Search

OBJECTIVES: With an increasingly dynamic global illicit drug market, including the emergence of novel psychoactive substances, many jurisdictions have moved to establish toxicosurveillance systems to enable timely detection of harmful substances in the community. This paper describes the methodology for the Emerging Drugs Network of Australia - Victoria (EDNAV) project, a clinical registry focused on the collection of high-quality clinical and analytical data from ED presentations involving illicit drug intoxications. Drug intelligence collected from the project is utilised by local health authorities with the aim to identify patterns of drug use and emerging drugs of concern. METHODS: The project involves 10 public hospital EDs in Victoria, Australia. Patients 16 years and over, presenting to a network ED with a suspected illicit drug-related toxicity and a requirement for venepuncture are eligible for inclusion in the study under a waiver of consent. Clinical and demographic parameters are documented by site-based clinicians and comprehensive toxicological analysis is conducted on patient blood samples via specialised forensic services. All data are then deidentified and compiled in a project specific database. RESULTS: Cases are discussed in weekly multidisciplinary team meetings, with a view to identify potentially harmful substances circulating in the community. High-risk signals are escalated to key stakeholders to produce timely and proportionate public health alerts with a focus on harm minimisation. CONCLUSIONS: The EDNAV project represents the first centralised system providing near real-time monitoring of community drug use in Victoria and is fundamental in facilitating evidence-based public health intervention.

AIMS: Treatment of methamphetamine dependence requires monitoring of recent use or abstinence. Self-report is commonly used for routine monitoring, but the accuracy of self-report is not established. For the treating clinician, the key accuracy statistic is the negative predictive value (NPV). The study aim was to estimate the NPV of self-reported non-use of methamphetamine compared with an oral fluid reference standard. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was a secondary (subgroup) analysis from a randomized controlled pharmacotherapy trial. Three Australian outpatient addiction services took part. Particpants were 139 people dependent on methamphetamine. MEASUREMENTS: Weekly oral fluid samples over 12 weeks to determine methamphetamine (and amphetamine) concentrations were used as the reference standard. Self-report of any methamphetamine use in the previous 7 days by the time-line follow-back method was the index test. Standard diagnostic accuracy statistics were calculated for all available paired episodes (n = 1134). Three NPV values were calculated: unadjusted NPV and NPV adjusted for clustering of observations through logistic regression and generalized estimating equation (GEE). We also calculated the NPVs for a range of prevalence rates of methamphetamine use, for the calculated levels of sensitivity and specificity. FINDINGS: Sensitivity was 96.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 95-97.5], specificity was 63.7% (95% CI = 57.3-69.8) and positive predictive value (PPV) was 90.8% (95% CI = 88.8-92.6). The unadjusted NPV was 82.7% (95% CI = 76.5-87.9), adjusted NPV by logistic regression 82.7% (95% CI = 73.9-91.5) and GEE 76.8% (95% CI = 66.8-86.8). At a methamphetamine use prevalence of 5%, the estimated NPV would be 99.7% (95% CI = 99.6-99.9) and at 95% prevalence, 48.2% (95% CI = 39.6-57.0). CONCLUSIONS: Self-report of no recent methamphetamine use appears to be sufficiently accurate to be clinically useful at the expected prevalence rates of metham

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The current phase of the North American 'opioid crisis' is characterised by illicit fentanyl use; however, the presence of illicit fentanyl in Australia is unknown. This study aimed to monitor unintentional fentanyl consumption in Australia. DESIGN: Rapid Urine Drug Screens (UDS) paired with surveys conducted within Supervised Injecting Facilities (SIFs), and confirmatory laboratory testing. SETTING: Sydney and Melbourne, Australia PARTICIPANTS: Clients who used heroin within the past 2 days (n=911 tests, 2017-2021). Participants were demographically similar to the overall client base (median age 43, 72% male). MEASUREMENTS: UDS were conducted using BTNX Rapid Response™ fentanyl urine strip tests with cross-reactivity to numerous fentanyl analogues. Positive urine samples were analysed using liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. Surveys covered past 3 day drug use and lifetime report of fentanyl in heroin. FINDINGS: Two percent of participants reported intentional use of fentanyl, mostly through fentanyl patches. Of the 911 rapid UDS conducted, 17 (1.9%) yielded positive results. Eight of these (all from Melbourne) were not explained by survey-reported fentanyl use in the past 3 days. Of these 8 unexplained positives, confirmatory laboratory analysis was conducted on 6, with 4 deemed to be false positives, and 2 confirmed for the presence of fentanyl. This represents the first confirmation of unintended use of fentanyl type substances in this population. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence of unintentional fentanyl use among people in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia who regularly inject heroin, suggesting that, currently, there is very little illicit fentanyl in Australian drug markets accessed by Supervised Injecting Facilities attendees. This study demonstrates the feasibility of quick onsite testing to cost-effectively screen large samples for fentanyl; however, the high false positive rate emphasises the need for conf