Search

Kratom, a plant that produces opioid-like effects, has gained popularity in the U.S. for self-treating symptoms of chronic pain, mood disorders, and substance-use disorders (SUDs). Most data on kratom are from surveys into which current kratom-using adults could self-select; such surveys may underrepresent people who have used kratom and chosen to stop. Available data also do not adequately assess important psychosocial factors surrounding kratom use. In this study, U.S. adults who reported past 6-month alcohol, opioid, and/or stimulant use (N = 1,670) were recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk between September and December 2020. Of the 1,510 evaluable respondents, 202 (13.4%) reported lifetime kratom use. Kratom-using adults, relative to others, were typically younger, male, unpartnered, without children, and had lower income. They had higher rates of chronic pain (31.7% vs. 21.9%, p = .003), childhood adversity, anxiety, and depression (p < .001), and lower perceived social rank (d = .19, .02-.22) and socioeconomic status (d = .37 .16-.26). They also reported higher use rates for most substances (except alcohol); this included medically supervised and unsupervised use of prescription opioids and diverted opioid agonist therapy (OAT) medications. Most (83.2%) met diagnostic criteria for any past-year SUD. Those reporting kratom use were less likely to reside in an urban/suburban area. The strongest predictors of kratom use were use of other drugs: cannabidiol (OR = 3.73), psychedelics (OR = 3.39), and nonmedical prescription opioids (OR = 1.72). Another strong predictor was lifetime OAT utilization (OR = 2.31). Despite seemingly poorer psychosocial functioning and health among respondents reporting lifetime kratom use, use of other substances may be the strongest indicators of kratom use. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

INTRODUCTION: Since 2007, kratom use in the United States has increased, centered around nonmedical self-treatment of pain, psychiatric, and substance use disorder (SUD) symptoms. Reports of kratom withdrawal have emerged amidst description of therapeutic effects, yet we know little about disordered use. Our objective was to assess DSM-5 SUD for kratom (“kratom use disorder”, KUD) and examine kratom withdrawal symptoms among those who ever used regularly. We also sought to identify clinical characteristics of respondents who qualified for current, remitted, or never KUD. METHODS: Between April-May 2021, we re-recruited online respondents who reported lifetime kratom use on an unrelated survey into our cross-sectional kratom survey study, permitting a diverse sample of current and former kratom-using persons. RESULTS: A total of 129/289 (44.6%) evaluable surveys were obtained. Over half (52.7%) of respondents never met KUD diagnostic criteria; 17.8% were assessed remitted, and 29.5% met current (past-year) KUD threshold. For past-year KUD, severity was: 14.0% mild, 7.0% moderate, and 8.5% severe. Pain, psychiatric symptoms, and polydrug use were found across all groups. KUD symptoms reflected increased use, tolerance, withdrawal, unsuccessful quit attempts, and craving; 9.3% reported decreases in important social, occupational, or recreational activities because of use. Withdrawal symptoms were moderate and included gastrointestinal upset, restlessness, anxiety, irritability, fatigue/low energy, and craving. CONCLUSIONS: As assessed here, tolerance and withdrawal are primary KUD features rather than psychosocial impairments. As kratom is often used among persons with a myriad of health conditions, clinicians should be aware of and assess for kratom use and withdrawal.

Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is a tree in the coffee family, indigenous to Southeast Asia (SEA), whose leaves have historically been used as a natural remedy and for its purported stimulating and analgesic properties. Kratom has gained popularity in recent years in the United States, where internet-based sales have driven growing numbers of people to experiment with kratom products. Kratom contains over 40 unique alkaloids displaying complex pharmacological properties including opioid- and non-opioid-receptor mediated effects. Data from animal research indicates therapeutic potential of kratom; for instance, as an analgesic agent or in mitigating opioid and alcohol withdrawal symptoms. Some adverse effects and risks are also attributable to kratom and its alkaloids, including possible liver damage and potential for dependence, particularly in the context of high dosage and/or chronic administration. However, in comparison to commonly used opioid medications, these risks are generally lower for kratom, consistent with human observational data from SEA and the US. Prevalence of kratom use remains difficult to conclusively assess, with estimates ranging between 1.8 to 15.6 million kratom-using adults in the US alone. The limited human data, comprised of survey and case report, suggest kratom may be effective for pain relief, to address mood and anxiety symptoms, and as a potential future aid in the treatment of substance use disorders and drug withdrawal. Overall, limited data indicate kratom and its alkaloids warrant a significant investment of rigorous basic and clinical research to better characterize its pharmacology, potential risks, and therapeutic benefits.

Background: Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa Korth.) use outside of Southeast Asia has increased over the past decade. Objectives: This investigation clarifies kratom’s role in perceived well-being, overall health, and temporal correlation with drug use to understand kratom’s role in the self-treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs). Methods: Between July 2019 and July 2020 an anonymous, cross-sectional, online survey was taken by 7,381 people who use kratom (PWUK) recruited through social media and other online resources. This included an assessment of (a) the relationship between self-reported overall health, concomitant use of drugs of misuse, and demographics; (b) the perceived effectiveness of kratom in self-treating diagnosed health conditions or symptoms; (c) the profile of PWUK primarily for drug dependence, pain, and mood or mental health conditions based on demographics. Results: A total of 5,152 valid responses (45.9% females/53.7% males) were collected. Kratom was primarily used for self-treating pain (73.0%) and improving emotional or mental health conditions (42.2%) without clinical supervision. Those with a SUD (synthetic opioids, methadone, benzodiazepines, or heroin) used kratom after discontinuing illicit or other drugs (94.8%). The primary substances taken before or concomitantly with kratom were cannabis, cannabidiol, benzodiazepines, or kava. PWUKs report a dose-dependent benefit for alleviating pain and relieving negative moods. Adverse effects were primarily gastrointestinal, typically at high (>5 g/dose) and frequent (>22 doses/week) dosing. Conclusions: Kratom was primarily used as a harm-reduction agent for SUDs and self-treatment of chronic conditions. Healthcare professionals need better information about kratom, its potential adverse effects, and clinically significant drug interactions.

Co-use of non-medical opioids (NMO) and methamphetamine is increasing. So too is the use of the psychoactive botanical "kratom," including among people with NMO and methamphetamine use histories. We assessed characteristics associated with respondent groups who reported lifetime methamphetamine and/or kratom use within a nationally representative US sample using 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data from respondents reporting lifetime NMO use (diverted prescription opioids, heroin). Weighted prevalence estimates for demographic, mental health, and substance use outcomes were determined. Logistic regression examined associations between group membership and outcomes. Among this sample of respondents with lifetime NMO use, 67.6% (95% CI = 65.6-69.4%) reported only NMO use; 4.6% (3.9-5.4%) reported NMO+Kratom; 24.7% (22.7-26.7%) reported NMO+Methamphetamine; and 3.2% (2.5-3.9%) reported NMO+Methamphetamine+Kratom. Compared to those in the NMO-only group, the NMO+Kratom group was more likely to report past-year serious mental illness (SMI; OR = 2.27), suicidality (OR = 1.89), and past-month psychological distress (OR = 1.88). The NMO+Methamphetamine+Kratom group was more likely to report past-year SMI (OR = 2.65), past-month psychological distress (OR = 2.06), and unmet mental health needs (OR = 2.03); increased odds for drug injection, opioid withdrawal, and perceived treatment need also emerged. Risk factors were observed for all groups but were greatest among those reporting use of all three substances.

Many meat-eaters experience cognitive dissonance when aware that their eating behaviors contradict their moral values, such as desires to protect the environment or animals from harm. One way in which people morally disengage from their behaviors—and thus avoid dissonance—is to displace responsibility onto others. Aligning with this notion, results of three studies (total N = 1,501) suggest that expressing moral outrage at third-party transgressors reduces dissonance and preserves moral identity among meat-eaters. When participants understood their in-group as responsible for factory farming’s negative impact or read about factory farming’s harms to animals, expressing moral outrage at third-party transgressors reduced guilt and elevated self-rated moral character. Moreover, reflecting on the morally troublesome nature of meat-eating led participants to express more moral outrage at a third-party organization responsible for animal abuse, an effect eliminated by self-affirmation. These findings substantiate moral outrage as a new mechanism to justify meat consumption.

Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa Korth.) use has increased substantially over the past decade outside of its indigenous regions, especially for the self-treatment of psychiatric conditions. An anonymous, cross-sectional, online survey was completed by 4,945 people who use kratom (PWUK) between July 2019 and July 2020. A total of 2,296 respondents completed an extended survey utilizing clinical scales for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive and anxiety disorders.PWUK and met criteria for ADHD, PTSD, depressive or anxiety disorders were primarily middle-aged (31-50 years), employed, more likely to have college-level education (81.3% vs. 80.0%), and reported increased concurrent or prior use of kratom with cannabis products, cannabidiol, and benzodiazepines. In all psychiatric conditions, PWUK reported less depressive and anxious moods. Self-reported quality of life was worse in psychiatric conditions whereas current pain was more severe. Based on this observational study, further clinical studies are warranted for kratom.

Employment problems are common among people with substance use disorders (SUDs), and improving vocational functioning is an important aspect of SUD treatment. More detailed understanding of the psychosocial benefits of employment may help refine vocational interventions for people with SUDs. Here, we used ecological momentary assessment to measure possible affective improvements associated with work. Participants (n = 161) with opioid use disorder were randomized to work (job-skills training) in a contingency-management-based Therapeutic Workplace either immediately or after a waitlist delay. Throughout, participants responded via smartphone to randomly scheduled questionnaires. In linear mixed models comparing responses made at work vs. all other locations, being at work was associated with: less stress, less craving for opioids and cocaine, less negative mood, more positive mood, and more flow-like states. Some of these differences were also observed on workdays vs. non-workdays outside of work hours. These results indicate that benefits associated with work may not be restricted to being actually in the workplace; however, randomization did not reveal clear changes coinciding with the onset of work access. Overall, in contrast to work-associated negative moods measured by experience-sampling in the general population, Therapeutic Workplace participants experienced several types of affective improvements associated with work.

BACKGROUND: Corrections-involved adults with a history of opioid use disorder are at elevated risk of opioid overdose following release from correctional settings. Increased opioid prescribing restrictions and monitoring during a time when heroin is becoming cheaper and ubiquitous means that adults who misused prescription opioids prior to incarceration may be reentering communities at greater risk for heroin exposure and use. OBJECTIVES: Determine risk factors of post-release heroin use among a sample of adults who participated in corrections-based drug treatment in Kentucky released between 2012 and 2017. METHODS: Survey data obtained as part of an ongoing evaluation of corrections-based drug treatment were examined. RESULTS: The final sample (N = 1,563) was majority male (80.9%). Nearly 11.0% reported past-year heroin use following their release. Depressive symptoms, polydrug use, and urban proximity were more common among participants reporting post-release heroin use. Heroin use 30 days prior to incarceration was associated with a 432.1% increase in odds of heroin use subsequent to incarceration. Post-release suicidal ideation increased odds of heroin use by 154.2%, whereas reporting satisfaction from social interactions decreased odds of use by nearly 60%. Post-release use of cocaine and diverted buprenorphine were associated with increased likelihood of heroin use during this time period, increasing odds by 469.1% and 265.9%, respectively. Residing in Central Appalachia subsequent to incarceration was associated with decreased likelihood of use. CONCLUSIONS: In this sample, post-release heroin use was associated with concerning features, such as polydrug use, lack of social satisfaction, and suicidal ideation. These features can serve as clear targets for clinical intervention.

Higher-dose formulations of naloxone were recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of opioid overdose. These products were developed based on projected saturation of high-potency fentanyl analogues in the illicit marketplace although the evidence base for their necessity is still under scrutiny. Concern has been raised that unintended reductions in patient acceptance of naloxone may occur due to increased precipitated withdrawal risk associated with higher naloxone doses. A well-founded and time-sensitive call for representation of people who use drugs in this decision-making process has been made. This study provides the first data on patient perceptions of higher-dose formulations to inform this scientific debate and distribution efforts.Patients (N=1152) entering treatment for opioid use disorder at one of 49 addiction treatment facilities located across the United States completed a preference assessment of naloxone nasal spray formulations. Patients selected a formulation preference across three scenarios (administration for self, administration to others, community responder administration).A majority of respondents that had been administered naloxone previously reported that their most recent overdose reversal included two or more naloxone administrations (59.9%). Most respondents either had no preference (48.4%) or preferred a higher-dose formulation (35.9%) if personally experiencing an overdose. Similar preference distributions were observed for administration to others and by community responders. Relative to standard-dose preference, respondents preferring higher-dose formulations had a greater odds of recent suspected fentanyl exposure.These data inform patients, advocates, and policy-makers considering distribution and utilization of naloxone formulations by reporting perspectives of patients with opioid use and overdose experience. Limited evidence for widespread avoidance of higher-dose formulations was found. As real-world evidence of acceptability and effectiveness emerges, either supporting or refuting the widespread need for higher-dose naloxone formulations, it is the responsibility of the scientific and public health community to be responsive to those data.

People in remission from substance use disorders (SUDs) have a history of using their own experience (also referred to as “experiential knowledge” or “expertise”) to support those in or seeking SUD remission. In recent years, people with this experiential knowledge are being incorporated into research protocols to better guide research questions and inform the real-world uptake of SUD treatments and recovery supports. In these research contexts, however, those with research expertise and addiction rarely speak freely about these overlapping perspectives. The aim of this commentary is to increase awareness regarding the existence of this group (addiction researchers with addiction) and to explore the possibility that their expertise may help advance addiction science while helping to reduce stigma.

Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa Korth., Rubiaceae) is a plant native to Southeast Asia, where it has been used for centuries as a mild stimulant and as medicine for various ailments. More recently, as kratom has gained popularity in the West, United States federal agencies have raised concerns over its safety leading to criminalization in some states and cities. Some of these safety concerns have echoed across media and broad-based health websites and, in the absence of clinical trials to test kratom’s efficacy and safety, considerable confusion has arisen among healthcare providers. There is, however, a growing literature of peer-reviewed science that can inform healthcare providers so that they are better equipped to discuss kratom use with consumers and people considering kratom use within the context of their overall health and safety, while recognizing that neither kratom nor any of its constituent substances or metabolites have been approved as safe and effective for any disease. An especially important gap in safety-related science is the use of kratom in combination with physiologically active substances and medicines. With these caveats in mind we provide a comprehensive overview of the available science on kratom that has the potential to i clarity for healthcare providers and patients. We conclude by making recommendations for best practices in working with people who use kratom.

There is limited understanding regarding kratom use among US adults. Although motivations for use are increasingly understood, typical kratom doses, threshold of (low and high) doses for perceived effectiveness, and effects produced during cessation are not well documented. We aimed to extend prior survey work by recruiting adults with current and past kratom exposure. Our goal was to better understand kratom dosing, changes in routines, and perception of effects, including time to onset, duration, and variability of beneficial and adverse outcomes from use and cessation. Among respondents who reported experiencing acute kratom effects, we also sought to determine if effects were perceived as helpful or unhelpful in meeting daily obligations. Finally, we attempted to detect any signal of a relationship between the amount of kratom consumed weekly and weeks of regular use with ratings of beneficial effects from use and ratings of adverse effects from cessation. We conducted an online survey between April-May 2021 by re-recruiting participants from a separate study who reported lifetime kratom use. A total of 129 evaluable surveys were collected. Most (59.7%) had used kratom >100 times and reported currently or having previously used kratom >4 times per week (62 weeks on average). Under half (41.9%) reported that they considered themselves to be a current “regular kratom user.” A majority (79.8%) reported experiencing acute effects from their typical kratom dose and that onset of effects began in minutes but dissipated within hours. Over a quarter reported that they had increased their kratom dose since use initiation, whereas 18.6% had decreased. Greater severity of unwanted effects from ≥1 day of kratom cessation was predicted by more weeks of regular kratom use (β = 6.74, p = 0.02). Acute kratom effects were largely reported as compatible with, and sometimes helpful in, meeting daily obligations. In the absence of human laboratory studies, survey methods must be refined to more precisely assess dose-effect relationships. These can help inform the development of controlled observational and experimental studies needed to advance the public health understanding of kratom product use.

Objectives To determine whether diagnosed pre-existing health conditions correlate with Kratom demographics and use patterns. Methods A cross-sectional, anonymous US national online survey was conducted among 8049 Kratom users in October, 2016 to obtain demographic, health, and Kratom use pattern information. Results People who use Kratom to mitigate illicit drug dependence self-reported less pain and better overall health than individuals who used Kratom for acute/chronic pain. Self-reported improvements in pre-existing mental health symptoms (attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder/attention deficit disorder, anxiety, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and depression) attributed to Kratom use were greater than those related to somatic symptoms (back pain, rheumatoid arthritis, acute pain, chronic pain, fibromyalgia). Demographic variables, including female sex, older age, employment status, and insurance coverage correlated with increased likelihood of Kratom use. Conclusions Kratom use may serve as a self-treatment strategy for a diverse population of patients with pre-existing health diagnoses. Healthcare providers need to be engaging with patients to address safety concerns and potential limitations of its use in clinical practice for specific health conditions.

In Asia, Mitragyna speciosa (e.g., “kratom”) has been used to mitigate alcohol and drug dependence. Some preliminary findings suggest kratom’s potential use as an informal harm-reduction method in the United States, such as an opioid substitute or as a means of lessening opioid withdrawal symptoms. To determine correlates of past-year kratom use among a sample of polysubstance users enrolled in residential recovery programs in Kentucky, an anonymous survey was completed by clients in April 2017. Logistic regression was used to identify significant associations with past-year kratom use. Of the final sample (N = 478), 10.4% reported past-year kratom use. Past-year heroin use, but not past-year prescription opioid (e.g., oxycodone, hydrocodone) use, was significantly associated with kratom use, such that individuals who reported past-year heroin use were 2.5 times more likely to also report past-year kratom use. Non-prescribed buprenorphine (i.e., Suboxone) use partially mediated the relationship between past-year heroin and kratom use by explaining 36% of the association between the two drugs. Though amphetamines were highly preferred, past-year use was negatively correlated with past-year kratom use. Rates of past-year kratom use were lower than rates of alcohol and illicit drug use. Kratom was not preferred over heroin or prescription opioids.

Background: Over the past decade, availability and use of novel psychoactive substances such as synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRA) have proliferated globally. However, the prevalence of SCRAs use remains uncertain, as does the degree to which individuals reporting SCRA use prefer SCRA to other drugs. Methods: In April 2017, a total of 500 anonymous surveys were completed by clients enrolled in a residential drug recovery program. Chi-square and t tests were used to examine significant differences between those who had ever used SCRA and those who had not. Logistic regression analysis was conducted in order to determine which other substances used within the past 12 months were significantly associated with past-12-month SCRA use. Results: About 69% (68.4%) of clients reported lifetime SCRA use. Those reporting SCRA use were predominantly younger ([Formula: see text] vs. 40.7, P

A survey pertaining to synthetic cathinone (SC) use was completed by 499 polysubstance users enrolled in a residential recovery program in the Southeastern United States. Of the final sample, 28% reported ever SC use. SC-users, compared with nonusers, were more often younger (32.7 vs. 36.0, p = .001), White (93.4% vs. 80.8%, p = .001), and on probation/parole since 2010 (80.9% vs. 70.9%, p = .032). SC-users evidenced extensive drug histories and were less likely to be enrolled in an urban-based program, compared to a rural, Appalachian-based program (73.8% vs. 86.6%, p = .001). Use of synthetic cannabinoids (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.9, p = .044), kratom (AOR = 1.7, p = .045), and inhalants (AOR = 2.3, p = .001) were significantly associated with SC use. Approximately 23% of SC-users preferred SCs to amphetamines or cocaine; however, only 3.6% ranked SC as their most preferred drug. Past-year SC use declined to 6.6%. Among polysubstance users in this sample, SC use may be a potential indicator of versatile and indiscriminate drug-taking.

The view that substance addiction is a brain disease, although widely accepted in the neuroscience community, has become subject to acerbic criticism in recent years. These criticisms state that the brain disease view is deterministic, fails to account for heterogeneity in remission and recovery, places too much emphasis on a compulsive dimension of addiction, and that a specific neural signature of addiction has not been identified. We acknowledge that some of these criticisms have merit, but assert that the foundational premise that addiction has a neurobiological basis is fundamentally sound. We also emphasize that denying that addiction is a brain disease is a harmful standpoint since it contributes to reducing access to healthcare and treatment, the consequences of which are catastrophic. Here, we therefore address these criticisms, and in doing so provide a contemporary update of the brain disease view of addiction. We provide arguments to support this view, discuss why apparently spontaneous remission does not negate it, and how seemingly compulsive behaviors can co-exist with the sensitivity to alternative reinforcement in addiction. Most importantly, we argue that the brain is the biological substrate from which both addiction and the capacity for behavior change arise, arguing for an intensified neuroscientific study of recovery. More broadly, we propose that these disagreements reveal the need for multidisciplinary research that integrates neuroscientific, behavioral, clinical, and sociocultural perspectives.

Objectives Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa Korth.), an indigenous medicinal plant, has been widely used as a traditional remedy in Southeast Asia. However, its combined consumption with other substances has received scarce attention. This study investigates the use of kratom among adults with a history of using heroin and methamphetamine in Malaysia. Methods A total of 332 patients who were mandated to undergo drug rehabilitation participated in this cross-sectional study. The study data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire. Results The majority were males (95%, n = 314/332) and Malays (98%, n = 325/332) with a mean age of 32.3 years (SD = 9.16). Over two thirds of the respondents used kratom to alleviate heroin withdrawal symptoms and to reduce methamphetamine intake; 59% used it as a substitute for heroin and methamphetamine. A similar proportion used kratom to reduce heroin intake (58%), while only 15% used it for its euphoric effects. Multivariate analysis showed that previous attendees of government rehabilitation programs had lower odds of using kratom as a heroin substitute. Conclusions The potential of kratom to alleviate heroin withdrawal symptoms, and to reduce methamphetamine and heroin intake, among people who co-use heroin and methamphetamine warrants further research.

Background: Originally believed to be an atypical antidepressant acting at serotonin transporters, tianeptine is now known to also be an atypical agonist at mu-opioid receptors. Its nonmedical use may be increasing amidst the broader context of novel drug and supplement use. Objectives: To analyze social-media text from current, former, and prospective tianeptine users for better understanding of their conceptualizations of tianeptine, motives for and patterns of use, and reported benefits and harms. Methods: Reddit posts were obtained and thematically coded; additional quantitative analyses were conducted. Results: A total of 210 posts mentioning tianeptine were made between 2012 and 2020. Eighteen thematic categories were identified, 10 of which were consistent with expected themes. Two independent raters coded all text, generating 1,382 unique codes, of which 1,090 were concordant (78.9% interrater agreement). Tianeptine use was frequently associated with use of other drugs, particularly kratom, phenibut, and racetams. People conceptualized and variously used tianeptine as an opioid, antidepressant, and “nootropic” (cognitive enhancer). Between 2014 and 2020, mentions of positive effects decreased, while mentions of adverse effects and withdrawal increased. Motivations for use included substitution or withdrawal mitigation for other drugs (especially opioids) and for kratom itself; self-treatment for psychiatric symptoms; and improvement of quality of life, mood, or performance. Descriptions of tolerance, withdrawal, and addiction were evident. Intravenous use was rare and strongly discouraged, with detrimental effects described. Conclusion: Tianeptine is recognized as an opioid (though not only an opioid) in online communities. Posts describe benefits, acute risks, and patterns of co-use that warrant greater clinical attention.

Background We previously showed, in people starting treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), that stress is neither necessary nor sufficient for lapses to drug use to occur, despite an association between the two. Both theoretical clarity and case-by-case prediction accuracy may require initial differentiation among patients. Aim To examine: (a) evidence for distinct overall trajectories of momentary stress during OUD treatment, (b) relationships between stress trajectory and treatment response, and (c) relationships between stress trajectory and momentary changes in stress and craving prior to lapses. Methods We used ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to collect ratings of stress and craving 3x/day for up to 16 weeks in 211 outpatients during agonist treatment for OUD. With growth mixture models, we identified trajectories of stress. We used mixed effect models to examine trajectory-group differences in the dynamics of stress and craving just before lapses to any drug use. Results We identified four trajectories of stress: Increasing (13.7 %); Moderate and Stable (23.7 %); Declining and Increasing (18 %); and Low (44.6 %). Overall drug use and opioid craving were lowest in the Low Stress group. Overall drug use was highest in the Moderate and Stable group. Alcohol use and opioid craving were highest in the Increasing Stress group. Opioid craving increased before lapse for most groups, but stress increased before lapses for only the Moderate and Stable group. Conclusion There are natural groupings of participants with distinct patterns of stress severity during OUD treatment. Momentary stress/craving/lapse associations may be better characterized when these groupings are considered first.

Background: Kratom is taken to self-treat pain and symptoms of psychiatric disorders, including substance-use disorders (SUDs) and opioid withdrawal. Before COVID-19, kratom use was increasing in the US, however, there are few published data on whether that trend continued during the COVID-19 pandemic, which could have affected kratom use in multiple ways. Aim: To examine COVID-19-related changes in kratom use and how these changes were experienced, relative to changes in other commonly used substances. Methods: Using Amazon Mechanical Turk, 2615 evaluable surveys were completed between September 2020 and March 2021. Responses from past-month and past-year kratom-using adults (N = 174) indicating changes for the better or worse were examined using generalized linear mixed effects models, and relevant open-text responses (n = 85) were thematically coded. Results: For kratom 33% (n = 58) reported a Covid-related increase and 24% (n = 42) reported a Covid-related decrease. Controlling for changes in amount used, alcohol (OR = 5.02), tobacco (OR = 4.72), and nonmedical opioid use (OR = 3.42) were all more likely to have changed for the worse, compared with kratom use. Relative to decreases in kratom use, decreases in alcohol (OR = 3.21) and tobacco (OR = 6.18) use were more likely to be changes for the better. Cannabis use was the only substance to display a probability lower than 50% of being a decrease for the better, and of the increases, cannabis use displayed the highest probability of being for the better. Conclusions: Increases in kratom and cannabis use were less likely than alcohol and tobacco to be reported as changes for the worse, and decreases in kratom and cannabis use were more likely than alcohol and tobacco to be reported as changes for the better. These findings indicate that people differently conceptualize their relationships with kratom and cannabis, compared to their relationships with alcohol and tobacco.

E-cigarette use has increased in the US, yet, in some regions rates of cigarette use remain high.To describe the prevalence and features of lifetime and past-year e-cigarette use among a clinical sample of polysubstance users in Kentucky, and to determine significant associations of past-year e-cigarette use.Of the final sample (N = 497), 83.5% reported having ever used e-cigarettes and 97.2% reported having ever used cigarettes. These rates surpass those found among Kentucky's general population. Compared to those who did not report e-cigarette use, e-cigarette users were more likely to be younger (mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"mml:movermml:mrowmml:mix/mml:mi/mml:mrowmml:mo¯/mml:mo/mml:mover/mml:math= 33.4 vs. 43.6, p.001) and White (88.2.1% vs. 62.5%, p = .001). E-cigarette users showed higher rates for lifetime incarceration (91.1% vs. 72.8%, p = .001) and past-year arrest (75.0% vs. 47.5%, p = .001). This group also presented with more severe substance use history and lower mean age for illicit drug use initiation (mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"mml:movermml:mrowmml:mix/mml:mi/mml:mrowmml:mo¯/mml:mo/mml:mover/mml:math= 13.8 vs. 16.4, p = .001). Approximately 65% of the sample reported past-year e-cigarette use and 96.6% reported past-year cigarette use. Logistic regression indicated that being younger (AOR = .973, p = .030), White (AOR = 1.92, .046), having a past-year arrest (AOR = 1.73, p = .047) and having used cigarettes (AOR = 8.93, p = .001) or kratom (AOR = 3.04, p = .025) within the past year were significantly associated with past-year e-cigarette use.E-cigarette use was related to more severe drug-using patterns. Rates of dual tobacco use among this sample are high, particularly among younger individuals. In ecological contexts where cigarette use remains normative, it is likely that dual use will persist for nicotine-dependent, polysubstance-using individuals.

BACKGROUND: Mitragyna speciosa, referred to as “kratom”, is increasingly used in the United States for self-treating pain, psychiatric, and substance use disorder symptoms. It is used by some to attenuate opioid withdrawal and as a longer-term drug substitute. Most self-report data have come from online surveys, small in-person surveys, and case reports. These may not be representative of the broader kratom-using population. PURPOSE: Analyze user-generated social media posts to determine if independent, descriptive accounts are generally consistent with prior U.S. kratom survey findings and gain a more nuanced understanding of kratom use patterns. METHODS: Reddit posts mentioning kratom from 42 subreddits between June 2019-July 2020 were coded by two independent raters. FINDINGS: Relevant posts (number of comments, upvotes, and downvotes) from 1,274 posts comprised the final sample (n=280). Of the 1,521 codes applied, 1,273 (83.69%) were concordant. Desirable kratom effects were described among a majority, but so too were adverse effects. Reports of kratom as acute self-treatment for opioid withdrawal were more prominent compared to longer-term opioid substitution. Quantitative analysis found higher kratom doses associated (p

Kratom use in the West has increased recently, yet the prevalence and motives for use among individuals with a history of substance use disorder (SUD) have not been fully examined. Kratom has been documented as a means of treating chronic pain, mitigating drug dependence, and easing withdrawal symptoms, yet it is unclear if substance users are utilizing kratom as a self-medication. Abuse liability, side effects, and overall appeal of kratom remain uncertain.In April 2017, an anonymous survey regarding kratom use and motivations was completed by clients enrolled in a 12-Step-oriented residential program. 500 respondents with a self-reported history of SUD completed the survey.20.8% of respondents endorsed lifetime kratom use and 10.2% reported past-12-month use. Kratom-users were younger (=32.1 vs. 35.9, p0.001) and were more versatile substance users. A majority (68.9%) of kratom-users reported having used the drug as a means of reducing or abstaining from non-prescription opioids (NPO) and/or heroin, and 64.1% reported using kratom as a substitute for NPO/heroin. 18.4% of kratom-users reported using the drug due to a disability or chronic pain. One-third of kratom-users stated that kratom was a helpful substance and that they would try it again. However, kratom was not preferred and was indicated as having less appeal than NPO, heroin, amphetamines, and Suboxone.Among substance users, kratom use may be initiated for a variety of reasons, including as a novel form of harm-reduction or drug substitution, particularly in the context of dependence and withdrawal from other substances.

Use of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) such as synthetic cannabinoids (e.g., "Spice," "Serenity") and cathinones (e.g., "bath salts") has proliferated in recent years; however, there is a gap in research examining prevalence among offender samples. This study examined demographics, drug use, mental health characteristics, and criminal histories of NPS users compared to non-NPS users within an offender sample entering drug treatment. Using logistic regression analysis, combined 2013-2015 assessment data were examined (N = 8,791). NPS users offended more often (x̄ = 10.3), were more likely to have experienced homelessness (12.2%), and to have lived in a metro area (59.0%). NPS users reported significantly more past-year drug use, including substances not readily detected by standard urine analysis (e.g., hallucinogens, alcohol, and inhalants). Individuals with higher anxiety symptom counts (OR = 1.07; p .001) and those who reported drinking to intoxication (OR = 1.30; p .001) had an increased likelihood of NPS use. Older individuals (OR = 0.95; p .001) and those who began using drugs at an older age (OR = 0.95; p .001) were less likely to report NPS use. NPS use may be a marker of more severe using patterns in an offender sample. Future investigation should focus on NPS use as a possible method for bypassing drug testing measures.

Opioid analgesics are commonly administered to hospitalized patients to treat acute pain, but these drugs put patients at risk for serious adverse events, such as unintended advancing sedation, respiratory depression, and death. Nurses play an important role in keeping patients safe by making clinical decisions about the frequency and intensity with which patients receiving IV and epidural opioids should be monitored. To make sound clinical judgments, nurses must be aware of the factors that place patients at elevated risk for adverse opioid-related effects and know how to screen and assess patients for these risks. The authors review the literature on unintended advancing sedation and respiratory depression associated with opioid administration and present evidence-based recommendations for clinical decision making and patient monitoring, using both nursing assessments and electronic technologies.

Mitragyna speciosa ('kratom') contains mu opioid partial agonists. It is widely available, and occasionally used as a home remedy for opioid use disorder. The Drug Enforcement Agency considers kratom a drug of concern; however, prevalence of use and role in drug misuse are unknown. This study aimed to characterize kratom use in the United States.Cross-sectional Survey of Non-Medical Use of Prescription Drugs (NMURx) Program, 2018 third quarter and 2019 first quarter.A validated non-probability online survey in the United States.A total of 59 714 respondents aged 18 years or older, weighted to represent the adult US population (n = 252 063 800).In addition to prevalence of past-year kratom and other drug use, behavior proportions were estimated. The Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST-10) estimated consequences of drug abuse.The estimated prevalence of past-year kratom use in the adult US population was 0.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.7-0.9], representing 2 031 803 adults. Life-time prevalence was 1.3% (95% CI = 1.2-1.4), representing 3 353 624 adults. Kratom users were younger (mean 35 years, P 0.001), with higher proportions of males (61.0 versus 48.6%, P 0.001), students (14.1 versus 7.5%, P 0.001) and health-care professionals (9.7 versus 4.5%, P 0.001) and fewer bachelor's/advanced degree graduates (33.4 versus 42.6%, P 0.001) compared with non-users. Results were inconclusive on whether there was a difference in kratom use by race, household income or employment status. Among those with past-year kratom use, 36.7% (95% CI = 32.1-41.3) non-medically used prescription opioids, 21.7% (95% CI = 18.0-25.5) used illicit opioids, 54.4% (95% CI = 49.5-59.3) used another illicit drug and 67.1% (95% CI = 62.5-71.8) used cannabis. The DAST-10 profile was more often substantial/severe in kratom users (21 versus 1%, P 0.001) compared with non-users.Estimated United States past-year prevalence of kratom use is 0.8%, and kratom users tend to have more serious substance abuse profiles than non-users or users of cannabis, alcohol or cigarettes. To our knowledge, this is the first description of kratom use at the national level.