 and 12.7 per 1000 person years in and out of methadone treatment (unadjusted out-to-in rate ratio 4.80, 2.90 to 7.96) and 1.4 and 4.6 in and out of buprenorphine treatment. Conclusions Retention in methadone and buprenorphine treatment is associated with substantial reductions in the risk for all cause and overdose mortality in people dependent on opioids. The induction phase onto methadone treatment and the time immediately after leaving treatment with both drugs are periods of particularly increased mortality risk, which should be dealt with by both public health and clinical strategies to mitigate such risk. These findings are potentially important, but further research must be conducted to properly account for potential confounding and selection bias in comparisons of mortality risk between opioid substitution treatments, as well as throughout periods in and out of each treatment.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Medication for Opioid Use Disorder After Nonfatal Opioid Overdose and Association With Mortality

              Opioid overdose survivors have an increased risk for death. Whether use of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) after overdose is associated with mortality is not known.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ann Med
                Ann Med
                Annals of Medicine
                Taylor & Francis
                0785-3890
                1365-2060
                28 July 2022
                2022
                28 July 2022
                : 54
                : 1
                : 2123-2136
                Affiliations
                [a ]Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine , Boston, MA, USA
                [b ]Grayken Center for Addiction, Boston Medical Center , Boston, MA, USA
                [c ]Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine , Boston, MA, USA
                [d ]Division of Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine, MassGeneral Hospital for Children , Boston, MA, USA
                [e ]Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School , Boston, MA, USA
                [f ]Division of General Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, Boston University School of Medicine , Boston, MA, USA
                Author notes
                CONTACT James Michael Winer james.winer@ 123456bmc.org Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine , Boston, MA, USA; Grayken Center for Addiction, Boston Medical Center , Boston, MA, USA
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7524-0178
                Article
                2104922
                10.1080/07853890.2022.2104922
                9341337
                35900132
                c64a2313-1c2b-4e18-9a11-353d2f23bc5d
                © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 1, Pages: 14, Words: 10430
                Categories
                Review Article
                Addiction

                Medicine
                adolescents,harm reduction,substance use disorder,addiction
                Medicine
                adolescents, harm reduction, substance use disorder, addiction

                Comments

                Comment on this article