CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 229Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prescription Opioid Abuse and Diversion in an Urban Community: The Results of an Ultrarapid Assessment

Open access
Inciardi, James A., Surratt, Hilary L., Cicero, Theodore J., Beard, Ronald A.·2009·Pain Medicine
DOI 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2009.00603.xPMC PMC2719877
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Prescription-drug diversion is a topic about which comparatively little is known, and systematic information garnered from prescription-drug abusers and dealers on the specific mechanisms of diversion is extremely limited. DESIGN: A pilot ultrarapid assessment was carried out in Wilmington, Delaware, during December 2006 to better understand the scope and dynamics of prescription-drug abuse and diversion. This involved focus groups with prescription-drug abusers and key informant interviews with police, regulatory officials, prescription-drug dealers, and pill brokers. SETTING AND PATIENTS: The research team recruited focus group participants from the two residential substance abuse treatment programs in Wilmington reporting the highest proportions of prescription drug abusing clients. A total of six focus groups were conducted with 32 patients in these two programs. Dealers were recruited from the same treatment facilities, and three in-depth interviews were completed. In-depth interviews were also conducted with two prescription pill brokers recruited through the authors' existing contacts in the drug abusing community. Six in-depth interviews were conducted with representatives from a number of Delaware agencies-the Attorney General's Office, the Department of Professional Regulation, the State Police; the Wilmington Police Department, and the Newark Police Department. MEASURES: In-depth interview and focus group guides were developed for each of the target populations. The in-depth interviews with police and regulatory officials focused on the extent of prescription drug abuse and diversion in the community, the types of drugs most commonly diverted, and mechanisms being used to channel the drugs to the illicit market. The focus group areas of inquiry with prescription drug abusers included general perceptions of the prescription drug problem in Delaware, sources and mechanisms of access to prescription drugs, popularity and prices of prescription medications on the street, as well as the initiation and progression of prescription and illicit drug abuse. RESULTS: The primary sources of prescription drugs on the street were the elderly, patients with pain, and doctor shoppers, as well as pill brokers and dealers who work with all of the former. The popularity of prescription drugs in the street market was rooted in the abusers' perceptions of these drugs as 1) less stigmatizing; 2) less dangerous; and, 3) less subject to legal consequences than illicit drugs. For many, the abuse of prescription opioids also appeared to serve as a gateway to heroin use. CONCLUSION: The diversion of prescription opioids might be reduced through physician education focusing on 1) recognizing that a patient is misusing and/or diverting prescribed medications; 2) considering a patient's risk for opioid misuse before initiating opioid therapy; and 3) understanding the variation in the abuse potential of different opioid medications currently on the market. Patient education also appears appropriate in the areas of safeguarding medications, disposal of unused medications, and understanding the consequences of manipulating physicians and selling their medications.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2009.00603.x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws: Diversion Prevention and Control Uniform Controlled Substances Act. Chicago, IL: National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws; 1994.
  2. Meier B . Pain Killer: A “Wonder” Drug's Trail of Addiction and Death. Emmaus, PA: Rodale Press; 2003.
  3. Conlin, 1990, States starting to target Rx drugs sold on the streets, Drug Topics, 6, 44
  4. Weathermon, 1999, Controlled substances diversion: Who attempts it and how, U.S. Pharmacist, 24, 32
  5. Brown R . Mother, son face drug charges. The News Journal. Friday, December 15, 2006: B3.
  6. Brown R . Police respond to two separate incidents. The News Journal. Saturday, March 11, 2006: B5.
  7. Taylor AL Sanginiti T . Police & fire. The News Journal. Tuesday, January 31, 2006: B3.
  8. Parra E Keith R . Sokoloff guilty of selling prescription medicine for profit. The News Journal. Saturday, July 22, 2006: B3.
  9. Schnoll, 2006, Risk management programs: A supplement to the controlled substances act, Update: Food Drug Law Regul Educ, 4, 19
  10. 10.1037//0893-164X.9.4.242 · DOI
  11. Alphama Pharmaceuticals. Tips, Photographs, & Explanations: A Practical Guide for Prescribing Controlled Substances, 1st edition. Stamford, CT: PharmaCom Group Inc.; 2007.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 227

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Inciardi, J. A., Surratt, H. L., Cicero, T. J., & Beard, R. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Delaware (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Inciardi, James A.
ORCID
Venue
Pain Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-04
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
537-548
ISSN
  • 1526-2375 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-4637
DOI
10.1111/j.1526-4637.2009.00603.x
PMC
PMC2719877
OpenAlex
W2079126110
Cited by
229
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 17
FWCI
16.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1 (tdm, 2344 d)
Locations
  • Pain Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA021330)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Keywords
prescription opioid abuse, prescription drug diversion, doctor shopping, elderly patients, pain patients, opioid misuse, physician training, Wilmington, Delaware, opioid abuse potential, addiction treatment programs, opioid prescribing guidelines, controlled substance regulation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Analgesics, Opioid, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Mass Screening, Urban Population, Focus Groups, Substance-Related Disorders, Prescription Drugs

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