Search

Background and Aims: Long‐acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) is a new treatment for opioid use disorder that is generating positive outcomes. Negative effects are typically mild and transient, but can occasionally be serious, resulting in treatment discontinuation/non‐adherence. This paper aims to analyse patients' accounts of how they felt during the first 72 h after initiating LAIB. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted (June 2021–March 2022) with 26 people (18 males and 8 females) who had started LAIB within the previous 72 h. Participants were recruited from treatment services in England and Wales and were interviewed by telephone using a topic guide. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed and coded. The concepts of embodiment and embodied cognition framed the analyses. Data on participants' substance use, initiation onto LAIB and feelings were tabulated. Next, participants' accounts of how they felt were analysed following the stages of Iterative Categorization. Results: Participants reported complex combinations of changing negative and positive feelings. Bodily experiences included withdrawal symptoms, poor sleep, injection‐site pain/soreness, lethargy and heightened senses inducing nausea ('distressed bodies'), but also enhanced somatic wellbeing, improved sleep, better skin, increased appetite, reduced constipation and heightened senses inducing pleasure ('returning body functions'). Cognitive responses included anxiety, uncertainties and low mood/depression ('the mind in crisis') and improved mood, greater positivity and reduced craving ('feeling psychologically better'). Whereas most negative effects reported are widely recognized, the early benefits of treatment described are less well‐documented and may be an overlooked distinctive feature of LAIB. Conclusions: During the first 72 h after initiating long‐acting injectable buprenorphine, new patients report experiencing a range of interconnected positive and negative short‐term effects. Providing new patients with information about the range and nature of these effects can prepare them for what to expect and help them manage feelings and reduce anxiety. In turn, this may increase medication adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background and Aims: Dr Leslie E. Keeley was perhaps the world's most famous addiction cure doctor at the turn of the 20th century, but mainstream medicine dismissed him as a quack because he dispensed a secret cure. This paper aims to describe Keeley's now largely forgotten story and to draw attention to the role of contextual issues in the acceptance or rejection of any theory of addiction, particularly the neuroscientific theories of the early 21st century. Methods: This study is a qualitative assessment and contextualization of historical documents. Its main sources are archival and are, for the most part, unknown to historians. The paper also offers intellectual and historical context that is drawn from leading historical and sociological analyses. Results: Keeley's addiction cure was dismissed as quackery because it failed to meet the changing standards of late 19th‐century professional medicine. This begs us to consider contextual issues in any assertion of the viability of addiction therapeutics, in the present as well the past. Conclusions: Keeley's near erasure from the historical record was a consequence of a broader, late 19th‐century medical power struggle that took precedence over the testimony of tens of thousands of satisfied patients who claimed that Keeley's cure worked. Context matters in the assessment of the viability of theories of addiction from the past, but also from the present. Historians and social scientists are well placed to make those assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]