Drug checking identifies counterfeit alprazolam tablets

Tobias, Samuel; Shapiro, Alan; Grant, Cameron; Patel, Priya; Lysyshyn, Mark; Ti, Lianping

doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108300

Cited by 37 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Publication bias may limit the representativeness of the included literature, as studies not showing positive impacts of DCS could be under‐represented. Timing of the search is another limitation, and several peer‐reviewed articles have been published since [ 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 ], including one Canadian study among drug sellers [ 100 ]. Our eligibility criteria excluded studies where DCS were not implemented although they may have reported outcomes on our domains, such as facilitators and barriers to use of DCS [ 112 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Publication bias may limit the representativeness of the included literature, as studies not showing positive impacts of DCS could be under-represented. Timing of the search is another limitation, and several peer-reviewed articles have been published since [99][100][101][102][103][104][105][106][107][108][109][110][111], including one Canadian study among drug sellers [100].…”

Section: Study Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Drug checking services for people who use drugs: a systematic review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims Drug checking services provide people who use drugs with chemical analysis results of their drug samples while simultaneously monitoring the unregulated drug market. We sought to identify and synthesize literature on the following domains: (a) the influence of drug checking services on the behaviour of people who use drugs; (b) monitoring of drug markets by drug checking services; and (c) outcomes related to models of drug checking services. Methods Systematic review. A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science and Dissertations and Theses Global. Eligible studies were peer‐reviewed articles and conference abstracts or grey literature, published in any language since 1990 and including original data on the domains. We assessed risk of bias for quantitative peer‐reviewed articles reporting on behaviour or models of drug checking services using National Institutes of Health tools. Results We screened 2463 titles and abstracts and 156 full texts, with 90 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Most (n = 65, 72.2%) were from Europe and used cross‐sectional designs (n = 79, 87.7%). Monitoring of drug markets by drug checking services (n = 63, 70%) was the most reported domain, followed by the influence of drug checking services on behaviour (n = 31, 34.4%), including intent to use, actual use and disposal of the drug, and outcomes related to models of drug checking services (n = 17, 18.9%). The most common outcome measures were detection of unexpected substances (n = 50, 55.6%), expected substances (n = 44, 48.9%), new psychoactive substances (n = 40, 44.4%) and drugs of concern (n = 32, 36.5%) by drug checking services. Conclusions Drug checking services appear to influence behavioural intentions and the behaviour of people who use drugs, particularly when results from drug checking services are unexpected or drugs of concern. Monitoring of drug markets by drug checking services is well established in Europe, and increasingly in North America. Concerns about drug contents and negative health consequences facilitate the use of drug checking services; lack of concern; trust in drug sellers; lack of accessibility of drug checking services; and legal and privacy concerns are barriers to use.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Drug checking services for people who use drugs: a systematic review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the United States, the use and distribution of fentanyl test strips is a relatively new but increasingly common drug checking strategy employed by SSPs and other programs, typically provided alongside harm reduction materials like sterile syringes and naloxone [16]. More complex technologies, like portable spectrometry devices, have been used for drug checking in several European countries since at least the 1990s [15] yet are only now emerging as an approach to drug checking in the United States [17][18][19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Bronze Age of drug checking: barriers and facilitators to implementing advanced drug checking amidst police violence and COVID-19

Carroll

Mackin²,

Schmidt³

et al. 2022

Harm Reduct J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Unpredictable fluctuations in the illicit drug market increase overdose risk. Drug checking, or the use of technology to provide insight into the contents of illicit drug products, is an overdose prevention strategy with an emerging evidence base. The use of portable spectrometry devices to provide point-of-service analysis of the contents of illicit drugs been adopted by harm reduction organizations internationally but is only emerging in the United States. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators of implementing drug checking services with spectrometry devices in an urban harm reduction organization and syringe service program serving economically marginalized people who use drugs in Boston, Massachusetts (USA). Methods In-vivo observations and semi-structured interviews with harm reduction staff and participants were conducted between March 2019 and December 2020. We used the consolidated framework for implementation research to identify implementation barriers and facilitators. Results This implementation effort was facilitated by the organization’s shared culture of harm reduction—which fostered shared implementation goals and beliefs about the intervention among staff persons—its horizontal organizational structure, strong identification with the organization among staff, and strong relationships with external funders. Barriers to implementation included the technological complexity of the advanced spectroscopy devices utilized for drug checking. Program staff indicated that commercially available spectroscopy devices are powerful but not always well-suited for drug checking efforts, describing their technological capacities as “the Bronze Age of Drug Checking.” Other significant barriers include the legal ambiguity of drug checking services, disruptive and oppositional police activity, and the responses and programmatic changes demanded by the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions For harm reduction organizations to be successful in efforts to implement and scale drug checking services, these critical barriers—especially regressive policing policies and prohibitive costs—need to be addressed. Future research on the impact of policy changes to reduce the criminalization of substance use or to provide explicit legal frameworks for the provision of this and other harm reduction services may be merited.

show abstract

“…The presence of DBZDS in counterfeit benzodiazepine tablets has been widely reported, 7–10 but other non‐benzodiazepine class drugs have also been encountered 4 . Opioids such as fentanyl, U‐47700 and even a potential fentanyl precursor have been identified, 7,8,11 as well as synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists and tryptamines 12,13 . There have also been multiple reports of an unusual combination of the pharmaceuticals adamantine, cyproheptadine and promethazine, frequently in conjunction with a DBZD, in counterfeit tablets 8,14 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What's in fake ‘Xanax’?: A dosage survey of designer benzodiazepines in counterfeit pharmaceutical tablets

Blakey

Thompson

Matheson

et al. 2021

Drug Testing and Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The identification of a range of different drugs within counterfeit benzodiazepine tablets has been widely reported; however, limited information is available on the dosage of these products. A rapid dosage survey of 46 counterfeit benzodiazepine tablets from 20 seizures was conducted over a 6-month period between April and September 2020. Existing methods utilised for the determination of benzodiazepines in toxicology specimens were applied to assess the dosage of four benzodiazepines detected across five different counterfeit benzodiazepine presentations. The highest dosage variation was observed for etizolam with a range of 0.7-8.3 mg per tablet. This report demonstrates the variability in drug content and dosage that can occur between visually similar counterfeit tablets, even when co-packaged within the same seizure, highlighting the potential public harm posed by these counterfeit medications.

show abstract

Drug checking identifies counterfeit alprazolam tablets

Cited by 37 publications

References 20 publications

Drug checking services for people who use drugs: a systematic review

Drug checking services for people who use drugs: a systematic review

The Bronze Age of drug checking: barriers and facilitators to implementing advanced drug checking amidst police violence and COVID-19

What's in fake ‘Xanax’?: A dosage survey of designer benzodiazepines in counterfeit pharmaceutical tablets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About