Substance, use in relation to COVID-19: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a scoping review focused on various forms of substance use amid the pandemic, looking at both the impact of substance use on COVID-19 infection, severity, and vaccine uptake, as well as the impact that COVID-19 has had on substance use treatment and rates. METHODS: A scoping review, compiling both peer-reviewed and grey literature, focusing on substance use and COVID-19 was conducted on September 15, 2020 and again in April 15, 2021 to capture any new studies. Three bibliographic databases (Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, PubMed) and several preprint servers (EuropePMC, bioRxiv, medRxiv, F1000, PeerJ Preprints, PsyArXiv, Research Square) were searched. We included English language original studies only. RESULTS: Of 1564 articles screened in the abstract and title screening phase, we included 111 research studies (peer-reviewed: 98, grey literature: 13) that met inclusion criteria. There was limited research on substance use other than those involving tobacco or alcohol. We noted that individuals engaging in substance use had increased risk for COVID-19 severity, and Black Americans with COVID-19 and who engaged in substance use had worse outcomes than white Americans. There were issues with treatment provision earlier in the pandemic, but increased use of telehealth as the pandemic progressed. COVID-19 anxiety was associated with increased substance use. CONCLUSIONS: Our scoping review of studies to date during COVID-19 uncovered notable research gaps namely the need for research efforts on vaccines, COVID-19 concerns such as anxiety and worry, and low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) and under-researched topics within substance use, and to explore the use of qualitative techniques and interventions where appropriate. We also noted that clinicians can screen and treat individuals exhibiting substance use to mitigate effects of the pandemic. FUNDING: Study was funded by the Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale University and The Horowitz Foundation for Social Policy. DH was funded by a NIDA grant (R01DA048860). The funding body had no role in the design, analysis, or interpretation of the data in the study.

Substance use and substance use disorder, in relation to COVID-19: protocol for a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is creating severe issues for healthcare and broad social structures, exposing societal vulnerabilities. Among the populations affected by COVID-19 are people engaged in substance use, such as people who smoke; vape (e-cigarette use); use opioids, cannabis, alcohol, or psychoactive prescription drugs; or have a substance use disorder (SUD). Monitoring substance use and SUD during the pandemic is essential, as people who engage in substance use or present with SUD are at greater risk for COVID-19, and the economic and social changes resulting from the pandemic may aggravate SUD. There have been several reviews focused on COVID-19 in relation to substance use and SUD. Reviews generally did not consider on a large range of substance use variants or SUDs. We plan a scoping review that seeks to fill gaps in our current understanding of substance use and SUD, in the COVID-19 era. METHODS: A scoping review focused on substance use and SUD, in relation to COVID-19, will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Africa-Wide Information, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, PsycINFO, PubMed, Middle Eastern Central Asian Studies, CINAHL Complete, and Sociological Abstracts. Grey literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, HSRProj, governmental websites, and clinical trials registries (e.g., ClinicalTrial.gov , World Health Organization, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and International Standard Randomized Con-trolled Trial Number registry). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2015 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies investigating substance use and SUD, in relation to COVID-19 in all populations and settings, will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. DISCUSSION: Original research is urgently needed to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 on substance use and SUD. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (osf/io/tzgm5).

Delphi survey of experts' opinions on strategies used by community pharmacists to reduce over-the-counter drug misuse.

AIM: To explore the views of experts within the fields of pharmacy and addiction on the value of current strategies and possible alternatives and to reach an agreement on best practice in the sale of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines which are liable to misuse. DESIGN: Using a modified Delphi approach, an anonymous, international, three-stage, postal questionnaire was conducted that generated both qualitative and quantitative data. PARTICIPANTS: Of those contacted by telephone (164) from the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and United States, 109 experts (66%) agreed to take part. Forty-three per cent (47/109) completed all three stages of the study. MEASUREMENTS: A Delphi technique was employed to gather data. The second and final questionnaires were constructed from the responses to the preceding questionnaires. Content analysis of the qualitative data was carried out at each stage. Statistical analyses of the influence of demographic factors, degree of shift in overall opinion between the first and second stages and degree of agreement between respondents at each stage were also conducted. FINDINGS: A consensus was reached on the strategies considered the most important and effective. Key areas include improving access to current information, improved staff training, addressing the issues of non-pharmacy outlets and Internet pharmacy sites. Concerns were expressed regarding the possible conflict between commercial and customer interests. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus view presented offers practical and realistic guidance for policy-makers and community pharmacists on the sale of OTC products. It reflects the best evidence to date of expert views in this area and accords with current UK guidelines. The effective implementation of these strategies can only be achieved with improved communication and coordination at local and national level.