Medical Cannabis Legalization: No Contribution to Rising Stimulant Rates in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: There has been a pronounced increase in the use of Schedule II stimulants to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the United States over the last two decades. Interestingly, chronic medical cannabis (MC) use can present with cognitive impairments that resemble ADHD symptoms. This study aimed to determine if MC legalization increased prescription stimulant distribution. METHODS: Information on the distribution of methylphenidate, amphetamine, and lisdexamfetamine for 2006 to 2021 was extracted from the Drug Enforcement Administration's comprehensive database and the three-year population-corrected slopes of stimulant distribution before and after MC program implementation were compared. RESULTS: We found a significant main effect of time (p<0.001); however, contrary to the hypothesis, the sales status of states' MC, did not influence slopes of distribution (p=0.391). There was a significantly large interaction effect of time and MC sales status on slopes of distribution (p<0.001). Slopes of distribution rates of stimulants were significantly lower in states that proceeded to legalize MC prior to MC program implementation than those states that did not (p=0.022). After MC program implementation, however, the distribution rates of the Schedule II stimulants were not significantly different when comparing states with MC sales to those without (p=0.355). DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that MC program legalization did not contribute to certain states having rapid increases in Schedule II stimulant distribution rates over time. Other factors, including the liberalization of the adult ADHD diagnostic criteria in the DSM-5 and the introduction of Binge Eating Disorder, also likely contributed to elevations in stimulant distribution.

Rise of escitalopram and the fall of citalopram.

Introduction: Citalopram and escitalopram are among the most used medications and are key treatments for many psychiatric disorders. Previous findings suggest citalopram and escitalopram prescription rates are changing because of the patent for citalopram ending as opposed to evidence of a clear therapeutic advantage, which is called evergreening. This retrospective study focuses on characterizing the chronologic and geographic variation in the use of citalopram and escitalopram among US Medicaid and Medicare patients. We hypothesized that prescription rates of citalopram will decrease with a concurrent increase in escitalopram, consistent with evergreening. Methods: Citalopram and escitalopram prescription rates and costs per state were obtained from the Medicaid State Drug Utilization Database and Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data. Annual prescription rates outside a 95% confidence interval were considered significantly different from the average. Results: Overall, a decreasing trend for citalopram and an increasing trend for escitalopram prescription rates were noted in both Medicare and Medicaid patients. Cost differences between generic and brand were noted for both drugs, with generic forms being cheaper compared to the brand-name version. Discussion: Despite limited evidence suggesting that citalopram and escitalopram have any meaningful differences in therapeutic or adverse effects, there exists a noticeable decline in the use of citalopram that cooccurred with an increase in escitalopram prescribing, consistent with our hypothesis. Moreover, among these general pharmacoepidemiologic trends exists significant geographic variability. There was disproportionate spending (relative to their use) on the brand versions of these medicines compared to their generic forms.

Specialty-type and state-level variation in paroxetine use among older adult patients.

Introduction: Paroxetine is an older "selective" serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) that is notable for its lack of selectivity, resulting in a cholinergic adverse-effect profile, especially among older adults (65+). Methods: Paroxetine prescription rates and costs per state were ascertained from the Medicare Specialty Utilization and Payment Data. States' annual prescription rate, corrected per thousand Part D enrollees, outside 95% confidence interval were considered significantly different from the average. Results: There was a steady decrease in paroxetine prescriptions (-34.52%) and spending (-16.69%) from 2015-2020 but a consistent, five-fold state-level difference. From 2015-2020, Kentucky (194.9, 195.3, 182.7, 165.1, 143.3, 132.5) showed significantly higher prescriptions rates relative to the national average, and Hawaii (42.1, 37.9, 34.3, 31.7, 27.7, 26.6) showed significantly lower prescription rates. North Dakota was often a frequent elevated prescriber of paroxetine (2016: 170.7, 2018: 143.3), relative to the average. Neuropsychiatry and geriatric medicine frequently prescribed the largest amount of paroxetine prescriptions, relative to the number of providers in that specialty, from 2015-2020. Discussion: Despite the American Geriatrics Society prohibition against paroxetine use in the older adults and many effective treatment alternatives, paroxetine was still commonly used in this population, especially in Kentucky and North Dakota and by neuropsychiatry and geriatric medicine. These findings provide information on the specialty types and states where education and policy reform would likely have the greatest impact on improving adherence to the paroxetine prescription recommendations.

A national action plan for workforce development in behavioral health.

Across all sectors of the behavioral health field there has been growing concern about a workforce crisis. Difficulties encompass the recruitment and retention of staff and the delivery of accessible and effective training in both initial, preservice training and continuing education settings. Concern about the crisis led to a multiphased, cross-sector collaboration known as the Annapolis Coalition on the Behavioral Health Workforce. With support from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, this public-private partnership crafted An Action Plan for Behavioral Health Workforce Development. Created with input from a dozen expert panels, the action plan outlines seven core strategic goals that are relevant to all sectors of the behavioral health field: expand the role of consumers and their families in the workforce, expand the role of communities in promoting behavioral health and wellness, use systematic recruitment and retention strategies, improve training and education, foster leadership development, enhance infrastructure to support workforce development, and implement a national research and evaluation agenda. Detailed implementation tables identify the action steps for diverse groups and organizations to take in order to achieve these goals. The action plan serves as a call to action and is being used to guide workforce initiatives across the nation.

Families and schizophrenia: the view from advocacy.

Historically, families of persons who have schizophrenia often were blamed for the development of the condition and subsequently might have been excluded from care. Now these notions, which never had much systematic empiric support, have been abandoned. Family involvement often is critical to the recovery process and must be engaged actively whenever possible. This article calls for the inclusion of patients who have schizophrenia and their families in a redesigned model of care that is explicitly collaborative in its orientation and routinely includes evidence-based treatments that are informed by a vision of recovery.

Report of recommendations: the Annapolis Coalition Conference on Behavioral Health Work Force Competencies.

In May 2004, the Annapolis Coalition on Behavioral Health Workforce Education convened a national meeting on the identification and assessment of competencies. The Conference on Behavioral Health Workforce Competencies brought leading consumer and family advocates together with other experts on competencies from diverse disciplines and specialties in the fields of both mental health care and substance use disorders treatment. Aided by experts on competency development in business and medicine, conference participants have generated 10 consensus recommendations to guide the future development of workforce competencies in behavioral health. This article outlines those recommendations. A collaborative effort to identify a set of core or common competencies is envisioned as a key strategy for advancing behavioral health education, training, and other workforce development initiatives.

Best practices in behavioral health workforce education and training.

Dramatic changes have occurred in the delivery of mental health and substance abuse services over the past decade and a half. There is growing concern that education programs have not kept pace with these changes and that reforms are needed to improve the quality and relevance of training efforts. Drawing on the published works of experts and a national initiative to develop a consensus among stakeholders about the nature of needed reforms, this article outlines 16 recommended "best practices" that should guide efforts to improve workforce education and training in the field of behavioral health.

Problems in behavioral health care: leap-frogging the status quo.

A version of this paper was presented as a keynote address entitled "Strategies for Catalyzing Change" at the September 2001 Annapolis Conference on Behavioral Health Workforce Education and Training. It explores some of the problems inherent in our present health care system and suggests that ultimately, revamping pre-professional training is the key to sustained system change. While the paper approaches the problems inherent in our behavioral health care system from a psychiatric perspective, it is believed that similar issues and concerns exist across disciplines and that ultimately the solution requires our ability to transcend narrower perspectives.

On the sensitivity of the tourniquet pain test.

Twenty-four chronic pain patients were given, on each of 4 successive days, oral doses of 60 mg morphine, 60 mg codeine, 600 mg aspirin and placebo, using a double-blind counterbalanced design. Two hours after ingestion, subjective pain estimates and tourniquet pain scores were obtained. Variability of the tourniquet pain scores was too great for differences in response to the analgesics to be significant. However, differences in pain estimates were also too small to discriminate among the drugs, and the lack of sensitivity may be a function of pain chronicity. The tourniquet techniques will continue to be useful until there is a purely objective measure of the severity of clinical pain.