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]

Objective: Excessive use of antipsychotic medication by older people is an international concern, but there is limited comparative information on their use in different residential settings. This paper describes and compares antipsychotic prescribing to older people in care homes and the community in England and Wales. Method: Analysis of a primary care database (THIN) with 403 259 community and 10 387 care home residents aged 65–104 years in 2008–9. Results: 3677 (0.9%) patients in the community and 2173 (20.9%) in care homes (20.5% in residential homes, 21.7% in nursing homes) received an antipsychotic medication prescription in the last 90 days. Most patients had received prescriptions for more than three months and 60% of prescriptions were for atypical antipsychotics. In patients without severe mental illness, 2367 (0.6%) patients in the community and 1765 (18.2%) in care homes received antipsychotic medication; such prescribing was common for patients with recorded dementia (30.2% in care home, 10.1% in the community). In care homes, younger age and living in the North of England predicted prescribing, but care home type did not. In the community, female gender, increasing age, living in a deprived area and the North predicted prescribing. Conclusions: Despite safety concerns, antipsychotic prescribing is markedly higher in care homes than in the community, and strongly associated with dementia in both settings. In England and Wales, we estimate that 54 000 older care home patients and 50 000 community patients receive antipsychotic medication without a diagnosis of severe mental illness with important implications for health and social services. Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]