No abstract

BackgroundStimulants are considered the first-line treatment for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in the US and they are used in other indications. Stimulants are also diverted for non-medical purposes. Ethnic and regional differences in ADHD diagnosis and in stimulant use have been identified in earlier research. The objectives of this report were to examine the pharmacoepidemiological pattern of these controlled substances over the past decade and to conduct a regional analysis.MethodsData (drug weights) reported to the US Drug Enforcement Administration’s Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System for four stimulants (amphetamine, methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine, and methamphetamine) were obtained from 2006 to 2016 for Unites States/Territories. Correlations between state level use (mg/person) and Hispanic population were completed.ResultsAmphetamine use increased 2.5 fold from 2006 to 2016 (7.9 to 20.0 tons). Methylphenidate use, at 16.5 tons in 2006, peaked in 2012 (19.4 tons) and subsequently showed a modest decline (18.6 tons in 2016). The consumption per municipality significantly increased 7.6% for amphetamine and 5.5% for lisdexamfetamine but decreased 2.7% for methylphenidate (all p < .0005) from 2015 to 2016. Pronounced regional differences were also observed. Lisdexamfetamine use in 2016 was over thirty-fold higher in the Southern US (43.8 mg/person) versus the Territories (1.4 mg/person). Amphetamine use was about one-third lower in the West (48.1 mg/person) relative to the Northeastern (75.4 mg/person, p < .05) or the Midwestern (69.9 mg/person, p ≤ .005) states. States with larger Hispanic populations had significantly lower methylphenidate (r(49) = -0.63), lisdexamfetamine (B, r(49) = -0.49), and amphetamine (r(49) = -0.43) use.ConclusionsTotal stimulant usage doubled in the last decade. There were dynamic changes but also regional disparities in the use of stimulant medications. Future research is needed to better understand the reasons for the sizable regional and ethnic variations in use of these controlled substances.

Objectives. To identify prepharmacy variables that predicted graduate performance on the North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) test. Methods. Undergraduate and pharmacy school transcripts for 424 students admitted to the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center (TTUHSC) Doctor of Pharmacy program from the fall of 1996 to the fall of 2001 were reviewed. NAPLEX scores were provided by the Texas State Board of Pharmacy (TSBP). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS, 11.5. Results. Grade point average, composite Pharmacy College Admission Test (PCAT) score, and California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) score were each positively correlated with NAPLEX score (p , 0.001 for each). Type of school where organic chemistry was completed; age; advanced courses taken in chemistry, biology, and math; and attainment of a BS, BA, or MS degree were not significantly correlated with NAPLEX score (p . 0.05). When comparing students who successfully graduated and passed the NAPLEX with students who were academically suspended or who failed the NAPLEX, there were significant differences in mean PCAT scores, CCTST score, and age (p , 0.05 for all). Stepwise regression analysis applying all admission variables except PCAT subscores revealed a correlation between predictors (composite PCAT, prepharmacy GPA, and age) and NAPLEX score (p , 0.001). Conclusion. Composite PCAT score was the strongest predictor of success and failure on the NAPLEX. However, the combined predictive ability of PCAT and CCTST scores, prepharmacy GPA, and age was relatively low. Thus, a full review of each candidate's application is justified.

No abstract