Cited by 37Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Trends and key correlates of prescription opioid injection misuse in the United States

Jones, Christopher M.·2018·Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

Background Despite concerns over increasing harms associated with prescription opioid injection misuse, there is a paucity of research on the magnitude, characteristics, injection practices, and syringe sources for people who inject prescription opioids; limiting the implementation of targeted policy and programmatic initiatives.Materials and methods Data from the 2003 through 2014 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health were used to estimate prescription opioid injection trends and examine risky injection practices and syringe sources for people who inject prescription opioids. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify characteristics associated with prescription opioid injection.Results Among people 12years or older, the rate of prescription opioid injection misuse increased from 1.6 per 1000 in 2003-2005 to 2.7 per 1000 in 2012-2014 (p value for trend <0.05). Groups with increased odds of prescription opioid injection included: males, non-Hispanic whites, having an annual household income <$50,000, the uninsured, people with Medicaid, and people with past-year use disorders for cocaine, heroin, or prescription opioids. Risky injection practices such as reusing a needle and sharing needles were common among people with a history of prescription opioid injection misuse.Conclusion This study found significant increases in prescription opioid injection misuse trends in the U.S. These findings underscore the need to bring to scale evidence-based interventions to increase the provision of medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorders and expand access to comprehensive risk-reduction services for people who inject drugs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.10.018

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jones, C. M.
Affiliations
George Washington University (US)
Corresponding author
Jones, Christopher M.
Venue
Addictive Behaviors
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
78
Pages
145-152
ISSN
0306-4603 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2769808526
Cited by
37
References
38
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 5
FWCI
6.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
opioid misuse, intravenous drug use, needle sharing, needle reuse, opioid use disorder, Medicaid, uninsured population, cocaine dependence, heroin addiction, medication-assisted treatment, drug use trends
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Analgesics, Opioid, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Opioid-Related Disorders, United States, Substance Abuse, Intravenous, Age Distribution, Young Adult, Prescription Drug Misuse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review