Home Blog Page 37

Addiction Treatment marketing

 

Make sure your marketing makes a splash!

When you promote your business and the services you offer, it has to be done in the right way. You’ve spent years nurturing a brand that’s synonymous with quality healthcare and you need to showcase trustworthiness, a safe and caring environment, and the expertise of your team. You need to convince people to look at what you have to offer, and reassure them that they have made the right choice by putting their trust in you. 

Before you even get that far, you need to reach people, make them sit up and take notice of what you offer and accept your invitation to take a closer look – not always easy when there’s so much competing for our attention.

 

How can we help you with this?

How can we help you with this? Well here at DDN, we have been producing a magazine for the addictions sector for 16 years. Over that time we have learned about – and with – our readership. We have followed changes in the sector and like to think we know what we are talking about – the magazine is read by people in a very wide variety of jobs and settings, including treatment workers, politicians, policymakers and service users. We like to think that we make complex information readable and digestible for busy people. We have also become a trusted brand.

Work with a team who understands your market

The team at DDN are in a unique position being experts in marketing and a leading authority in this sector. 

Get in touch

DDN is produced by a small independent publishing team, enabling us to maintain our integrity, react quickly to new ideas and opportunities, and seek out the people we love working with. We are at home in this sector, which is why we are now inviting opportunities to work with us. Our years of writing news and features, shaping articles from all manner of source material, shaping articles of all standards and styles into readable articles for the magazine and website have made us adept at creating copy for all occasions and styles of media. 

Furthermore, we offer deep-seated understanding and experience of the commercial aspects of trading in the sector. Every penny you spend on promotion and advertising must work for you – we know that, because DDN is a free magazine funded by advertising. Every free copy of DDN that lands on someone’s desk must have the print, postage and production costs earned by advertising and sponsorship. We can share our knowledge to help your budget go further.

Take the first step

We like to think we are very approachable! So why not get in touch by dropping us a line or giving us a quick call? If you think we can help or you want to know more about what we might be able to offer, we’ll be more than happy to expand our ideas. We’re very conscious of budget constraints and uncertainty in the current climate, so our suggestions will be based on realism. And you might have fun working with us!

Other things we offer… 

Our team offers many (so many!) years of experience in editorial, sales, design, web design and content, marketing and online promotion –including SEO and ad words campaigns that have become so important to being seen and searchable. We have developed the skills of a fully fledged communications agency and can confidently and capably manage campaigns, as shown by successful promo campaigns for several organisations in the sector. 

If you run your campaign with us you will be talking to a team that not only knows about the addictions sector, but can bring knowledge and ideas to you from the get-go. Raising your profile depends on your comms team having the knowledge and understanding how to put your messages across using the right language – including terminology that won’t offend. 

We offer straightforward liaison, trustworthy and accurate results and the benefit of years of experience. We can help you raise your profile and punch above your weight, without the costs of maintaining an in-house operation.

In a nutshell, we are mighty fine value for money!

Get in touch to find out more

e: ian@cjwellings.com  t: 07711 950 300

Tobacco plan aims for ‘smoke-free generation’

The government has published its new tobacco control plan, outlining that its vision is ‘nothing less than to create a smoke-free generation’. Earlier this year more than 1,000 doctors and other health professionals wrote an open letter to Theresa May and Jeremy Hunt calling for a new control plan to be published ‘without delay’ as the previous one had expired at the end of 2015 (DDN, February, page 5).

Towards a smoke-free generation: a tobacco control plan for England comes less than a week after the publication of the delayed 2017 drug strategy, and aims to cut the number of 15-year-olds who smoke from 8 per cent to 3 per cent or less, as well as reduce the adult smoking rate from 15.5 per cent to 12 per cent.

While smoking rates have fallen from just under 20 per cent at the start of the decade to their lowest ever level (DDN, July/August, page 4) the plan’s objective is to reduce the ‘inequality gap’ in smoking prevalence, as smoking accounts for approximately half the difference in life expectancy between society’s richest and poorest. There are still 7.3m adult smokers in England and ‘smoking and its associated harms continue to fall hardest on some of the poorest and most vulnerable’, the document states. Among the plan’s other commitments are to improve data collection on smoking and mental health and provide access to training for all health professionals on how to help patients – especially those in mental health services – to quit.

Anti-smoking charity ASH welcomed the ‘step change in ambition’ represented by the vision of a smoke-free generation, but stressed that it was vital that the correct funding was in place to achieve it. Recent analysis by the King’s Fund found that reductions in local authority public health spending as a result of government cuts threatened smoking cessation alongside drug and alcohol services.

‘Funding must be found if the government is to achieve its vision of a “smoke-free generation”,’ said ASH chief executive Deborah Arnott. ‘The tobacco industry should be made to pay a through a licence fee on the “polluter pays” principle. Tobacco manufacturers are some of the most profitable companies on earth; they can easily afford the costs of radical action to drive down smoking rates.’

Document at www.gov.uk

Recovery focus for updated ‘Orange Book’

The government has published the updated version of its Drug misuse and dependence: UK guidelines on clinical management, usually referred to as the Orange Book. While endorsing much of the 2007 guidelines, the 2017 version has a ‘stronger emphasis on recovery and a holistic approach to the interventions that can support recovery’, it states.

The updated version also includes new guidelines on NPS and club drugs, mental health, prison-based treatment and naloxone provision, as well as misuse of prescription and over-the-counter drugs and smoking cessation.

Prof Sir John Strang: Treatment landscape has changed dramatically.

‘Guidelines guide – they are not intended to dictate the precise treatment for each patient,’ says Professor Sir John Strang – who chaired the working group that updated the 2007 version – in his introduction. While there had been positive developments in areas including peer support, mutual aid and hepatitis C treatment, there remained ‘marked weakness’ in support for social integration, such as housing and employment. The treatment landscape had also changed dramatically since the last version, he points out, with ‘NHS specialist providers much diminished’ and major independent or third-sector agencies now the main providers of treatment ‘in a variety of collaborative arrangements’.

The huge number of NPS and an aging cohort of people with long-term heroin dependence problems meant that treatment was ‘increasingly complex’, he states, making effective coordination between services vital. ‘This includes ever greater integration with mainstream physical and mental healthcare.’

Meanwhile, Ireland has launched its ‘health-led’ response to the country’s drug and alcohol use, Reducing harm, supporting recovery, which includes both the introduction of a pilot supervised injection facility in Dublin city centre (DDN, December 2015, page 4) and the establishment of a working group to look at ‘alternative approaches to the possession for personal use of small quantities of illegal drugs’. It also includes a commitment to expand treatment services and a targeted youth services scheme for disadvantaged young people, as well as a 50-point action plan from 2017 to 2020 and ‘scope to develop further actions’ until 2025.

Leo Varadkar: Addiction is a public health issue.

‘Treating substance abuse and drug addiction as a public health issue, rather than a criminal justice issue, helps individuals, helps families, and helps communities,’ said Ireland’s Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar. ‘Ireland has a problem with substance misuse. Rates of drug use in Ireland have risen significantly over the past decade, with the greatest increases among younger people. These issues highlight the need to intervene effectively to reduce the harms associated with substance misuse, and combat the underlying reasons for the demand for drugs.’

Reducing harm, supporting recovery – a health-led response to drug and alcohol use in Ireland 2017-2025

Becoming free of hepatitis C

To mark World Hepatitis Day, the I’m Worth… campaign is launching a survey – and needs your views.

In England, around 160,000 people are infected with hepatitis C, the majority of whom are from marginalised and under-served groups in society, such as people who inject drugs (PWID). (1)

If left untreated, hepatitis C can cause serious or potentially life threatening complications like liver cancer. (2)

To mark this year’s World Hepatitis Day on 28 July, DDN is partnering with the I’m Worth… campaign to conduct a survey of DDN readers. I’m Worth… aims to address the stigma that many people with hepatitis C face, encouraging and empowering people living with hepatitis C to access diagnosis, care and services no matter how or when they were infected.

The I’m Worth… survey aims to gain insight into the opportunities and challenges that you are faced with when working with those affected by hepatitis C. We are hoping to understand the barriers to patient engagement, the most effective channels of communication, the resources available and any unmet needs.

We want to hear from YOU, the people working day to day with PWIDs and other marginalised groups where there is a high prevalence of people with, or at risk of, hepatitis C.

Please complete our short survey to share your thoughts on what support, resources and care could improve the lives of those affected by hepatitis C.

Click here to take the survey

2, Public Health England. Hepatitis C in England: 2017 Report.

http://www.hcvaction.org.uk/sites/default/files/resources/hepatitis_c_in_england_2017_report.pdf [Accessed: July 2017]

2, NHS Choices: Hepatitis C. http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/hepatitis-c/pages/introduction.aspx [Accessed July 2017]

The I’m Worth… campaign has been developed and paid for by Gilead Sciences Ltd, a science-based pharmaceutical company. Content development has been supported by input from numerous patient groups with an interest in hepatitis C in the UK.

HCV/UK/17-04/NM/1634b – July 2017

Delayed drug strategy promises ‘national recovery champion’

The government’s long-awaited drug strategy has finally been published, and includes both a new ‘national recovery champion’ role and a cross-government drug strategy board to be chaired by the home secretary, Amber Rudd. The UK will ‘drive global action and enhance its leadership in the international response to drugs’, the government states.

Home secretary Amber Rudd announces a focus on strong law enforcement, alongside prevention and ‘drug free’ recovery.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is a focus on a ‘strong law enforcement approach’ to restrict supply and dismantle trafficking networks, as well as action to strengthen border controls and share intelligence internationally. The national recovery champion role, meanwhile – to be appointed by the Home Office and Department of Health – will ‘make sure adequate housing, employment and mental health services are available to help people turn their lives around’, while efforts to reduce demand include continued expansion of the Alcohol and Drugs Education and Prevention Information Service (ADEPIS).

The strategy also includes changes to the way the ‘long-term success of treatment’ is determined, with a requirement on services to ‘carry out additional checks to track the progress of those in recovery at 12 months, as well as after six, to ensure they remain drug-free’ as part of the National Drug Treatment Monitoring System (NDTMS).

While rates of drug use are falling, there are significant and growing problems around NPS, ‘chemsex’ drugs, performance and image enhancing drugs and misuse of prescription drugs, the document states. A new NPS intelligence system being developed by Public Health England (PHE) will help to reduce the length of time between NPS-related health harms emerging and effective treatment responses, while data from the Report Illicit Drug Reactions (RIDR) system will be analysed to identify patterns of harm and agree clinical responses.

The home secretary’s chairing of the new cross-government drug strategy board will help to ‘drive action and ensure the strategy is delivered by all partners’, says the Home Office, and police will be encouraged to refer drug-misusing offenders to ‘appropriate services to maximise the significant benefits that investment in treatment can have on reducing crime and anti-social behaviour’. The financial cost of the UK’s drug problem stands at almost £11bn a year, the strategy says, with drug-related theft alone accounting for £6bn.

The document also includes a commitment to ‘supporting prison officers to play a bigger role in the recovery process of drug offenders’ and ‘maintaining our world-leading drug and alcohol treatment system’, although analysis by The King’s Fund published earlier this week identified reductions to local authority public health spending of £85m compared to the previous financial year.

‘This government has driven a tough law enforcement response in the UK and at our borders, but this must go hand in hand with prevention and recovery,’ said Amber Rudd. ‘This new strategy brings together police, health, community and global partners to clamp down on the illicit drug trade, safeguard the most vulnerable, and help those affected to turn their lives around. We must follow through with our commitment to work together towards a common goal – a society free from the harms caused by drugs.’

Paul Hayes: The home secretary’s personal commitment will provide the political energy to turn aspirations into outcomes.

‘The government’s recognition that evidence-based treatment, recovery, and harm reduction services need to be at the heart of our collective response to drug misuse is very welcome,’ said Collective Voice chief executive Paul Hayes. ‘Investment in treatment has reduced levels of drug use, cut drug-related crime, enabled tens of thousands of individuals to overcome dependence, and is crucial in combating the recent increase in drug-related deaths. The home secretary’s commitment to personally lead this cross-government effort, and the increased transparency of local performance provide the political energy and focus needed to turn the strategy’s aspirations into outcomes.’

Click to read: The drug strategy 2017 

Please send your reactions to the new drug strategy to the DDN editor.

Sarah Newton MP comments on the new drug strategy

The new drug strategy represents a ‘balanced approach’ to enforcement and support, says Sarah Newton, minister for crime, safeguarding and vulnerability.

The shocking pictures of people using ‘spice’ in Manchester earlier this year reminded us just how harmful and dangerous drugs can be. They can devastate whole families, and the communities around them – the same communities where we all live, work and bring up our children.

Tireless work goes on every day to provide treatment services to individuals suffering from substance misuse problems, but the challenges are constantly evolving.  ‘Spice’, like all synthetic cannabinoids, is part of a changing picture that also includes the rapid emergence of other psychoactive substances, image and performance enhancing drugs, ‘chemsex’ drugs, and misuse of prescription medicines. The pressing needs of an ageing cohort of heroin and crack cocaine users add to the problem.

As minister for crime, safeguarding and vulnerability it is my responsibility to ensure that we do everything we can to tackle illegal drugs. This government’s new drug strategy, launched today by the home secretary, is testimony to our commitment to protecting the most vulnerable in society from the harms drugs cause.

In the strategy, we continue to stress the importance of a tough law enforcement response, across the UK and at our borders, where record seizures have recently taken place. This government has ensured police forces continue to have the resources they need to keep our communities safe.

I know the police already do a great deal to prevent drug crime on our streets. On patrol with officers I have seen first hand the good work to stamp out anti-social behaviour and enforce the law, by testing people for substance abuse and taking appropriate action. Drug testing on arrest is an indispensable tool for the police to monitor new patterns around drugs and crime and provides an early opportunity to refer offenders into treatment and help prevent further reoffending.

Enforcement is just one element of our response and we remain determined to pursue a balanced approach and to achieve a society free from the harms of drugs. Our efforts must continue to focus on recovery and prevention.

Our strategy seeks to prevent drug misuse in the first place by building confidence and resilience in our young people through targeted interventions for those who are most at risk. For this reason I am particularly pleased that we are continuing to fund the Alcohol and Drug Education and Prevention Information Service (ADEPIS) programme to raise awareness in schools.

The strategy identifies those most vulnerable to ensure they receive the specialist support they need. For example, specific measures will be taken to protect those in prison. It is essential that drugs do not destroy the rehabilitation role of our prisons. Governors will have more powers to extend searches to prevent smuggling. Longer term, we want to focus on continuity of drug treatment, putting offenders on a path to recovery so that they can integrate in society when they are released.

Drug misuse is also common among people with mental health problems: research indicates that up to 70 per cent of people in community substance misuse treatment also experience mental illness and there is a high prevalence of drug use among those with severe and enduring conditions such as schizophrenia and personality disorders. In the strategy we acknowledge this and I want all those vulnerable to mental illness and drug misuse to be able to access the care they need.

Since I became a Minister I have had the opportunity to visit several recovery centres where former drug users are helped to turn their lives around. It was truly inspiring to meet so many people, both staff and service users, who clearly feel passionate about what they do.

The stories I have heard are powerful. I have met people whose lives had been filled with hardship, sometimes with violent abuse, and who had been exposed to drugs for too long. Yet by accessing the right support tailored to their needs, they regained hope and a lasting sense of purpose.

When I visited a recovery centre in Durham, I was particularly impressed by the initiative in place for service users who wished to give something back by becoming apprentices and later ambassadors in a peer-led system. Peer-led support works and I am confident more and more partners will replicate similar community-based models to improve treatment outcomes and challenge stigmatising views of drug users.

Crucially, the new strategy also sets out how we can, by bringing the right partners together, work towards sustaining recovery for all. This requires that we support those in need in all aspects of their new life free from drugs. The National Recovery Champion, together with Public Health England, will lead our response, making sure all partners across the country work towards our overarching goals: to reduce drug use, and boost recovery.

To get tangible results, we have created a Drug Strategy Board, which the home secretary will chair and I will attend. The Board will oversee the development of innovative joint measures so that all partners play their part in ensuring those in recovery can access stable employment or meaningful activity, safe housing, and overcome the mental health issues they may face. Multi-layered support is what we intend to continue developing so that vulnerable people and those most at risk of relapsing stay on the path to recovery.

Building on the success of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016, we have worked to design a comprehensive plan that addresses the complex and evolving problems that continue to emerge from changing drug use habits. We will ensure clinicians benefit from the latest intelligence gathered by frontline specialists. This collaborative system driven by Public Health England will play a decisive role to keep on top of worrying patterns in drug use, and provide appropriate treatment interventions.

I am well aware that achieving the aims of the strategy will require strong and effective partnership working, at local, national and international levels.

In the lead-up to today’s launch, we consulted extensively with key partners working in the drugs field, including health and justice practitioners, commissioners, academics and service users, as well as our independent experts, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

So I am confident that it will have the operational impact we want to see, because in a Britain that works for everyone, there is no place for drugs.

Click to read: The Drug Strategy 2017.

Please send your reactions to the new drug strategy to the DDN editor.

Budget cuts spell more pain for services

Local authorities have been forced to reduce planned public health spending on services including drug and alcohol treatment by £85m as a result of government cuts, says The King’s Fund.

David Buck, The King’s Fund: ‘Reducing spending on public health is short-sighted.’

Councils in England will spend £2.52bn on public health services in 2017-18 compared to £2.6bn the previous year, according to the think tank’s analysis of Department of Communities and Local Government data. ‘Once inflation is factored in, we estimate that, on a like-for-like basis, planned public health spending is more than 5 per cent less in 2017-18 than it was in 2013-14,’ says the organisation.

While some services, such as promoting exercise, will actually see increased funding, money for tackling drug misuse in adults will face a 5.5 per cent cut of £22m, with specialist drug and alcohol services for children and young people, sexual health and smoking cessation also facing substantial reductions. Services are already struggling with the impact of a £200m cut to the 2015-16 public health budget (DDN, September 2015, page 4), as well as planned ongoing reductions until the end of the decade. Although some local authorities have been ‘innovative in contracting and in seeking efficiencies’ in their public health budgets, there is ‘little doubt that we are now entering the realms of real reductions in public health services’ says The King’s Fund.

Dr Iain Kennedy, BMA: ‘This is a huge step backwards for public health.’

‘These planned cuts in services are the result of central government funding cuts that are increasingly forcing councils to make difficult choices about which services they fund,’ said senior fellow in public health and inequalities at The King’s Fund, David Buck. ‘Reducing spending on public health is short-sighted at the best of times. The government must reverse these cuts and ensure councils get adequate resources to fund vital public health services.’

Shirley Cramer, RSPH: This will be ‘devastating’ for the nation’s health.

Chair of the BMA’s public health committee, Dr Iain Kennedy, said the cuts signified ‘a huge step backwards for public health’ that would ‘inevitably’ cost the NHS far more in the long term, while RSPH chief executive Shirley Cramer said the scale of the reductions would be ‘devastating’ for the nation’s health. ‘Short-sighted cuts to sexual health, drug misuse and stop smoking services are a false economy – saving money in the short term but costing far more over coming decades, while jeopardising precious gains we have made to cut the number of smokers and efforts to tackle our growing crisis of drug-related deaths,’ she stated.

Height of ecstasy

Summer brings the festivals – and a new young crowd experimenting with MDMA. Kevin Flemen gives the guide to staying safe

‘Who is Leah Betts?’ The question, from a recently qualified social worker on an NPS course, brought home to me some important issues. Leah died in 1995, aged 18, after using MDMA and drinking a large quantity of water. Campaigns by her family, the media and advertising agencies saw her posthumously become the ‘poster girl’ for the dangers of MDMA.

That was 1995, and my newly-qualified social worker was a baby when this happened. She and a whole cohort of children and young adults have not grown up in the shadow of Leah’s death. They didn’t read about it in the papers, see the video at school or learn about it from earnest drug educators.

This matters now more than ever. This MDMA-naïve generation are going out at a time when MDMA pills have never been as strong, cheap, or widely available. Alongside the pills containing dangerous adulterants, powder and crystal MDMA may also be adulterated or misidentified.

Alongside the Leah question, I hear another: ‘Frank – is that still going?’ The days when the drugs helpline enjoyed TV adverts and a budget allowing for innovative cross-platform promotion are long gone. It became a casualty of cuts along with the club outreach that helped reduce the risks to a generation of young people. So with exams coming to an end and the festival season underway, it is imperative that those MDMA harm reduction messages are dusted off, refreshed and communicated to the new generation of users.

As ever, drug terms and slang vary from place to place and over time. The drug MDMA is variously known as Mandy, Molly, ecstasy, E and XTC and some young people may not be aware of its ‘proper’ name. Terms may link to form (‘ecstasy’ had referred primarily to pills, MDMA to powder and crystals) but this isn’t always the case.

Pill strength has increased significantly over the past couple of years and has become a key concern. There is no routine, consistent monitoring of available pill strengths in the UK, so comparisons are partly estimates. Back in the late ’80s and early ’90s, MDMA pills contained around 80mg per pill and would retail for £5-10.

Looking at the range of pills currently available on dark web sites such as Dream Market, there are a few at the 160mg mark but most claim strength of between 220mg and 250mg, so average pill strength has probably trebled.

New production methods and the massive marketplace that is the dark web have seen manufacturers competing on strength and price, so low cost is no longer indicative of a low-dosed pill. For older users accustomed to swallowing two or three pills at a time, or for younger users with no tolerance, these high dose pills can cause fatal overdoses.

CRYSTAL CONTAMINATION
Just as pills can vary significantly in terms of dose and composition, the same is true for products sold as powder or crystal MDMA. Alternative substances or adulterants may be present and whereas one can check online for pill warnings, powders and crystals are harder to identify visually.

Looking at submissions to the Welsh testing site WEDINOS, samples bought as powder or crystal MDMA contained a range of compounds including previously legal NPS such as methylone, mephedrone and a-PVP, alongside cocaine, caffeine, speed and a host of other compounds.

There is no easy way for end users to assess pill strength, or the content of powders and crystals. The claimed strength of dark web retailers cannot be relied on, and as fast as ‘genuine’ pills are sold online, fake ones are likely to appear on the streets.

Other options for information include Erowid’s Ecstasy Data (www.ecstasydata.org) the user-run Pill Report (pillreports.net) and WEDINOS, (www.wedinos.org) from Public Health Wales. Each carries useful information on components or user experience, but little on pill strengths.

Thanks to the efforts of The Loop (wearetheloop.org), club and festival pill testing has increased, and at a small but growing number of events it is now possible to have drugs tested and results passed back to users and health professionals in a short timeframe.

HOUSE PARTIES AND TEDDY BEARS
The emergence of online and festival-based resources are welcomed. They are, however, most accessible to tech-savvy club and festival-goers who are interested in harm reduction and aware that they are taking MDMA.

Young people taking pills and attending house parties are at very high risk and fall outside these information channels. Pills are cheap, well-pressed, colourful and increasingly attractive with designs such as Instagram, Snapchat or teddy bears that inevitably resonate with younger people.

At £2-3 a pill (strong enough to share) it’s cheaper than cider or a bag of weed, and teenagers may not associate this Molly, Mandy, E – or whatever the pill is called – with MDMA and the risks that it entails.

Incidents of young teenagers taking MDMA pills in atypical settings demonstrate why websites and festival testing need to be backed up by high quality education and awareness-raising. Young people at house parties, with no access to the festival or club welfare services, need to be equipped with the knowledge and skills to respond to MDMA-related incidents for themselves.

Harm reduction
For young people contemplating use, key messages include general risks around strong stimulants and hallucinogens, especially in unfamiliar settings, and should include information about potency, overdose prevention and managing emergencies.

Crush – dab – wait has become a key message about starting with low doses of MDMA. Developed by the Loop, it is a field-appropriate method of taking a smaller drug dose on a moistened finger and waiting for one to two hours before taking further doses. In practice it can be hard to crush dense tablets in festival settings and if the drug in question is highly potent (such as a SCRA or a fentanyl) even dabbing could be a risk.

Starting with low tablet doses – quarter to half a tablet – will reduce risk, although a quarter of a tablet for a young user is still a potentially dangerous dose when tablet strengths are possibly 220mg+. In groups, one person taking a very low ‘tester’ dose can help reduce risk to the rest of the group.

Anxiety and panic are common especially for new users, so it is helpful to have more experienced, sober friends who can reassure and calm the person. As ever, set and setting matter, so using when feeling well in a familiar, safe environment is protective.

Serotonin syndrome, caused by excessively high levels of serotonin, could be caused by high doses of MDMA. Risk increases where other serotonin-elevating drugs are used, including some antidepressants, tramadol, some antihistamines and many other compounds. Indicators of serotonin syndrome include agitation, delusions, fast heart rate, elevated body temperature, muscle twitching, seizures and convulsions, and it can be fatal. Where serotonin syndrome is suspected, an ambulance should always be called.

Convulsions: safe management of people convulsing means always calling an ambulance, allowing the person to convulse unrestrained, removing things in the vicinity that could cause injury where possible, and protecting but not restraining the head. Nothing should be placed in the mouth as it increases risk of choking.

Overheating caused by elevated serotonin levels is highly dangerous. Chilling out from dancing and staying hydrated can help reduce the risk. If a person feels excessively hot, complains of feeling too hot, is panicked, complains of headaches, has excessive sweating, or conversely stops sweating, these could be indicators of overheating. Reduce body temperature by spraying their unclothed torso with tepid water, under moving air, but always seek medical help as overheating can lead to blood clotting and organ failure. Don’t try to give the person cold drinks or immerse them in cold water.

Hydration and over-hydrating: Excess water consumption, combined with MDMA’s anti-diuretic properties, can cause water retention and in extreme cases can cause electrolyte imbalance and swelling of the brain. This can be life threatening. Advice remains to drink around a pint of water or an isotonic drink, sipped over the course of an hour, which helps maintain hydration but minimises risks of hyponatraemia.

Self-care: MDMA use can lead to significant depletion of serotonin after use and can cause quite serious low mood and depression. Stress the importance of taking long breaks after use, eating well and avoiding other substance use.

Kevin Flemen runs the drugs education and training initiative, KFx.

Visit www.kfx.org.uk for free-to-download leaflets on ecstasy – Fest-E (about the wisdom of doing ecstasy for the first time at a festival) and First-E (guidance for first-time users). Both were produced by KFx in 2014 and illustrated by a 17-year-old, in response to growing concern about ecstasy.

Battle lines

For many ex-service personnel the transition to civilian life can be a struggle, and it’s all too tempting to turn to the bottle to cope. DDN hears how specialist support provided by the charity Combat Stress is helping veterans get back on their feet.

Soldiers silhouettes

Adjusting to civilian life after a career in the armed forces can be hugely challenging, and that’s even without the PTSD that many veterans may be struggling with. Around 15,000 people leave the forces every year, and many try to cope with the transition by self-medicating – especially with alcohol, something that may have been a central part of their forces life.

It’s little surprise therefore that last month an Addaction report by researchers at Sheffield Hallam University, and funded by the Forces in Mind Trust, found that ex-military personnel with substance problems are far more likely to succeed in their recovery if they access veteran-specific services.

‘Following service in the armed forces, a small but measurable number of people struggle to transition into civilian life and can turn to addiction when trying to cope with these pressures,’ said Forces in Mind Trust chief executive, air vice-marshal Ray Lock. ‘It can be very difficult for such vulnerable people to have the confidence to speak up and ask for help. In some cases they may not even be aware that such help is available.’ This is backed up by research from Surrey-based charity Combat Stress, which found that veterans may put off seeking help for years, even decades, with many not accessing services until they’re in their 60s (DDN, June, page 4).

Combat Stress

Combat Stress is the UK’s leading mental health charity for veterans, helping those struggling with PTSD, depression, anxiety and other issues. Originally founded just after World War I, it currently has more than 6,000 people registered for support and also offers specialist substance misuse services, which are always free of charge for veterans. The organisation works closely with the NHS to identify former service personnel who may have substance issues and help them engage with treatment.

Donna Bowman is a specialist veterans substance misuse nurse for Combat Stress, based at the Queen Alexandra (QA) Hospital in Portsmouth. ‘I’d been a specialist nurse for the hospital’s alcohol team for about seven years when I found out about this role, and the more I heard, the more I thought it sounded really interesting,’ she tells DDN. ‘My caseload is always between about 30 and 40, and I’ve seen around 130 veterans in total now.’

While most clients come from the hospital she also gets referrals from drug and alcohol services, GPs and veterans’ outreach services, along with some self-referrals. ‘What really appealed to me about the role was that you could do really assertive outreach in the community – you could pick up the veterans in the hospital then follow them up,’ she says. ‘I found that really exciting and rewarding as the one thing I always thought was a shame with my alcohol patients was that we couldn’t follow them up in the community.’

Another positive is that the veterans are ‘a great group of people to work with’, she says. ‘Once they get on a mission about stopping drinking, and they have support, they do very, very well.’

While that sense of commitment and determination can stand them in good stead when it comes to recovery, in other ways a military background can act as a significant barrier, however. ‘They’re just so proud,’ she says. ‘Plus in the military they’re used to being told to just get on with it, not ask for help and not really talk about things. So when they’re out in civilian life they think they should be able to cope with things themselves. They can be really hard to reach, and they leave it so long that by that time their lives can be in a state of ruin.’

Key Skills

A key skill when dealing with veteran clients is simply being approachable, she stresses, as is the ability to slowly build up trust. ‘That can take a while, but often they can be very sick when they come in as they’ve left it so long.’

Another crucial aspect is simply that ‘you do what you say you’re going to do’, she stresses. ‘It can take a while to establish their trust, but once you’ve got it you’ve got it forever. I’ve worked in intensive care so I’ve got also quite a lot of assessment skills, and unless someone can get their health back on track their life is going to be pretty miserable. So I’ll go to people’s houses, and I’ll get GPs and ambulances out because I’m not happy with how they’re looking.’

For the vast majority of her clients the problem is alcohol rather than drugs, she says. ‘It was such a massive part of their culture when they were in the military that it tends to be their crutch when something goes wrong. We do see people with drug issues, but it’s quite rare.’

Family Support

She also provides support for family members on house visits, along with referring them to services like Al-Anon. Signposting her veteran clients – to housing, education, training, health and other services – is also a ‘massive part’ of the role, particularly as it’s not uncommon for some veterans to end up homeless. ‘I work with a charity called Veterans Outreach Support, which has a drop-in service based in a maritime hotel – there’s about 20-plus services under one roof, so veterans can turn up on the day and be seen by mental health teams, the Royal British Legion, [armed forces charity] SSAFA and loads of different services. So I have access to all of those at my fingertips really.’

Given the trauma that many veterans will have been through and the difficulties in adjusting to civilian life, could the armed forces themselves be doing more to provide support? ‘I do think they could,’ she says. ‘I think it might be getting better, but I do think in the transition period from when they leave the forces they could perhaps explain a bit more about where to seek help for alcohol problems and things like that, and provide information about what’s in their area in terms of support. When they come out it’s so different from being looked after and having that structure.’

Someone who can attest to that is her client Michael, whose Royal Navy career lasted more than 21 years. After leaving he worked full-time as an engineer on army camps, but it was when the work stopped that his drinking got out of control. ‘It just got progressively worse and worse, until it snowballed into about a litre of vodka a day,’ he tells DDN. ‘A ridiculous amount.’

Despite the extent of his drinking he found it hard to even acknowledge that he had a problem until his first contact with Combat Stress. ‘What made me sit up and take notice was the first time I ever met Donna,’ he says. ‘That was in January 2016, when I was in the QA hospital for the second time with a broken shoulder. She just turned up at my bed one day and the light bulb went on over my head. Up until then it hadn’t really dawned on me because I couldn’t see the wood for the trees. I was too close to the problem.’

Although he’s making good progress he’s aware that it can be a long road. ‘I’ve had a couple of blips,’ he says. ‘I went without a drink for about 16 months and I thought I had it under control, but I didn’t. It’s like any addiction, it comes up and kicks you in the backside, but generally I’m feeling quite optimistic.’

His only other experience of treatment, at a drug and alcohol drop-in centre, made him realise how much he values the veteran-specific service at Combat Stress. ‘The atmosphere and surroundings were not what I’d call conducive to help,’ he says. ‘A lot of people were only there because they had to be as part of their ASBOs or whatever, and were talking about how they were going to be taking drugs the moment they left.’ In common with other people with a military background he also struggled with the ‘sharing’ aspect of some treatment. ‘I’ve always preferred the one-on-one – I’m not a great group person – and I get on with Donna and all her colleagues brilliantly.

‘The thing I like is that they talk to you,’ he says. ‘They don’t talk at you or down to you – they talk it through, which being ex-service is what you need. I honestly don’t think I’d be here if it wasn’t for Donna and her colleagues. I can’t praise them enough. It made me realise that somebody actually cared.’

Addaction report – It’s not just about recovery: the Right Turn veteran-specific recovery service evaluation, at www.fim-trust.org

I’m worth… survey

 

Thank you for taking the time to answer questions about your work in relation to hepatitis C.

Your answers will be anonymised and will be aggregated to inform activities as part of the I’m Worth… hepatitis C patient empowerment campaign. The I’m Worth… campaign aims to address the stigma that many people with hepatitis C face encouraging and empowering people living with hepatitis C to access care and services no matter how or when they were infected. It doesn’t matter how someone got hepatitis C; no one deserves to live with a potentially life threatening disease. Everyone is worthy of being given the chance to be hep C free.

The ‘I’m Worth…’ campaign is a disease awareness programme, that has been developed and paid for by Gilead Sciences Ltd, a science-based pharmaceutical company.

 

Click here to take the survey

Activists out in force for fifth Support Don’t Punish day of action

Thousands of people once again took to the streets to call for an end to the war on drugs as part of the Support Don’t Punish campaign’s ‘global day of action’. Events in more than 200 cities worldwide included debates, workshops, concerts, parades, sporting tournaments and displays of street art.

The day of action took place on 26 June to coincide with the UN’s controversial ‘international day against drug abuse and illicit trafficking’. It also saw the launch of a letter signed by more than 100 NGOs in Sao Paulo protesting against recent crackdowns on people who use drugs by the Brazilian authorities, as well as a briefing to media in the Philippines on the harms of President Duterte’s violent war on drugs.

‘By organising these events, partners from all continents are proclaiming that the harms being caused by the war on drugs can no longer be ignored,’ the campaign stated. ‘It is time to leave behind harmful politics, ideology and prejudice and to prioritise health and human rights over incarceration and futile efforts to achieve a “drug-free world”. It is time to support, and not punish, people who use drugs and other non-violent drug offenders.’

‘This is the fifth global day of action, and the biggest ever global show of force in support for drug policy reform,’ said International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC) executive director Ann Fordham. ‘It demonstrates the growing recognition around the world that a repressive approach towards drugs has failed. It is a waste of public money, and it is doing more harm than good, as can be seen today in countries like the Philippines, Cambodia, Brazil and others. We need drug policies that are meaningfully grounded in human rights, and that aim to address the health and social vulnerabilities faced by people who use drugs instead of exacerbating them’.

Full reports and pictures at supportdontpunish.org/2017-global-day-of-action

 

 

 

Alcohol-related deaths more than 50 per cent higher in Scotland

An average of 22 people per week died of an alcohol-related cause in Scotland in 2015, according to an NHS Health Scotland report, a figure that’s 54 per cent higher than in England and Wales. Weekly alcohol sales per adult were also 17 per cent higher.

The following year saw 10.5 litres of pure alcohol sold per adult in Scotland, enough to exceed the chief medical officer’s recommended 14 units by 44 per cent every week of the year, says Monitoring and evaluating Scotland’s alcohol strategy, which draws together data on sales, price and consumption as well as alcohol-related deaths and hospital admissions. Alcohol-related death rates were up to six times higher in the country’s most deprived areas, with alcohol-related hospital stays up to nine times higher. Rates of alcohol-related death and hospital admissions were more than twice as high among men, and highest of all in the 55-64 age range.

More than half of all off-trade alcohol was sold for less than 50p per unit in 2015, the report continues, although overall alcohol consumption rates have fallen back to 2013 levels following two years of increases, and the proportion of non-drinkers is rising. The number of children who report drinking in the previous week is also declining.

‘It is worrying that as a nation we buy enough alcohol for every person in Scotland to exceed the weekly drinking guideline substantially,’ said the report’s lead author, Lucie Giles. This has harmful consequences for individuals, their family and friends as well as wider society and the economy. The harm that alcohol causes to our health is not distributed equally; the harmful effects are felt most by those living in the most disadvantaged areas in Scotland.’

‘It’s clear we need further action to change Scotland’s relationship with alcohol,’ added Alcohol Focus Scotland chief executive Alison Douglas. ‘Alcohol is so cheap and widely available that it’s easy to forget how it can damage our health. Shops are selling bottles of cheap, high-strength white cider for as little as 20p per unit of alcohol. A 50p minimum unit price will have the biggest impact on the heaviest drinkers who tend to buy these type of drinks.

‘We need to introduce this long-delayed policy as soon as possible to improve Scotland’s health, cut crime and save lives. It is scandalous that Diageo and other Scotch Whisky Association members have blocked it.’

Report at www.healthscotland.scot

Smoking rates hit record low

The proportion of adults in England who smoke has fallen to just over 15 per cent, according to a report from NHS Digital, ONS and PHE, down from just below 20 per cent at the start of the decade. The largest fall – from 26 per cent to 19 per cent – was among 18 to 24-year-olds, says Statistics on smoking, England 2017.

The number of hospital admissions attributable to smoking has increased, however, from 458,000 in 2005-06 to 474,000 in 2015-16, although it has fallen as a proportion of all admissions from 6 per cent to 4 per cent. The highest estimated admission rates were in Barnsley, Blackpool, Hartlepool and Sunderland, while the highest estimated rate of smoking-related deaths was in Manchester.

Sixteen per cent of all deaths in England in 2015 were estimated to be attributable to smoking, at 79,000, while just under 11 per cent of women giving birth in 2016-17 were recorded as smokers at the time of delivery. Tobacco is now 27 per cent less affordable than it was in 2006, the document adds.

Anti-smoking charity ASH said that while the drop in smoking rates was ‘great news’, smoking remained the leading cause of preventable death and was responsible for half the difference in life expectancy between rich and poor. ‘One in two lifetime smokers will die from smoking-related disease, so a fall in smoking rates of this scale will save many thousands of lives in years to come,’ said chief executive Deborah Arnott.

‘This proves that tobacco control policies work, when they are part of a comprehensive strategy and are properly funded. But we must not stop now. Every day since the last tobacco control plan expired on 31 December 2015, hundreds of under-16s have started smoking.’

Earlier this year, more than 1,000 doctors and other health professionals signed an open letter to prime minister Theresa May and health secretary Jeremy Hunt calling for a new tobacco control plan to be published ‘without further delay’ (DDN, February, page 5). Next month also marks the tenth anniversary of the implementation of smoke-free legislation in England, added Arnott, ‘a worthy date for publication of the next tobacco control plan, with a commitment to delivering a smoke-free future for our children’.

Report at www.gov.uk

Finding the right voice

CGL has been consulting with young people on the best ways for its youth services to get their message across. DDN reports on the outcomes, and the potential lessons for other providers.

Promoting services to young people, particularly in an area like drugs and alcohol, can be fraught with potential pitfalls. It’s important not to seem intimidating or off-putting, and to come up with something young people can relate to, but at the same time it’s vital to avoid slipping into patronising or embarrassing ‘down with the kids’ territory – something that’s likely to alienate your target audience even more.

Following the re-branding of change, grow, live (CGL) from Crime Reduction Initiatives (CRI) (DDN, February, page 11), the organisation felt that it still needed to do more to reach younger people. ‘Prior to the national rebrand many of our YP services created their own local branding,’ CGL’s national head of operations for young people’s services, Raj Ubhi, tells DDN.

While the organisational rebrand ensured a ‘refreshed visual identity and national consistency’ in how services were marketed to service users and potential referrers, it didn’t necessarily appeal to younger audiences in the same way as it did to adults, he says. ‘We therefore decided to work with young people themselves to develop a specific, distinctive and recognisable brand which young people could more closely relate to and engage with.’

The process started around six months after the national CGL re-brand was introduced, and following a period of extensive consultation, development and implementation, all of CGL’s services across the country adopted the new young person’s brand from April this year.

‘What young people want from a brand often differs from what adults want – I think there was a consensus that actually we can do something that better appeals to our younger audiences that’s separate to something you might expect to see in an adult service,’ he says. It was ‘a big piece of work’, however, involving more than 20 services working with varying ages, backgrounds and needs, all of which CGL wanted to cater for.

The organisation consulted more than 180 young people, but also extended the consultation to commissioners, professionals and partners, because ‘a lot of the marketing material has to appeal to them as referrers also’, he explains.

A key element to get right was one of the most basic – the actual naming of the services. ‘One of the things that is central to our values is service user voices informing and influencing the services we offer them – ultimately it’s their service,’ says Ubhi. ‘Therefore, young people often inform what our services are named locally. We want something they can relate to and something that’s going to appeal to them.

‘Generally we go into local areas to consult through competitions or raffles to help determine service names, and it’s important that a national brand has the capacity for localisation. So although the logo for all our services is now the same – and the design architecture that sits around it – the actual service names are going to be local. There are quite a few of our services named Wize-up – young people seem to like that name.’

Just as important were the visuals – an area it can be easy to get wrong. ‘A lot of that came through in the consultations – young people didn’t want a brand that contained patronising images, language and designs,’ he says. ‘Some of the key messages were that they wanted something that looked current, bold and minimalistic. They liked the dark backgrounds, black and white images and bright colours, so something quite striking but simple at the same time. We took into account national commercial brands that they were particularly fond of.’

They also wanted images that ‘represented young people in general’ rather than pictures of the type of people generally perceived as ‘substance misusers’, he stresses. ‘They were against using young people’s faces more generally because they thought that could stereotype the type of person that might access the service. There isn’t a typical young substance user – most young people will have some level of interaction or relationship with substances, whether that be curiosity, recreational or more problematic use.’

It was important to try to increase visibility and accessibility for all these audiences by reducing stigma, he says, another reason to move away from ‘traditionally deficit-based images that represent problematic drug use, or that scream out “drug and alcohol misuse”’. There may be a bit of resistance in terms of engaging with that type of service, depending on the young person, parent or carer – that was key feedback that we tried to take into account.’

On the subject of feedback, the reaction since the re-branding has been positive, he says. ‘It’s really good that young people were involved throughout – not only did we do a consultation via a survey, we actually sat down with them to create the brief that we gave to the developers. We showed the final designs to the young people and asked if they thought it closely met their brief, and it did.’

Creating a brand that could appeal across the age ranges covered by the services isn’t necessarily easy when that goes from as young as ten up to 25, not to mention parents, carers and the professionals who might direct young people towards the services. ‘But it seems to have been effective in meeting these diverse needs,’ he says. ‘Visual identity is important to young people, and hopefully this brand will appeal to young people universally and encourage engage­ment where others may not have traditionally done so.’

In terms of the challenges facing young people’s services generally, while cannabis and alcohol are still the main reasons for presenting, the key issue is ‘not only the substances being used by young people who present, it’s the substances being used by young people who don’t present, and are at increased risk’, he states. This could be down to a lack of awareness around services generally, or the simple fact that they don’t see their substance use as an issue that needs addressing, he points out.

The substances falling into that latter category include NPS, PIEDs and even ‘smart’ drugs. ‘This can be seen as more aspirational use to better themselves rather than engaging in any particular risk to their health. And where excessive alcohol and cannabis use is normalised in peer groups, or substances are used as a coping mechanism, there can be a reluctance to access services for support. Responding to this “hidden” risk is an important prevention agenda and the marketing of our services is a key factor here in terms of proactive engagement.’

To help achieve this, all of CGL’s services now adopt a ‘peripatetic’ model, he points out. ‘It’s very rare that we operate from premises where we’d expect young people to come to us to access support or any kind of intervention. We go out to young people to offer one-to-one appointments, but we also try to increase visibility by being in places young people are – not in an intrusive way, but just so we can engage and open up conversations in a more meaningful way around drugs and alcohol.’

This could be in-reach work with partner agencies where people could benefit from drug and alcohol advice, such as sexual health services, youth hostels, children’s homes, A&E, or schools and colleges, or via traditional street outreach in the community, the night-time economy, festivals or fresher’s fairs. There’s also a major focus on whole-family approaches and delivering interventions to parents, carers and wider family members. ‘For a lot of our young people their key protective factor is their parent or carer, so trying to involve them in any support that we offer the young person is in both their interests,’ he says.

Perhaps crucially, the ‘we won’t judge you or tell you what to do’ message is as prominent on much of the literature as the description of the service or contact details. ‘When we’ve done consultations, often the reluctance to engage is because they may think they’re going to get a lecture or be told to stop using substances. They’re not always going to want to stop, and there might be young people who feel ashamed or guilty about their substance use, so that’s a barrier to accessing services. So we thought we needed to address that one head on in some of our key branding messages.’

However good the branding is, there’s little point unless it’s used properly, however. ‘We wanted to better understand how young people learn about our services – a lot are searching for information on substances or other support services online, so it’s about how we make this brand compatible with a real sound, comprehensive digital presence,’ he states.

‘The national rebrand is to create a recognisable brand for young people, raising the profile of CGL as a specialist provider of young people’s substance misuse support, information and advice,’ he continues. ‘Expert advice is important for young people – they told us that they’re more likely to engage if they know that the service or worker “really knows their stuff” – more than they might easily be able to access online. I think that consistent brand will help young people recognise it and trust it for up-to-date, accurate, relevant advice.

‘There’s a whole host of information out there of varying degrees of quality, so that’s something that we’re really keen to do in terms of raising that profile and that trust and credibility among young people.’

Proposed Glasgow consumption room moves a step closer

A report to be presented to the Glasgow City Integration Joint Board later this month will identify potential sites for what could be the UK’s first drug consumption room. The board officially approved the development of a business case for the facility late last year (DDN, November 2016, page 4).

Suitable available sites in the south east of Glasgow’s city centre are being ‘pursued in the event that permission is granted’, says the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde health board, with a community engagement process to begin once a site has been chosen. The proposed facility would also offer heroin-assisted treatment alongside health and social care advice, peer support and treatment referrals.

The draft business case drawn up last year argued that the combined consumption room and heroin-assisted treatment could help reduce drug-related deaths and blood-borne virus transmission, as well as public injecting and drug-related offending. It could also improve service engagement for people with complex needs and reduce the burden on other health services.

The new report estimates the combined cost of the consumption room and heroin-assisted treatment at just over £2.3m per year, to be part-funded by redirecting existing resources of just under £900,000. The remaining £1.4m would be met by ‘contingency funding for a period of no more than three years’, says NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

Last year’s draft business case estimated the lifetime costs to the health service of Glasgow’s newly diagnosed HIV cases among drug users since 2015 at almost £30m, while a 2009 Scottish Government research paper estimated the ‘total economic and social costs attributable to illegal drug users’ in Scotland at around £3.5bn. Heroin-assisted treatment could potentially save almost £950,000 per year for every 30 people who access it, says the health board, with the treatment available only to adult heroin-dependent patients ‘with previous unsuccessful treatment episodes’.

‘The need for a safer consumption facility is about improving the health of those involved in public injecting,’ said chief officer for strategy, planning and commissioning at Glasgow City community health partnership, Susanne Millar. ‘Our aim is to provide a route to recovery for a group of people often disengaged from support services, and improving the general amenity of Glasgow city centre.’

Public injecting placed a ‘considerable’ financial burden on the health, social care and criminal justice systems, she added. ‘Existing research suggests the average spend on health, addictions, housing and criminal justice service for people in Glasgow with complex needs ranges from £1,120 and £3,069 per individual per month. These proposals are backed by evidence indicating safer drug consumption facilities not only improve health outcomes for people who inject drugs, but are also highly cost effective and contribute to savings for health and social care services.’

Public health body backs festival drug testing

The Royal Society for Public Health (RSPH) has called for music festivals to provide drug safety testing facilities ‘as standard’, as the summer festival season gets underway. The organisation also wants to see the harm reduction measure implemented in city nightlife areas.

The call follows concerns about increasing purity levels of club drugs, with tests ‘repeatedly’ reporting ecstasy pills containing 150g and more of MDMA, compared to averages of around 50-80mg in the 1980s and ’90s (DDN, March 2017, page 4).

Drug safety testing pilots have already been carried out at UK festivals with the support of local police, and harm reduction organisation The Loop plans to extend testing to eight of this summer’s events. RSPH research found that around a third of festival-goers and clubbers would ‘definitely or probably’ not take their drugs if testing revealed the strength or composition to be different than expected, while almost half said they would take less or ‘be more careful’. Last year RSPH published a report that advocated decriminalising the personal possession of all illegal drugs (DDN, July/August 2016, page 4).

‘While the use of stimulant club drugs such as ecstasy can never be safe, and RSPH supports ongoing efforts to prevent them entering entertainment venues, we accept that a certain level of use remains inevitable in such settings,’ said RSPH chief executive Shirley Cramer. ‘We therefore believe that a pragmatic harm reduction response is necessary.’

A third of festival-goers and clubbers would ‘definitely or probably’ not take their drugs if testing revealed the strength or composition to be different than expected.

Testing facilities provided an opportunity to ‘impart practical harm reduction advice to an audience who would not normally engage with drug services’, she continued. ‘We urge events companies to make these facilities a standard part of the UK festival and clubbing landscape, and we urge both local and national police and public health authorities to provide the support that will enable this.’

‘We believe that prioritising public health over criminal justice for drug users at a time of growing concern about drug-related deaths at festivals and nightclubs can help to reduce drug-related harm both on and off site,’ added The Loop’s director, and professor of criminology at Durham University, Fiona Measham.

A guide to fentanyl – Meet the fentanyls

With a vast range of forms and potencies, the fentanyl family bring too many unknowns. Kevin Flemen gives an essential guide.

Click here to read it in DDN Magazine

Kevin Flemen talks about fentanyl use
Kevin Flemen, KFX training

Another day, another drug warning – lately we’ve had drug scare after drug scare. There was flesh-eating Krokodil, Bath Salt cannibals, Hippy Crack, Zombie Spice and, in the May issue of DDN, concerns about an increase in Xanax use. Most recently came warnings about fentanyl-type drugs. Such bulletins can risk losing impact, but if the evidence from North America and elsewhere is anything to go by, fentanyl and its derivatives have the potential to become a huge problem and cause significant loss of life.

Although fentanyl-type drugs have featured sporadically in the UK drug scene for a while, concern about them has increased markedly in the past few months, leading to official warnings from the National Crime Agency (NCA) and Public Health England (PHE). So, it’s time (and some would argue, long overdue) to get up to speed with the fentanyls.

Fentanyls are opioids, with fentanyl (Duragesic) used for severe pain. It has numerous analogues and derivatives, with new ones emerging – Wikipedia lists 42 and this may be an underestimate. Several of the fentanyls have legitimate medical use and so are better understood in terms of potency, doses, and metabolites, but others have been developed to sidestep legislation or restriction on precursors. Less is known about these newer compounds.

The potency and half-life of different fentanyls varies massively. To illustrate relative potency, fentanyls are compared to morphine – but this is a crude indicator, especially when the composition and purity of street-sourced fentanyls is unclear.

To further complicate the issue, some analogues have more than one isomer, which in turn vary in potency. So 3-methylfentanyl ranges in potency, from 300 times the potency of morphine to 6,000 times stronger, depending on which isomer is present.

Given such a wide range of products and potencies, the risk of overdose cannot be understated. There is every chance of misidentification and mis-selling throughout the supply chain, from producers inadvertently supplying the wrong analogue or isomer through to suppliers mis-identifying their product.

To reduce the potency to usable levels, fentanyls need to be bulked out with a non-psychoactive filler agent, such as mannitol. This demands correct identification of the drug, careful calculation of the amount of filler to be added, and thorough mixing of drug and filler.

Such mixing is at best prone to errors. When fentanyl is mixed with more granular substances, such as brown heroin, it is impossible to achieve a thorough mix, and so the risk of separation and ‘hot-spots’ is greater still.

——————————–

Fentanyls – a comparative

Fentanyl is rated as approximately 100 times* the potency of morphine – so 1g of fentanyl is equivalent to 100g of morphine.

Some analogues are weaker: acetylfentanyl is around 15 times the potency of morphine. Others are far stronger: 4-fluorofentanyl is reported to be twice the strength of fentanyl – some 200 times the strength of morphine.

Carfentanil, legitimately used to tranquillise large mammals, is reportedly around 10,000 times the potency of morphine (100 times stronger than fentanyl). So, in theory, 1g of carfentanil is the equivalent of 10kg morphine.

*This dose equivalence is a very crude way of indicating relative potency. Variables such as speed of onset, duration of effect, level of analgesia versus level of sedation, and therapeutic index cannot be summarised by a simple drug A is x times stronger than drug B.

——————————–

Sources and supply

Synthesised in China and elsewhere, fentanyls have become increasingly available on the dark web. Products reputedly on sale included fentanyl, furanyl-fentanyl, carfentanil and other analogues.

Given their very high potency, they are an appealing option for international smuggling. They offer a low bulk/high potency alternative to heroin and are available via labs online, rather than engaging with heroin suppliers.

Fentanyls have become a very significant factor in drug deaths in North America and the major cause of opiate deaths in British Columbia, with the number almost doubling between 2015 and 2016. Closer to home they have been an issue in the EU, but it has primarily been Baltic countries, especially Estonia, which have seen the biggest problems.

There may also be some European production. In April, West Yorkshire Police raided a ‘drugs lab’ where fentanyl was involved, although is not clear from the reporting if the ‘lab’ was synthesising fentanyl, or compounding imported fentanyls with heroin for onward sale.

The UK market
Medically diverted fentanyl is abusable, but the combination of limited prescribing and transdermal preparations has meant it has not been a massive issue in the UK to date. Fentanyl analogues have been around here for a while, cropping up sporadically in drugs analysed (for example) by the drug identification service WEDINOS, but difficulties in detecting newer fentanyls make it hard to gauge their presence. It may be that they have been a factor in opiate drug deaths for longer than thought, and reviews of post-mortem samples are being conducted to see if this is the case. Routine drug testing and screening won’t show up fentanyls and even fentanyl-specific tests won’t detect all analogues.

Injecting heroin and fentanyl mix
At street level, fentanyl is most likely to end up as a component in another drug, usually heroin.

While fentanyl is most likely to appear as a cut in heroin, it is also sold online as a white powder and has been offered in liquid and blotter forms. It can be smoked, snorted, injected, or taken rectally, and while all routes are risky, smoking carries the lowest risk of fatal overdose. At street level in the UK, it is most likely to end up as a component in another drug, usually heroin. This may be in the form of typical brown heroin, with fentanyl added to make it feel more potent.

Fentanyl is sometimes referred to as ‘synthetic heroin’ or ‘China white’. It is therefore essential to stress that buyers offered ‘white heroin’ or ‘China white’ are at present very likely to be getting fentanyl rather than old-school white heroin.

People seeking heroin are clearly the group most at risk of encountering fentanyls. However, they have cropped up in place of other products including benzodiazepines and stimulants such as MDMA or cocaine in the UK and Europe, and sold internationally mixed with crack cocaine. Becoming more widespread could impact not solely on heroin users, but people using any white powder drug – populations that are likely to be harder to reach with harm-reduction messages and less likely to have naloxone at point of overdose.

Issuing warnings about fentanyls is a finely balanced judgement call, as premature warnings about ‘dangerous drugs’ can be counterproductive. On the one hand, they raise awareness and highlight the dangers; on the other, they risk publicising a high-strength, low-cost alternative to street heroin and can make it a sought-after product. However, the string of deaths in the north of England, more frequent reports from around the UK and increased police seizures have acted as a catalyst for the NCA and PHE to issue alerts about fentanyls. This has triggered a flurry of articles in the mainstream media, so the cat is well and truly out of the bag.

This still doesn’t mean that fentanyls are widespread or have penetrated the market at all levels. We need to try and develop locally relevant messages that don’t inadvertently promote fentanyl: references to ‘super strong’ or ‘high strength’ are probably phrases to avoid.

Where next?
We need to look urgently at the experience of North America, especially Canada, in the face of escalating fentanyl use. Experience in terms of detection, first response and educative messages will be invaluable.

In response to rising fatalities, drug consumption room provision is being expanded in Canada. Such measures are long overdue in the UK and in the context of escalating deaths in the UK and the advent of fentanyls, similar measures are required here.

There’s no evidence that harsher legal sanctions for adding fentanyl to heroin will deter suppliers. However, fear of police action may mean that suppliers holding fentanyl supplies try to offload stock quickly, with the risk that the drug will crop up in a more random fashion.

Ultimately, such measures are of course sticking plasters. We keep seeing the evidence that prohibition begets increasingly dangerous substances. The long-term solution is drug legislation reform, but until this happens we are obliged to wait for the next alert to flash up as a new, more potent substance enters the drug stream.

——————————–

Harm reduction for fentanyl

While all use of street opiates brings a risk of overdose, the potency and variability of fentanyls bring an unparalleled level of risk. Scattergun warnings can reduce their credibility, and so assessing what is going on locally is important:

• Engage with people who are using to determine what is being offered, and if ‘white heroin’ or other potential fentanyl-laced products are appearing on the market.

• Make bulletins up to date and locally relevant.

• Ensure that facts are established before cascading information by developing a local drugs warning protocol in conjunction with user groups, police and public health.

‘Fentanyl=death’ messages are inadequate as, without access to licit compounds, people will still access the street market and so harm reduction is also essential.

Core opiate harm reduction messages remain relevant, and need to be re-stressed:

• Smoking represents the lowest risk of fatal overdose and this should be emphasised, alongside provision of foil.

• Overdose risk increases when opiates are used alongside alcohol or other sedating drugs including benzodiazepines, z-drugs or gabapentin/pregabalin.

• Sampling batches before use and injecting slowly can reduce risk.

• Fentanyl overdoses can reportedly be very rapid.

• Use with company who can respond in the event of an emergency; if using together don’t all use at the same time.

• Ensure availability of naloxone and a phone that works.

• It is imperative that an ambulance is called in the event of an OD.

• OD may require larger doses of naloxone than a heroin OD and distributors may need to review training and the number of kits distributed if fentanyl is a local issue.

• Encourage retention and submission of samples post OD for analysis.

——————————–

Kevin Flemen runs the drugs education and training initiative, KFx. Visit www.kfx.org.uk for information and free resources.

Read more on fentanyl

Vital connections

Most drug-related deaths are of people not in treatment. DDN visits Equinox outreach team in Brighton to hear how they engage with a growing population of rough sleepers.

Rough sleeping figures continue to rise. In the government’s latest report, local authority counts showed 4,134 people out on the streets in England on a snapshot night in autumn last year – up 16 per cent on the previous year’s count. Brighton is near the top of the league table with one in 69 people homeless, and the challenge is clear for the city’s outreach team.

Outreach worker Scott (left) with Dolores from Equinox head office and Jesse, manager of the Brighton team.

Among the members of Pavilions, Brighton’s partnership of treatment services led by Cranstoun, Equinox are hard at work at the community base in Queens Road, a few roads up from Brighton’s seafront. There’s plenty going on as usual, and people buzzing in and out offices shared with many other agencies, from housing support to mental health.

While explaining what they do, they break off to deal with an urgent suicide threat nearby. One of the regular clients is threatening to kill himself, having been caught shoplifting again. Anti-social behaviour caseworker Kristina has rushed up there to help out, knowing that he will have been shoplifting to feed a drinking habit of 40-50 units a day. It’s a situation he’s been trying to escape, but he has a girlfriend who drinks and he’s finding it hard to change.

For this man, as with many other Equinox clients, there are no quick fixes. The team members know they are in it for the long haul, explains manager Jesse Wilde. The working model is ‘assertive outreach with recovery at its heart’. In practice this means going back again and again, taking the knockbacks and offering a friendly chat until one day it’s welcomed.

Visiting nurse Mike confers with ASB caseworker Kristina.

‘These are people who will never make that call for help,’ he says. ‘Their life is often a web of chaos, often involving begging and jail. One day something will change – maybe they’ll have had a bereavement – and they’ll want to talk.’ The assertive outreach is the only way, as ‘signposting isn’t going to work’.

The key workers are obviously vital to what happens next, and Wilde explains that their training equips them to build rapport. ‘Some people are avoidant, wary of intimacy or any interaction, even being told “well done”,’ he explains. ‘So we’d keep it very business-like in this case, and chat on the way to appoint­ments.’ In the textbook it’s called ‘attachment theory’; he calls it ‘keyworking by stealth’.

Outreach worker Scott Crossley is well versed in these techniques. He acknowledges that many clients can be ‘chaotic, disruptive and challenging’, but he rises to the challenge of gaining their trust, trying to look at the root of their behaviour, and working out how to offer support.

‘It takes time to establish trust and a rapport,’ he says, and the first stage is demonstrating reliability. They might have complex trauma and personality disorders, and a history of people saying they’re going to do something but not turning up. We’re always going to turn up.’ After a while you see people soften and reciprocate.

It can be a long road, and at the start ‘the worker can be running around a lot, almost like a PA’. But then you need to find a way of ‘handing responsibility back, giving that power back’, so they are not dependent on the worker and can take charge of their own life. The results can be life-changing: ‘We’ve had people who screamed and shouted, and they’re now in their own accommodation, completely different people… but that takes time.’

The scope to work in this way comes from being part of Pavilions, Brighton’s network of support. The important parts of Crossley’s work takes place away from mainstream hubs, ‘taking recovery to people who can’t do mainstream’.

‘You’ve got one person but lots of strands, almost like a spider web, for housing, mental health, whatever they need,’ he says. Through multi-agency working, they can get a support package together, including OST at the right titration.

‘We can get them so we’re holding them,’ says Crossley. ‘We’ve got a platform and can then do the good work of preparing them for a stint in rehab. If you put someone with so much trauma without preparation work into detox, all the years that drugs have suppressed – this filing cabinet of feelings – opens up and these feelings go everywhere.’

The involvement of mental health teams makes a vital difference, he believes. ‘Before, we would do all the work to prepare them and leave them at the rehab door. We can now go on working with them and liaise. The drop out rates are down – it’s been amazing.’ Another success is that the team all carry naloxone in their bags, and consider that this should be mandatory everywhere.

The success of partnership working has energised the team’s proactive approach to trying different initiatives, and Wilde describes how ‘Sensible on Strength’, seen to be working well in Norwich, has been adopted by Brighton and is highly successful in tackling anti-social behaviour and improving public health. Around 200 alcohol retailers have agreed to take high-strength alcohol off their shelves, through working with the local authority and local residents.

‘It’s now rare to see a can of Tennents Super,’ adds Crossley. ‘I never in my wildest dreams thought it would be this successful.’ He recalls how an incident black spot near to an off-licence – a place where an inebriated girl once got run over by a bus – has been transformed. Following pressure from residents the licence was revoked until opening hours were changed and the shop agreed not to sell super-strength alcohol. A local doctor has called the project ‘the single most important health initiative in recent years’.

Such initiatives contribute significantly to the health of homeless clients and are also helpful in improving relations with the local community. Each month progress is discussed at a ‘high impact case forum’, involving police, the substance misuse teams and other community partners, covering the most offensive forms of anti-social behaviour, from urinating on the street to aggressive begging. Ideas and action points from the group feed back out to the day to day work with many community partners, including the church, city college and local residents.

Equinox are in multi-agency office in Brighton, where they can connect with other vital services.

‘There’s an entrepreneurial element to being a frontline worker,’ suggests Wilde. Increasing complexity among clients, mental health services that are stretched to the limit, and the fact that substance misuse and mental health funding still exist separately – not to mention a massive 25 per cent cut of PHE funding to the outreach team – mean that staff are faced with more challenges than ever.

‘One of the things we try to instil in the team is that you need to be assertive and have confidence,’ he says. ‘When you lose posts and money, you have to work more closely together.’

The outreach team also benefits hugely from having members who are themselves in recovery. ‘It’s made them a lot more “no nonsense” about the work,’ he says. ‘They know what a blag is.’

The team also has little time for strategies that sit on the page and make little sense in the hand-to-mouth environment of the street. Crossley dismisses ‘off the shelf’ recovery and talks about harm reduction side by side – part of the ‘whole person’ vision.

‘I hate that word “motivation”,’ says Crossley, referring to target-speak for a moment. ‘Our guys have a different motivation – not to get sick; to get money to get drugs. These guys aren’t going to sit in groups. They have a £200 a day habit and they need to beg. For these people you have to throw “motivation” out the window. If you ask them “do you want to be injecting in the neck?” they’d say no. They have no choice.’

Market forces

Drug-related deaths:

A strong message from Addaction’s Mortality Matters conference was that treatment services need to put competition to one side and challenge the conditions that are allowing drug-related deaths to rise. DDN reports.

How should we tackle the alarming increase in drug-related deaths head on, asked Addaction’s medical director, Dr Kostas Agath, opening the charity’s one-day conference in Leeds.

‘Drug-related deaths have been increasing year on year for the last three years… we haven’t cracked it,’ he said. The figures – 3,388 drug-related deaths in 2015 in the UK – didn’t give the whole story. He spoke about Martin, who lost his life just recently – and about his mother, struggling to make sense of the gaping hole in her life. ‘Someone, somewhere must begin to ask the right questions. The Martins out there must be someone’s responsibility.’

We could take four steps to reduce drug-related deaths, suggested Alex Stevens, professor of criminology at the University of Kent, setting the scene through his keynote speech. The steps were to care, invest, innovate and integrate with other services. ‘We know these would reduce DRDs. The question is whether we care enough to do something about it.’

There had been a significant increase in opioid-related deaths since 2012 and the government had reacted by banning things (such as psychoactive sub­stances) rather than looking at the contributing factors.

We should be looking at the ‘devastating’ consequences of short-term commissioning and worsening socio-economic circumstances for vulnerable groups, he said. ‘The government is reducing the income of people who are most vulnerable to drug-related deaths.’ And from talking to legal support charity Release, who provide help and advice, he confirmed that ‘people are being given arbitrary changes to their treatment plans related to what their commissioners would prefer to provide.’

Changes in treatment and a focus on recovery had sidelined harm reduction, and there was pressure on services to achieve ‘drug-free exits’.

So what should we be doing? Two of the clearest practical steps were to invest in high quality opioid substitution therapy (OST) at optimal dosage and opti­mal duration, and to provide naloxone to practition­ers, peers and potential bystanders – anyone who comes in contact with a person who could be at risk of overdose.

‘Naloxone should be available and I’m saddened and angry that commissioners haven’t got the message,’ he said.

The risks were much higher out of treatment, ‘so we don’t want to be pushing people out of treatment before they’re ready, as this risks them dying,’ he spelled out.

We need to innovate, he said, and give proper consideration to heroin-assisted treatment, medically supervised consumption rooms, and new routes for administering naloxone.

Better service integration could also make a significant difference. ‘Pulmonary (lung) health tends to be very poor indeed,’ he said. We needed to provide better access to smoking cessation, tobacco harm reduction services, housing, dental health – ‘all the stuff that makes life meaningful’.

‘Service users in drug clinics have a high burden of respiratory disease,’ confirmed Dr Sandra Oelbaum, Addaction’s associate medical director and primary care lead, who gave her experience of improving access to COPD diagnosis and treatment in Liverpool shared care.

The links between drug use and breathlessness meant drug users were three times more likely to be admitted to hospital with respiratory conditions, she said, ‘so the impact on health services is very dispro­por­tionate’. There was very poor follow-up, with many feeling that they could not access care or go to their GPs.

Yet there were simple and effective measures that could engage people in treatment, such as putting spirometry (lung function tests) in drug treatment clinics. Trialing this in Liverpool shared-care clinics had achieved high levels of participation, diagnosis and treatment, with participants comfortable with the idea of having a COPD clinic located in drug treatment.

‘Sometimes we need to go back to principles and make sure we’re doing what we know works,’ said Dr Jan Melichar, consultant psychiatrist and medical director at DHI, South Gloucestershire, who had been asked to talk about ways of maximising treatment to reduce opioid-related deaths.

‘We’ve changed our emphasis from what’s good for people to successful treatment exits,’ he said, and he had clear advice. ‘Get them on doses that work. Suboptimal doses make things worse.’

The optimal doses were usually between 60-120mg of methadone and 12-16mg of buprenorphine. However the average doses were 46.6mg of methadone, 10.6mg of buprenorphine and 9.3mg of buprenorphine/ naloxone. So why was average dosing so low?

‘There’s fear of diversion,’ he said. But using buprenorphine as an example, 16mg was the best dose, as ‘at this dose it blocks. It lets them engage with getting better. Choose good clinical dosing and let people choose life.’

With representatives of some of the major treatment agencies in the room, the conference was an opportunity to debate sector-led solutions.

‘This is not a happy conversation to be having – it touches people’s lives every day,’ said Karen Tyrell, Addaction’s executive director of external affairs. It also had a huge impact on frontline workers, and ‘every organisation should be doing more about that’. To reduce drug-related deaths we needed to improve penetration rates – ‘make sure our services are easy to get into,’ she said.

With this in mind, a panel session brought together directors from Addaction, CGL and Turning Point, together with Paul Hayes of Collective Voice, the body representing the sector’s major treatment agencies.

‘We want to develop a shared statement,’ said Hayes. ‘We’re not just looking at overdoses, but excess deaths. This is a population with compromised hearts, lungs, mental health problems, who are in and out of prison and whom the rest of the population shuns.’

There were key areas to look at. These included helping service users to recognise who’s most vulner­able; improving clinical interventions and NHS engage­ment; and making pathways and appointments easier.

‘These things are difficult to navigate – God help you if you’re in your 40s and have had life experience that leaves you feeling compromised,’ said Hayes. ‘How do we make sure we have a system that has the right balance between offering people recovery but not pushing them into it too early? How do we engage with people who are most at risk – people outwith the treatment system?’

‘We want to be able to move people at risk up the system,’ said Dr Prun Bijral of CGL. ‘Our key workers are really pushed right now – we need to help them…. We need to have ambition. There’s a lack of penetration – people are not seeing our services as attractive. We need to look at the evidence base and prioritise.’

Another challenge for providers, he said was ‘to factor in 30 per cent or 40 per cent for non attendance loss’.

Dr David Bremner of Turning Point agreed with the need to adapt to circumstances. ‘We have to look at what harm minisisation advice is, in the context of massively slashed budgets – people are sometimes late or angry and we have to take this into account.

Bremner wanted to see better liaison to get things done. Getting commissioners along to morbidity and mortality meetings had ‘borne phenomenal fruit’.

‘We now have 100 per cent naloxone penetration,’ he said. ‘When there’s resistance to this, you have to hit it with a sledgehammer.’

Furthermore, he wanted providers to think outside of the usual competitive mindset. ‘We need to, as a group, set industry standards, so no one is scripted without naloxone. We also need to break the “dare to share” attitude,’ he said, rather than doubling up to all invest in new things from scratch.

Addaction’s executive director of operations, Anna Whitton, also spoke of the need to look past the competitive element. ‘This is about putting differences to one side, this is about people dying,’ she said. ‘If we find the right partnerships we can make quick differences to what’s happening.

‘We need to listen to service users and facilitate access to appointments, particularly early in their treatment,’ she said. ‘How do we make the system more responsive to people? How can we work flexibly and smarter?’

In Bremner’s view, ‘things we’ve done very poorly’ included accepting payment by results. ‘There are people who are seen as “not engaging”, but they are engaging, such as with the pharmacist. They’re just not engaging with you. We need to be more clinically authoritative.’ Providers also needed to ‘push back against CQC’, he believed, adding ‘I haven’t come across any inspection that’s going to stop deaths’.

‘I’m a big fan of low threshold prescribing – but try and get that past CQC now,’ he said. ‘It got people on and into treatment. But I believe we’re moving back to a more robust harm reduction model and low threshold prescribing is part of that.’

‘There is a mood shift,’ agreed Hayes. ‘Harm reduction never went away but it became unfashion­able. As the drug-related deaths agenda comes to dominate, it will be easier to talk in those terms.’

‘Some people just want a safe place to use,’ added Bijral. ‘We have to work with coroners and commissioners. We have to get people into treatment.’

‘Part of shifting the balance sits within treatment services,’ said Harry Shapiro, director of DrugWise, from the audience. ‘Harm reduction has become quaint, or a political watchword for legalisation. But we need to bring harm reduction back into the heart of the mainstream.

‘There’s a key message for the workforce,’ concluded Karen Tyrell. ‘Your fundamental job is to keep people alive. Be as aspirational as you want, but keep people alive.’

Knowledge exchange

Drug-related deaths:

NHS Trusts from across England came together to mark a vital new initiative in tackling drug-related deaths, as Danny Hames reports.

For a number of reasons 25 April was a significant date. In 1684, the patent was granted for the most sensible but useful of inventions, the thimble, but also it marked the formal launch of the NHS Substance Misuse Provider Alliance (www.nhssmpa.org.uk).

As a collaboration of a number of NHS trusts one of our key objectives has been to use the resources within our alliance to positively impact upon the drug and alcohol treatment sector. If as an alliance we can be half as useful as the thimble has been in avoiding harm we will be doing well. However, on a more serious note, this was a day when we were able to bring together service users and professionals from a range of backgrounds to share information and practical examples of service provision that we hope can contribute to reducing drug-related deaths.

The conference was hosted at Greater Manchester Mental Health Foundation Trust’s (GMMH) Curve Conference Centre and started with introductions from colleagues at GMMH, Bev Humphrey, chief executive, and Richard Rodgers, strategic lead for substance misuse. The challenge that was posed to all delegates was to ensure that we do not allow the marketisation and competitiveness of the drug and alcohol treatment sector stop the sharing of best practice – particularly important when sharing expertise and understanding between the drug and alcohol treatment sector and mental health. As Bev Humphreys said, this was a key reason why GMMH have remained in the sector – a reason that would apply to many of the NHS trusts across the country.

Dr Emily Finch, chair for the conference, introduced Professor John Strang who delivered the keynote speech alongside presentations from Steve Taylor of Public Health England and Dr Tim Millar from the University of Manchester. Professor Strang talked about the need for better action in preventing opioid deaths – a call to arms for the sector in responding to where the risks are and applying a broad range of remedies. This includes ensuring the availability of naloxone and also the many related factors, such as ensuring that family groups are not overlooked and are supported in how to manage overdose.

Steve Taylor provided a national overview of the impact of drug-related deaths, highlighting that although the majority of these are still male, female deaths are also steadily rising. Dr Tim Millar gave a useful insight into the cause of service users deaths that are not directly related to the use of a substance: a user of substances over the age of 45 was 27 times more likely to die of a homicide than someone in the general population and the risk of suicide was also very significant. His research also posed some interesting discussion points for service providers and commissioners; for example, the evidence would indicate that for those solely in psychological treatment the risk of drug-related death is no different to those who are not in treatment.

The morning concluded with a presentation from colleagues at Pennine, Derbyshire and Greater Manchester NHS Foundation Trusts providing their findings from drug-related death audits they had completed independently over the last few years. Again, the prevalence of suicide was notable in these audits.

The afternoon sessions were very much focused on initiatives that are provided at a service level and can be taken away and developed. This included a lung health pathway in Lambeth by South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust; presentations from Inclusion about their take-home naloxone project nationwide; and then in collaboration with the Hepatitis C Trust, a presentation of their P2P:peer mentor and hepatitis C project from Hampshire, which included a moving and inspirational film about the reasons for this work.

Mike Linnell walked us through the important work regarding early warning systems that has been happening in the Manchester area, and delegates also benefited from understanding the highly effective hospital liaison services working with alcohol users that GMMH and Salford Royal Foundation Trust are providing.

The purpose of the conference was to provide an insight into what is causing so many of the people we work with to die early through what are also often avoidable deaths. It was also meant to have a practical application, whereby the NHS organisations and partners who provided their expertise on the day gave the opportunity to make contacts and take away tangible and realistic innovations that can be applied in their services. From feedback on the day, the conference and launch of the NHS SMPA did this – but this is only the start, and we look forward to this being the first of many such events.

Danny Hames is chair of the Substance Misuse Provider Alliance

For more information about the day, contact candie.lincoln@sssft.nhs.uk

Who cares?

Drug-related deaths:

Like so many others, Darren’s death was preventable, says
Dr Chris Ford.

I still cry when I think of Darren months after his death. He was young and had done well in treatment – I felt I must discover why he had died, as so many others die, and drug-related deaths in the UK continue to rise.

I first met Darren in 1997. He was 17 years old and registered to ask for help with his heroin problem. He was also a charmer with a cheeky smile, but he looked unwell. He had been injecting for about six months and realised he couldn’t manage without heroin. He also told me he had an alcohol problem, which had improved since he took up heroin – he had been drinking up to two bottles of vodka a day but now only drank beer. The other drug he liked was diazepam, which he could pinch from his mother on occasions.

His request was to go on methadone and then become drug free. I said that was possible, but asked if I could see his injecting sites first. Darren rolled up his sleeves and revealed the worst injecting tissue damage I had ever seen. My first job was to teach him how to inject.

Darren settled well into treatment and after about nine months of methadone maintenance, he felt ready to become drug free so we discussed the pros and cons. He reduced over about six months and was very pleased. He agreed to continue counselling and to come back if he was at risk of relapsing.

After six months he relapsed – first on alcohol and benzos, and then heroin, and repeated this pattern for about 14 years. Mostly he would do outpatient detox with us, but did have two attempts at rehabilitation. For most of the time on maintenance, he worked as an apprentice in a butcher’s. He loved the work and dreamed of having his own shop. His relapses were usually started by increasing his alcohol, but a couple were when he found crack.

Having relapsed again in early 2011, Darren once again settled quickly on methadone maintenance. He had been drinking a lot and we discussed that as he had chronic hepatitis C, perhaps he should think more seriously about treatment. He smiled and said he would think about it. But early in 2012, having learnt that I was retiring, he said he must detox now as other services ‘may not understand me so well’.

Piecing together what happened in the four years leading up to his death made me angry. He had again relapsed on alcohol and benzodiazepines and was determined not to relapse on heroin, so presented asking for benzodiazepines. Both the local service and his GP turned him down, saying they were very addictive. Darren found it easy to get them from the internet so his habit increased enormously, mainly to try and curtail his alcohol. He started to feel more unwell and realised that his drinking was not helping his hepatitis C, so changed to heroin. He lost his job, split up with his girlfriend and had rows with his mum, so presented for help at the local service.

He was told to come back a week later for an assessment and was ten minutes late, so was made to come back the next day. He was told buprenorphine was the best drug for him, disagreed – and this almost got him excluded for a month. He decided to give it another try and presented in the morning in withdrawals. After four attempts he got his first dose.

Darren soon realised it wasn’t going to work, but the service insisted he continued. He dropped out of treatment, his alcohol and benzodiazepines went out of control, and he added crack and heroin. After several months, heroin helped him reduce his alcohol and he started to buy methadone off the street. He was even able to start work again. He tried the local service again and this time they agreed to continue methadone. All continued well for several months but after a series of missed appointments, he again dropped out of treatment, took up alcohol, lost his job and was thrown out of his flat. Darren’s last year is hazy but he seemed to isolate from friends and family, drank all he could get hold of and injected any drugs.

He was found dead in a stairwell with a needle in his arm and a can of strong lager by his side. He was only 36 years old.

The USA tops the chart in terms of opioid overdose deaths, increasing 255 per cent between 1999 and 2015. In England and Wales the rate increased by 35 per cent between 1999 and 2015, and then by a shocking 64 per cent linked to heroin and morphine over the last two years – the highest since records began. The UK now has the highest proportion (38 per cent) of the European total.

Australia, Germany, Luxembourg, Norway, Switzerland, Greece and Italy are reducing overdose deaths. What do they have in common? Extremely good access to opioid substitution therapy (OST). What else helps? Drug consumption rooms (DCRs), heroin-assisted treatment, measures to reduce homelessness, and take-home naloxone.

What do I think killed Darren? People not seeing him as a person and services not seeing him as an individual – as well as the UK government replacing extremely effective harm reduction with abstinence. Overdose deaths can be reduced – the science is easy. It’s the policies that need changing.

Chris Ford is clinical director at IDHDP

Overdose deaths up across Europe

The total number of drug overdose deaths in Europe has risen for the third consecutive year, according to EMCDDA’s European drug report 2017. There were 8,441 fatal overdoes, ‘mainly related to heroin and other opioids’, in the 30 countries covered by the report in 2015, compared to 7,950 the previous year.

Increases were reported in almost all age groups, the document states, while methadone-related deaths exceeded heroin-related deaths in Ireland, France, Croatia and Denmark, underlining the need for ‘good clinical practice’ to prevent diversion. However, there are now take-home naloxone programmes in nine EU countries plus Norway, the report points out, as well as drug consumption rooms in six plus Norway.

The report also draws attention to the growing threat posed by potent synthetic opioids, despite them ‘representing a small share of the market’. Twenty-five new synthetic opioids have been detected in Europe since 2009, it says, 18 of them fentanyls (DDN, June, page 8).

While previous years’ European drug reports have highlighted the exponential increases in NPS being detected for the first time via the EU Early Warning System (EWS), 2016 saw the number fall to 66 from the previous year’s 95. Although this signifies a ‘slowing of the pace’, it still represents more than one per week and NPS remain ‘a considerable public health challenge’, the document stresses, with more than 620 now being monitored by EMCDDA. New legislation, including blanket bans like the UK’s Psychoactive Substances Act, and the targeting of NPS labs in China may have contributed to the slowdown, it says.

New commercially regulated cannabis markets in countries outside Europe are ‘fuelling innovation’ and development of products such as vaporisers and e-liquids that could eventually affect patterns of use in the EU, the report adds, while cocaine purity and availability is also rising across the continent.

‘Our latest findings suggest that responses to new psychoactive substances, such as new legislation and measures targeting the high-street shops that sell these products, may be having an impact on the emergence of NPS on the market,’ said EMCDDA director Alexis Goosdeel. ‘But despite positive signs of a slowdown in product innovation, overall availability remains high. We are seeing sales of these drugs becoming more clandestine, with transactions moving online or onto the illicit drug market, and we have witnessed the recent appearance of some highly potent substances, which have been linked to deaths and serious intoxications’.

European drug report 2017: trends and developments at www.emcdda.europa.eu

Letters and comment

We welcome your letters and comment. Please send your feedback to articles – as well as your thoughts on any aspect of your work or personal experience – by emailing the editor, claire@cjwellings.com. Letters for publication should be up to 350 words.

Smoke without fire

Having worked in this sector for over ten years it never ceases to amaze me how little attention is paid to smoking cessation. Every drug and alcohol service is instantly recognisable by the small huddle of smokers near the door, and these are the professionals working there! Clients smoking is something that in my experience is hardly ever addressed, despite the huge health risks associated with it. The rationale is that our job is to work with clients to tackle their primary addiction to drugs and alcohol, and that trying to stop smoking could jeopardise tentative first steps to recovery.

That is why e-cigarettes are a game changer! Clients do not have to increase their stress levels by trying to quit an often very entrenched habit, but simply switch to using something that is hugely less harmful. This is why I was interested to read Professor Neil McKeganey’s article in May’s DDN magazine on the relatively low uptake of e-cigarette use, and the misconceptions around how harmful they are compared to normal cigarettes. This is despite PHE stating that vaping was 95 less harmful than smoking. McKeganey states that alongside confusion and dislike of the paraphernalia, this has led to only around 15 per cent of smokers switching.

I think it is our duty to encourage clients to try to switch to vaping, and ensure that they are aware of the facts and have access to the equipment. We could even be handing out free e-cigarettes and allowing clients to use them in services! By doing this we will be improving their health and wealth, which all goes towards a successful sustainable recovery.
Lucy Phillips, via email

No sticking plaster

In response to ‘The emperor’s new clothes’, (DDN, May, p19): People do not ‘recover’ from childhood trauma, entrenched behaviour and mental illness just by sticking a methadone or subutex script in front of them. Without long-term investment in proven therapeutic interventions that work with clients where they are at in that long, long recovery journey we will continue to see an increase in drug related deaths and low successful outcomes. I have worked in substance misuse for 20 years and services have got less client focused and less accessible to those with the greatest need. We need a revolution in service design and commissioning and some commissioners who understand the complexity of problematic substance misuse.
Daisy Flower, via DDN Magazine Facebook page

Sense on Xanax

Thank you for your comprehensive look at the risks of Xanax (DDN, April, page 6). Young people at my son’s school know all about getting hold of this drug but the school has done nothing to help parents or pupils by acknowledging the drug, let alone what to do about it. I am lucky that my sister gets DDN at work, as I have been able to show the school information that gives the facts without scaremongering. I hope that they will actually use the info to start discussion on prevention before it’s too late.
S Riley, by email

Time to train

Clive Hallam makes some good points in his article on talking therapies (DDN, April, page 18) but, because of the quantity of misinformation in the rehab sector and the paucity of most of the so-called rehab systems on which his observations rely, he understandably misses the main requirements for recovering addicts from their habit. OST is not a recovery from addition prog­ramme – it is merely a change of supplier and as Clive has rightly pointed out, too many talking therapies rely on the practitioner rather than on the process they use.

Society cannot afford to provide a police or medical minder for anybody for life, so any viable solution must sufficiently empower the addict to enable him or her to take control of their own life, and again help themselves. This means using a non-drug withdrawal, plus training in two things: giving them the knowledge of how to reach and maintain abstinence; and at the same time resurrecting their responsibility level to the point where they can run their own lives.

Substituting one addictive substance for another does not cure. Talking about one’s addiction seldom cures, nor does so-called ‘treatment’. But drug-free withdrawal plus training does work in enough cases to make it thoroughly worthwhile.
E. Kenneth Eckersley, CEO, Addiction Recovery Training Services (ARTS)

Choice is a lifeline

Thanks for your article ‘More Choice, More Options’ (DDN, April, page 14). It is essential that the role OST can provide in an individual’s recovery is acknowledged, and not ignored as part of a desire for a ‘one size fits all’ abstinence based model.

I am in long-term recovery and am now abstinent from all drugs, but without the pause from the madness of addiction and the period of stability that my prescription created, I do not think I would be where I am today. It is also interesting to hear of new innovations within this sector, which will hopefully help to reduce stigma towards people on scripts and provide more opportunities for more people to start their recovery journey.
Max, by email

**************

Bold moves

The UK’s drug policy approach is no longer fit for purpose. It’s time to try something new, says Norman Lamb

The Liberal Democrats have long been calling for wholesale reform of our outdated and catastrophic drugs policies. There is no doubt that the War on Drugs has failed to tackle the harm caused by illegal drug use, or support problematic users into treatment and rehabilitation. Instead, we put huge sums of money into the pockets of criminals. It is a completely stupid approach.

While Labour and the Conservatives want to persist with the War on Drugs, however disastrous the consequences, the Liberal Democrats have been prepared to stand up in Parliament and call for the bold changes that are clearly required. We have recently been pushing for a debate in the Commons to force the government’s hand, and had been close to securing one before Theresa May announced a general election. Hopefully we will be in an even stronger position to make the case after 8 June.

The Liberal Democrats are the only party with a progressive, liberal, and evidence-based policy on drugs. We strongly believe that the possession of all drugs for personal use should be decriminalised on public health grounds, but have also gone one step further by calling for a legalised and regulated cannabis market in the UK. It would allow the sale of cannabis from specialist, licensed stores, overseen by a new regulator. The model was proposed by an independent expert panel, which I established, before being formally adopted as Lib Dem policy in March 2016.

We have to be pragmatic. We know that people will continue to purchase and use drugs, so ensuring their safety and wellbeing must be our absolute priority. It’s disheartening to see other countries adopt more enlightened approaches while Britain is stuck in the dark ages.

Drug and alcohol addiction stands alongside obesity and smoking as one of the biggest public health disasters the country faces. There is a moral imperative to ensure that treatment services are properly funded, which unfortunately hasn’t been the case in recent years, but we also need to end our hard-line approach to drug addiction where people are too often punished instead of being diverted to treatment and support. The Liberal Democrats have been clear that we would invest more resources in public health, ensuring that every local area is able to provide strong services including treatment for drug and alcohol misuse.

Our message of hope is this: There is a political party committed to fighting to reverse the cuts we have seen to substance misuse services, to reforming our damag­ing drugs laws so that drug use is treated as a health issue rather than a criminal offence, and to delivering a properly-funded, world-class health and care service where nobody goes without the right support. Only a vote for the Liberal Democrats on 8 June will guarantee a strong voice on these issues over the next five years.

**************

In search of altruism

A year on from ‘View From The Coalface’ (DDN, April 2016, page 17), the Mulberry Community Project is still alive and well and has ambitions, says Keith Stevenson.

When I started up the Mulberry Community Project six years ago, people told me it wouldn’t work. I approached the powers that be and they told me that they had no money to help us and that they didn’t understand the concept of recovery houses.

Mulberry started with £250 in the bank and a lot of faith. We had help from Green Pastures, our partners from Southport who could see the vision, and support from the church at All Hallows in Blackpool, which has been a lifeline for us. We have seen other organisations come and go and huge pots of money being used and abused by others trying to do what we have done – helping people finding their road to recovery and out of the chaos.

We’ve now had six years of building the programme and working with people – some who wanted recovery and some who just wanted a roof over their heads; six years of sending people back into society to work, lead a productive abstinence-based lifestyle and enjoy life. We still get phone calls and visits from our past residents, and we catch up on how well they are doing and what they are achieving.

However there is so much more we could do, by offering work experience along with qualifications – so that when people leave, their readiness for work is obvious. To achieve this we need help. I have just been to the opening of a fantastic project in Blackpool that helps young people with terminal illness have holidays, and the vision and the dream is breathtaking. It is easier to raise funds for a popular charity like this than for one that helps recovering addicts; we are not a ‘pretty’ charity, and I know we are not alone in this. However we receive no funding from commissioners and we have to rely on what we earn and what we raise.

This may sound silly, but I want people who could give without expecting any return – to perhaps loan without making a profit out of it. I want altruistic people who are willing to be involved with helping people get back into society. I want £50k so we can build a project that is going to have a massive impact on people’s lives, and those around them. We are a very small charity and that amount would be massive to us.

I want to help those who may never have had work, people who need training to expand their skills and who are looking for independence from the state, and I know it can be done. If there is anyone out there who has caught the vision, please get in touch and let’s build something together to enable people to live the dream.

Keith Stevenson is founder and CEO of the Mulberry Community Project

DDN June 2017

‘Most drug-related deaths are of people not in treatment’

By the end of this week the next government will have been chosen – and who knows, the wheels may have started turning again after a static couple of months for policy. As I write though, the debates are still in full swing and the leaflets are still dropping through the door.

So much noise, and so many promises by the politicians to listen. So here are some suggestions served up by this month’s issue. Turn to page 4 to learn that the sector is vulnerable and volatile, and that services closing could lead to thousands of people dropping further down the waiting lists.

Go to page 6 to be reminded that most drug-related deaths are of people not in treatment – and that the first place to look for these people is on the streets, where outreach workers do their best to engage with and protect a growing population of rough sleepers despite diminishing resources.

Turn to page 8 for a comprehensive briefing on fentanyl – a drug with many highly dangerous forms that requires a robust and proactive harm reduction and education strategy, rather than a knee-jerk ‘ban everything’ reaction.

Then carry on to page 12 to hear feedback from young people on how to engage around substance misuse in a way that is meaningful to them – and finally, read some difficult pages (14-17) about drug-related deaths, the topic you don’t really want to acknowledge. If major treatment agencies are willing to put competition to one side to look for joint action to halt the climb in mortality figures, shouldn’t politicians join in?

Claire Brown, editor

Read the PDF version or the mobile magazine.

Slow on the draw

Why are smokers reluctant to exchange the risks of cigarettes for the health benefits of e-cigs, asks Neil McKeganey.

E-cigarettes have been characterised by Public Health England as being as up to 95 per cent less harmful than combustible cigarettes. On the basis of that figure, and the fact that smoking kills around one in two of all smokers, you would have thought that smokers would be heading towards e-cigarettes in their droves – but that does not seem to be what is happening.

According to the UK charity Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), there are approximately 2.8m people in the UK who are using e-cigarettes, 51 per cent of whom are current smokers. ASH has also estimated that there are approximately 9.1m adult smokers in the UK. On the basis of those figures, only around 15.6 per cent of adult smokers in the UK are using e-cigarettes. Given the enormous individual and public health benefit that would flow from more smokers switching to the non-combustible product, it is important to identify what the barriers are to wider use of e-cigarettes by smokers.

As hard to believe as it might be, one of those barriers might be a misplaced assessment of how harmful e-cigarettes are compared to normal cigarettes. Both in the US and the UK there has been a worrying increase in the number of smokers who think that e-cigarettes are actually more harmful than normal cigarettes. The reason for such an erroneous view is likely to be news media headlines that repeatedly announce the harms of e-cigarette use, without comparing those harms to combustible cigarettes. It is entirely possible that some smokers are choosing not to switch to non-combustible nicotine products in the mistaken belief that to do so might actually increase their level of risk and harm.

In interviews with a sample of smokers, many of those who said that they had tried e-cigarettes but not continued with them commented that, in their view, these devices were a poor substitute for smoking. Some of the smokers said that they did not like the hard plastic feel of e-cigarettes or the feeling that vaping was ‘cold’ in a way in which smoking was ‘warm’.

Some of the smokers were clearly confused by the vast array of e-cigarette technology and put off by the bewildering details of nicotine strengths, flavours, coils, ohms, tanks, wicks and batteries. For these smokers, the cigarette had an appealing simplicity. If you have one, you light it, and you smoke it. The comments from these smokers suggest that the technology of e-cigarettes has some way to go before these devices become attractive to the majority of smokers.

Government can initiate measures that are likely to increase e-cigarette use among smokers. These measures include ensuring that e-cigarettes are taxed at a level that makes them cheaper than combustible products. Another thing that governments can do, is to discourage the various bans on e-cigarette use that have been instituted out of a misplaced belief secondhand vaping causes harm. Public health bodies, however, need to do much better in accurately conveying to smokers the relative harms of combustible and non-combustible cigarettes, tackling the large and growing proportion of smokers who don’t know, or who believe that smoking is actually safer than vaping.

There are other ways in which the use of e-cigarettes can be stimulated among smokers is for ‘stop smoking’ services to become e-cigarette friendly. While there are some services that positively encourage e-cigarette use by smokers as a way of bolstering individuals’ attempts at stopping smoking, there are other services that either frown on e-cigarettes and or ban the use of these products on their premises. Such bans contribute to stigmatising vapers and vaping, and ignore the fact that hundreds of thousands of smokers have used these devices as a way of stopping smoking.

Finally, manufacturers of e-cigarettes have an important role to play in increasing the appeal of these devices to smokers – which, ironically, may entail ensuring that the experience of vaping is closer to the experience of smoking.

Prof Neil McKeganey is at the Centre for Substance Use Research, Glasgow

On a mission to cure hep C

Curing hepatitis C has become a reality and makes sense for the public purse as well as public health. So let’s get on with it, says Dee Cunniffe.

If you heard there was a disease that affected an estimated 216,000 people in the UK, including 160,000 people in England, and was contributing to an increased mortality from liver disease – one of the five ‘big killers’ – and also posed a significant public health risk, you might say that something should be done about it. In the case of hepatitis C, the ball has started to roll, but those of us who work in this area know that so much more could, and should, be being done right now.

Hepatitis C – also known as hep C or HCV infection – is a virus that infects the liver. It is usually spread through blood-to-blood contact, and if left untreated, can cause serious and life-threatening damage. It’s for this reason that it is sometimes known as the ‘silent killer’ as it can remain undetected for many years – currently an estimated 40 per cent of people don’t even know they have the condition.

We know that hepatitis C is a condition of inequalities, disproportionately affecting marginalised groups. Injecting drug use remains the major risk factor for infection in England, 50 to 80 per cent of injecting drug users are infected with hepatitis C within five years of beginning to inject (Hepatitis C in London, PHE, 2015).

‘Our ultimate mission is to eliminate HCV as a public health threat.’ Dee Cunniffe

Formed in 2009, the London Joint Working Group on Substance Use and Hepatitis C (LJWG) is a group of expert clinicians and patient advocacy and voluntary sector leads, working in collaboration with a wide group of stakeholders. Our common goal is to implement an integrated plan to drive improvements in the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and outcomes of hepatitis C in people who use drugs, and reduce the spread of the virus. Our ultimate mission is to prevent new infection in people who do, or who have, injected drugs (PWIDs) in London and to help treat and eliminate HCV as a public health threat.

Why is this important? Well, we know from the PHE figures that the prevalence of hep C among people who inject is higher in London (55 per cent) than elsewhere in England (45 per cent) and that currently there are around 60,000 people in London who carry the virus.

But here’s where the figures get worrying. LJWG’s Public health report on commissioning of HCV services in London for people who inject drugs (2013) found that only three per cent of people diagnosed with hep C in London are being treated – an even smaller proportion than the 4.2 per cent in the rest of the country), and only one in three London boroughs has a hep C testing-to-treatment pathway.

In London’s prisons the situation is similarly poor, says PHE, with only 6.4 per cent of new receptions reported as having been tested, compared with 7.8 per cent in the rest of England. When people with chronic HCV infection remain undiagnosed, they in turn fail to access treatment. Often they will then present late with complications of HCV-related end-stage liver disease (ESLD) and cancer, which we know have low survival rates.

However, there is plenty that can be done about the current rates of hepatitis C in London and elsewhere around the country. The main causes of liver disease are alcohol misuse, obesity and viral hepatitis and of these, hepatitis C is the one most amenable to intervention. When the new wave of direct acting antiviral (DAA) drugs came onto the scene a couple of years ago, the outlook became significantly brighter for hepatitis C patients: this disease is now curable in 90-95 per cent of cases. This means that our vision to help eliminate HCV as a public health threat now lies in the realms of the possible.

Our work with substance users in London shows how much of a difference these new medicines have made. Our LJWG hep C care booklets, produced in collaboration with Magdalena Harris from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, include comments from clients like Brad, who said: ‘I’m thinking about my future in a different way now. I’ve started to be a bit more positive and started thinking right, I could get rid of this. If I get rid of this within the year, that’s it, I’ve got a new life.’

Or Ivan, who said: ‘Getting shot of hep C, it’s making me more confident… free… I just feel so much more lifted. I really do, and if it didn’t work at least I was given the option, at least people are trying for me, they’ve not given up on me, thinking “he’s not worthless”. They’re thinking “he’s worth it, let’s give him a hand”.’

The LJWG is a member of the Hepatitis C Coalition, a national group of clinicians, patient groups, charities and other groups who also want to see a more coordinated and effective approach to testing, treating and curing people with hepatitis C in the UK, and greater emphasis on the prevention of new infections. Finding patients through community outreach – through drug and alcohol services particularly – getting them tested and on to treatment in a timely manner is ultimately a win-win situation: people suffering from hep C can get the disease out of their system and get on with their lives, while the NHS saves itself cash from having to treat advanced liver disease for the same patient later on down the line.

Liver disease costs the NHS around £500m every year and the figure is rising annually, so testing and treating for hepatitis C – especially among the most at-risk groups of people – should be a national priority.

That’s before the severity of the public health risk is put into the picture. The sooner people are cured, the sooner they no longer pose a risk to others of passing on the disease. Among people who inject drugs, that has to be a major concern. The mantra of ‘test, treat, cure’ covers all bases and solves the issue.

The call to action therefore needs to be three-fold: increase testing, increase diagnoses and maximise treatment for all those with hepatitis C, especially for people who inject drugs. The LJWG is committed to working towards this goal and invites all those who share our vision to get involved with us.

Dee Cunniffe is policy lead of the London Joint Working Group on Substance Use and Hepatitis C.

The LJWG will be holding its annual conference at the Guildhall in London on Tuesday 26 September 2017. Click here for more information and to get involved.

Stay ahead of CQC

Pleased with your CQC inspection or bruised by the experience? David Finney gives you the key issues.

The first phase of inspections of substance misuse services by the CQC Hospital Directorate is now complete and all reports published. The experience of providers under this new regime has been varied: some received accolades, while others with previously excellent ratings have been severely criticised. Some services have even closed as a result of the new approach.

Sometimes CQC have ‘requested’ that providers temporarily suspend admissions while changes are made. This has been serious where there is a quick turnover of residents (in detox, for example) and numbers in treatment quickly reduce. Problems have also arisen when commissioners have been informed of negative comments in an inspection report, which has led to admissions being suspended or reduced.

CQC have already published the ‘key lines of enquiry’, used by inspectors, but many inspection judgements seem to be have been made according to additional criteria, such as NICE guidelines, extra guidance issued by CQC or simply the interpretation of regulations by the inspector.

Therefore, providers often ask me: are inspectors looking for services that replicate the NHS, or do they appreciate the distinctiveness of residential rehabilitation services, or the informality and reach of community-based services?

So, let us consider some of the issues attracting inspectors’ attention:

1. The Mental Capacity Act. CQC expect that all staff have some awareness of what this act means for their service. Staff training is important, but staff also need to know what to do if someone lacks capacity while in the service, and how to assess for capacity in the first place.

2. Governance. CQC seem to increasingly expect an NHS-like system of accountability, where matters such as incident management, safeguarding, service user outcomes, key performance indicators etc are formally monitored; improvements made and risk registers produced. It is reasonable to expect corporate bodies to have such formal systems, but smaller services often have less formal ways of overseeing their work, which can be just as effective, but harder to evidence to the inspector.

3. Ligature risks. A focus on this topic springs from the mental health background of the CQC directorate inspecting substance misuse services. To my knowledge, there have been very few incidents of suicide risk in residential services, but now services are being expected to thoroughly examine their environment for ligature risks. CQC provide separate guidance about this issue on their website.

4. Clinical issues. These have been many and varied, but inspectors have often focused on assessment tools such as SADQ and CIWa for alcohol dependence and withdrawal, and other tests for drug dependence such as SDS. They often comment on the use of emergency medication such naloxone and rescue medication for seizures. NICE guidelines figure highly in CQC inspection reports, whereas they are only mentioned in passing in the ‘key lines of enquiry’. There is also an expectation that providers have a multi-disciplinary team (MDT) in place; smaller services who are not equipped with an array of professionals on their staff team may have some difficulty explaining how they provide this.

5. Care Issues. These have included a wide range of subjects, from a lack of thoroughness in initial comprehensive assessments and seemingly low involvement of clients in their care planning, to the lack of privacy in shared rooms and the new topic of a requirement for same-sex accommodation (which seems to reflect concerns about mixed wards in the NHS).

6. Statutory notifications. There has been controversy over which deaths to report, especially in community services where service users may have infrequent contact with drug and alcohol workers. Exactly what qualifies as a death ‘while receiving a service’ is clearly up for debate with CQC. Other events, such as when police are involved or when a serious injury occurs, are also classed as ‘notifiable incidents’ by CQC, which providers can easily overlook. As it is a statutory requirement to make these notifications, CQC will deem any omission to do so as a ‘breach of regulation’, which has serious implications in terms of enforcement action.

These are just some of the issues causing concern and setbacks for substance misuse services – as if the funding crisis suffered by many services were not enough to dampen spirits. The CQC Hospital Directorate has certainly been making its presence felt during this round of inspections; so what of the future?

There is no public indication of when CQC will introduce ratings for the substance misuse sector, and the most recent consultation about CQC methodology amalgamated all the criteria into a generalised document that said very little about substance misuse services at all. Should providers just wait and hope for the best until we find out what CQC will do next – or is it better to actively prepare for the next round of inspections in the light of what we know already?

David Finney is an independent social care consultant who has been involved in the inspection of substance misuse services for 21 years, most of the time working for government inspection bodies. He is planning a training event to address these issues on 10 July.

Get in on the act

ACT Peer Recovery™ (ACT-PR) is a new form of mutual aid recognised by Public Health England.

WHAT IS IT?
ACT-PR is very simple. So simple it takes just 60 seconds to get started. Try it for yourself on the website – push the ‘start learning’ button. However, just because it’s easy to learn doesn’t mean it’s lightweight or not backed up by research.

ACT-PR is based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), which has an evidence base on a par with CBT. The peer model is based on the ACT Matrix, which is a simpler training format.

It was developed in Portsmouth from 2008 and eventually grew to 20 groups per week across the whole community, from the general hospital to the library. In 2013 the peers wanted to make it available more widely, and a community interest company was established. Information days were held in Manchester with Emerging Futures and it also caught the attention of PHE in relation to FAMA (facilitated access to mutual aid). ACT-PR was approved for inclusion in the new policy guidelines in July 2015.

Since then ACT-PR has grown steadily, and there are over 40 meetings a week (excluding Portsmouth) across 12 local authority areas, with a further 15 areas developing. A new group opens on average every week, and that is accelerating.

‘ACT-PR is so simple it takes just 60 seconds to get started.’

SO HOW DOES IT WORK?
The unique feature of ACT-PR is its simplicity, achieved via focus on behaviour (see the short introductory videos). Behaviours are divided into two categories – those that take you towards recovery, and those that take you away. By learning to notice this difference, peers begin to reduce the ‘away’ behaviours and increase the ‘towards’ behaviours. In a nutshell, that’s it.

Recovery is defined as building a life of meaning and purpose in the community. The backbone of the programme is the monthly challenge in which each peer chooses to make a significant behavioural change. Sometimes it’s successful, sometimes it isn’t. But what’s important is to learn by a trial and error approach in which failure leads to success.

‘Of course there are obstacles – we call these “lemons”.’

The only requirement for attending an ACT-PR meeting is that you commit to a challenge. Of course there are obstacles – we call these ‘lemons’, summed up in the programme’s key metaphor ‘passengers on the bus’:

‘Building your life can be like driving a bus (behaviour) in a certain route (direction). However, when you start driving the passengers (lemons) get upset and bother the driver, who usually responds by trying to get them off the bus. Problem is, then the bus doesn’t go anywhere, or even crashes.’

This is where acceptance comes in – some painful thoughts and feelings like anxiety, sadness or guilt are part of life. The commitment part is driving the bus with the passengers on board. So you learn to become ‘comfortable with being uncomfortable’ – the key to freedom and a better life.

STRUCTURE
Meetings are arranged at different levels, each divided into eight lessons delivered from a manual by the peer facilitator. The facilitators are trained, supported and licensed to ensure quality. The meetings are always open access, voluntary and independent.

FAMA
The new videos mean that anyone can be introduced to ACT-PR in 60 seconds, and connected to mutual aid. This can be built into the assessment process so that everyone has access to mutual aid right from the start. Licensed peers also run basic level ‘introduction to ACT-PR’ meetings as part of their service roles, providing a joined-up pathway into mutual aid. ACT-PR fits very well with the 12 steps and SMART so it is another choice for people entering recovery.

ONLINE
An online version of ACT-PR is being rolled out, with the first level a simple introduction, foll­owed by an interactive version of the lessons. This makes ACT-PR available to anyone with internet access, and in time individual peer-to-peer support will also be available online.

BEHAVIOURAL HEALTH
As a behavioural approach, ACT-PR can be applied to many conditions that people face in recovery, from anxiety and depression to diabetes and pain. The peer approach can work with anything that is behavioural.

Mark Webster is CEO of ACT Peer Recovery. To find out more visit www.act-peer-recovery.com

**********************

ACT IN ACTION…

‘Life has got a lot more peaceful and relationships have improved all round.’

ACT-PR in Bristol
by Jamie Freeman

I first came across ACT-PR at a FAMA training day in 2015. What appealed to me was the focus on behaviour and I also liked the fact that it wasn’t measured in terms of success/failure. I followed it up and if memory serves, the first conversation went like this:

Me: We don’t have any peer organisations in Bristol.
Mark: Set one up.
Me: How do I do that for ACT Peer Recovery?
Mark: You’re doing it right now.

We agreed that an information day would be a good place to start, and in spring 2016 Bristol City Council gave us a small sum to host it. Mark came with four peers and they presented ACT-PR to us – everyone got it straight away and the first group was set up in October 2016. Twelve of us started in a space at Bristol Drugs Project, and it was amazing how things suddenly began to click.

We’ve now finished the group leader training and have four new ACT meetings, including an LGBTQ+ meeting. We’ve formed a small charitable organisation and found office space. We have several people interested in doing the next round of group leader training in September.

With my peer colleagues we have worked hard to get ACT-PR off the ground because we have all benefitted from the model ourselves – developing our noticing muscles, loving our lemons and changing our lives. We really have ‘just done it’.

The peer experience
by female parent, 40

‘Past/present/future’ is a format from the meetings:

Past: I used to react, get angry and be confrontational which caused arguments at home, filtered down to my children and rippled out to the rest of my life. It caused problems everywhere, including work.
Present: ACT-PR helped me get a pause button so I could notice my behaviours in advance and stop myself. Now I talk instead of shouting and choose my words carefully. Future: Life has got a lot more peaceful and relationships have improved all round. I am no longer this ogre that people are frighten­ed of. I have become more approachable, and get on so much better with everyone.

FAMA, Warrington
by BRIC worker

After assessment we started to tell people about ACT-PR. They could attend a short introductory session that is held every week at the same time, so staff know when it is.

From the beginning it has been well attended and we have seven or eight people coming each week to learn the basic principles. In the year we have seen over 200 different people at these introductory sessions. Half go on to the full mutual aid meeting that we also run in the building. After that there are the community groups which attract a wide range of people.

We are now getting ready to use the video introductions at assessment time, and expect the numbers to grow even further. The results speak for themselves, and many people have stayed the course and developed recovery in the mutual aid groups.

The facilitator experience
By Lancashire male, 36

I attended a meeting and had a lot of ‘penny-drop’ moments – it really made sense to me, so I wanted to see if I could help out. I started by doing small parts of the meeting while the leader supported me, like a mentor, until my confidence improved. Once I was comfortable doing that I attended the six-week training course.

I enjoyed the course because it was very practical. We didn’t just sit there and listen – we had to have a go and get out of our comfort zone. As the weeks went by my confidence improved and by the end I was ready to start my own group, which you have to do to get a licence.

Now I run my own group and have watched the attendance slowly build. It makes me feel very proud to see people starting out on the process that I followed. One day I’ll hand it over to them and go on to the next level. And yes, it’s still scary – but it works.

 

Lifeline to close after almost 50 years

The Lifeline Project, which provides services to around 80,000 people, is to close as a result of financial difficulties. Staff at the charity, which was established in 1971, were told on 18 May that it was aiming to transfer its services to other providers.

The organisation’s data on the Charity Commission website for the financial year 2015-16 show that it had income of £61.8m and spending of £60.5m, as well as £3.2m of own-use assets and £9m of other assets. Its total liabilities were listed as £5.9m.

Ex-UKDPC chief executive Roger Howard resigned from Lifeline’s board in November 2016 after raising concerns about management and governance issues. He also raised the concerns with the Charity Commission.

‘I was reminded of the lessons arising from Kids Company – the failure of governance and leadership,’ Howard told DDN. ‘Yes, austerity is there, there have been substantial reductions in the ring-fenced grant for treatment, the constant re-tendering process is incredibly challenging – and staff did brilliantly in sustaining through that. But you have to ask the question of why is it that CGL, Turning Point, Addaction, Phoenix and any of the other organisations are coping with the sort of managerial and governance demands being placed upon them. I think that’s where there was a pretty clear failing on the part of Lifeline. It’s easy for the field to think that this is all the result of big bad commissioners and funding constraints, but in this circumstance I think that narrative probably needs to be challenged.’

The pressure to deliver more services against a background of financial uncertainty made it ‘vitally important that all organisations in this sector are impeccably well-run and well governed’, said WDP chair Yasmin Batliwala. ‘That is why I look forward to the results of a full investigation into this regrettable development, which was surely preventable.’

From 1 June, a large number of Lifeline services will be taken over by change, grow, live (CGL). Service users will be able to expect ‘the same level of treatment and care’, says CGL, with referrals continuing as normal and service contact details staying the same for the time being. ‘CGL are looking to help and, quite rightly, to preserve as many services and staff as possible,’ said Howard.

‘The numbers aren’t confirmed yet, but we’re working to take over the majority of services,’ CGL’s executive director Mike Pattinson told DDN. ‘Obviously that isn’t a decision that can be made just between Lifeline and CGL – we’re in the process of negotiations with various commissioners or lead contractors who might be Lifeline sub-contractors, but we’re working towards taking over the majority. Our engagement with Lifeline over the last few weeks has been explicitly to make sure that service users are safeguarded, there’s continuity of service provision and that employment is protected. They approached us around what support we could offer, and then asked us about transition of services. Our engagement was at their request.’

CGL has written to Lifeline staff and aims to provide as much stability as possible in the short term, ‘recognising that the start of June is only a couple of weeks away,’ added Pattinson. ‘Clearly our explicit involvement with Lifeline staff could only start once Lifeline had communicated to their employees themselves. We’re working to protect as much employment as we can, but we’ve also said we do need to make sure that the services that are transferring are on a stable, sustainable financial footing – that’s the commitment we’ve got to make. There are a number of issues we’re going to have to look at, but our intention is to protect employment, protect service users and protect continuity of service.’

Lifeline has been contacted for comment for this story.

Any Lifeline staff transferring to CGL who have questions or concerns should contact servicetransfer@cgl.org.uk

Lib Dems promise legal cannabis market

The Liberal Democrats have made a manifesto commitment to decriminalise the possession of illegal drugs for personal use and introduce a ‘legal, regulated’ market for cannabis. The latter would ‘break the grip’ of criminal gangs and raise £1bn in annual tax revenues, says their manifesto document, which also pledges to repeal the controversial Psychoactive Substances Act.

Anyone arrested for possession of drugs for personal use would either be diverted into treatment and education as part of a ‘health-based approach’ or be subject to ‘civil penalties’, says Change Britain’s future, with the authorities concentrating instead on those who import, deal or manufacture illegal drugs. The Psychoactive Substances Act would be repealed as it has ‘driven the sale of formerly legal highs underground’, while the departmental lead on drug policy would be moved from the Home Office to the Department of Health.

The proposed regulated cannabis market would ‘introduce limits on potency’ and allow cannabis to be sold via licensed outlets to people over 18, the document states. The party previously commissioned an expert panel chaired by Transform’s Steve Rolles to produce a report looking at how such a market could work in practice (DDN, April 2016, page 4), and last month Liberal Democrat health spokesperson Norman Lamb wrote in DDN that the war on drugs was ‘a completely stupid approach’ (DDN, May, page 10).

‘The war on drugs has been a catastrophic failure,’ says the party’s manifesto. ‘Every year, billions flow to organised crime while we needlessly prosecute and imprison thousands of people, blighting their employment and life chances, and doing nothing to address the impact of drugs on their health.’

While the Lib Dems also state they would replace police and crime commissioners (PCCs) – ‘elected at great expense in elections with very low turnout’ – with accountable police boards made up of local councillors, the Conservatives’ manifesto says that they would widen the role of PCCs to include having them sit on local health and wellbeing boards to enable ‘better co-ordination of crime prevention with local drug and alcohol and mental health services’.

Perhaps predictably the Conservative document, Forward together, largely approaches the issue of substance misuse from a law and order perspective, stating that the party would create a national community sentencing framework to include measures such as ‘curfews and orders that tackle drug and alcohol abuse’, as current community punishments ‘do not do enough to prevent crime and break the cycle of persistent offending’. However, it also pledges to address the issue of racial disparity in police stop and searches, saying that the Conservatives would ‘legislate to mandate changes in police practices if “stop and search” does not become more targeted and “stop to arrest” ratios do not improve’.

Labour’s manifesto, For the many not the few, promises to ‘implement a strategy for the children of alcoholics based on recommendations drawn up by independent experts’ and states that prison ‘should never be a substitute for failing mental health services, or the withdrawal of funding from drug treatment centres’, but otherwise contains little on drug policy issues. ‘Labour should be the party that shouts the loudest about the need for drug reform,’ said treatment adviser at the Volteface think tank, Paul North. ‘Their political ideology should see drug reform as an opportunity to stand out from the rest of the field.’

Manifestos at www.libdems.org.uk, www.conservatives.com, www.labour.org.uk

Vote of confidence

As Phoenix Futures launches its new strategy, with the strapline ‘The charity that is confident about recovery’, DDN hears about the ideas behind it from chief executive Karen Biggs.

One of the key tenets of Phoenix Futures’ new strategy, which will define the organisation’s direction from now until 2020, is that it’s time for both the charity and the sector as a whole to have the confidence to speak up, especially when it comes to issues like stigma.

‘We were coming to the end of our last strategy and about a year ago we started to have a conversation within the senior management team about things like identity,’ says Karen Biggs, and particularly the perceived differences between ‘charities’ and ‘providers’. ‘We kept coming back to that.’

In the year that followed she consulted with staff via a weekly email, and began exploring ideas. ‘Last year was a mad year for the sector, and over the course of it the sense of people in Phoenix identifying us much more as a charity than as a provider of government contracts was very real,’ she says.

This went hand in hand with a feeling that far from stigma becoming less of an issue, it was actually on the increase. ‘We’re not a lobbying or a campaigning organisation in the slightest, but what my staff were telling me was that stigma is now impacting people’s ability to move through treatment and achieve the life they want,’ she says. ‘So while we’re seeing a reduction in stigma in mental health, what we’re seeing in addiction is almost a re-stigmatisation of our client group. It’s hampering our ability to do our best for our service users.’

So why is this happening now? ‘I think when local communities have difficult decisions to make about where they spend their money, it becomes easier to identify groups that might not necessarily be thought as deserving as others,’ she says. ‘That feels like an awful thing to say about our society, but people are facing really difficult decisions and I don’t think localism has helped because we’ve introduced that element of local politics into the process.’

The fact that substance misuse is a relatively small sector compared to other areas of social care means it hasn’t been able to ‘carve out that space that some of our colleagues have’, she states, while some of the mechanisms that were intended to address those ‘deserving/undeserving’ issues and make sure that the needs of all groups were looked after in local decision-making haven’t necessarily worked out for the sector’s client group. ‘I don’t really see that the health and wellbeing boards offer any protection for addiction services, for example.’

As a result, the new strategy will have a focus on talking about addiction and stigma in a much more public, high profile way. The field has sometimes been accused of insularity and having conversations with itself – does she feel this is something it’s shied away from in the past? ‘When you look at other social care sectors like mental health or housing, we’re relatively small and still relatively new. I think that newness makes that sense of confidence a bit more difficult to achieve, but I definitely think there’s more we can do.

‘Maybe there wasn’t a need to do it before, but the sector has grown and more money has come into it. But you really test your mettle when things start to become a bit more difficult and you have to fight and evidence the values that your services are bringing to the wider community, rather than a particular group.’

Given that Phoenix started out as a grassroots organisation, how important has that voluntary ethos been over the years? ‘Phoenix has a really strong connection with its history, and that sense of where we came from is really important to us,’ she says. ‘It’s recognised in the importance of peers supporting each other in their recovery, it’s really important to me, and it resonates with the staff – it’s a real motivator.’

The new strategy is also about maximising resources – whether statutory funding or voluntary support – to widen and improve the services on offer. ‘The important things in that new strapline are the confidence bit and the charity bit,’ she states. ‘There’s a palpable sense in this sector of decline and marginalisation, and when funding’s being cut across all those health and social care sectors, identifying as a provider of government contracts can at times challenge your values.

‘It can be hard to see how you can deliver your organisational purpose, but if you switch how you think about yourselves and reconnect with that charitable purpose, you can see how a charity that’s dedicated to supporting people affected by substance misuse fits in the world. You see how you can deliver your purpose in a much more meaningful way, regardless of what’s going on with contracts and funding.’

This then creates a ‘much more credible fundraising offer’, she stresses – ‘targeted and focused approaches to projects that complement the strategy’, which means the organisation is now on the lookout for funders with similar values. ‘It’s the whole gamut – people can support us by working in partnership, there’s different grants and trusts, there’s business and private sector organisations looking to deliver their social purpose.

‘There are people out there who are looking for good, credible charities who they can see operate with integrity, and they want to support them. It becomes a virtuous circle because it gives you much more confidence in yourself as a charity. Charities don’t necessarily have the greatest PR, but that’s what we are, and what motivates us to get out of bed in the morning is doing our very best for the people who need our services.’

There will also be an emphasis on making the whole idea of treatment less intimidating – being more open and helping to reduce the fear of the unknown. Does the field do enough to demystify treatment, or is this another area where it may have fallen down in the past? ‘I think it’s difficult with the level of stigma and this increasing sense of deserving and undeserving in our local communities,’ she says.

‘But different organisations and groups have come together over the last few years to see what we can do about stigma, and maybe now’s the time when there’s a sense of need and coming together. I do sense a real increase in goodwill in the sector amongst providers, and maybe that comes from difficult times.’

The strategy also addresses the thorny issue of well-meaning policies that can have unintended negative consequences, whether that’s benefit or commissioning decisions, or even treatment criteria. She cites the example of Grace House, the London-based service for women with complex needs opened by Phoenix in 2015.

‘Lots of people might have thought that was quite a strange thing to do – in the midst of so many residential services closing why would you open a new one, especially when it’s for some of the most marginalised and excluded women in our community? It was because there was a need – we were delivering lots of different services that sometimes just didn’t meet the needs of women with the most complex needs.’

This applies across the sector, she states. ‘Sometimes exclusions or criteria or the hoops that people are asked to jump through to demonstrate their motivation are absolute brick walls for the women we’re trying to help at Grace House.

‘What we’ve demonstrated is that if you open it up and you set out that you’re there to support the women everybody else thinks are too risky or tricky, or whatever they think – if you make sure you deliver services to meet their needs rather than what you might deliver elsewhere, you can get really good outcomes,’ she continues.

‘When you look at the devastation that has impacted those women’s lives – offending, domestic violence, sexual abuse, involvement in prostitution – those are the kinds of needs we’re there to support, and we have a 67 per cent completion rate. For any residential service – or any service – that’s really, really good.’

The ‘real heart of it’, she says, is that even though the commitment to support people with substance problems has been central to the sector for a long time ‘we’re still making it really difficult for some people to get the help that they want, when they need it’.

While the strategy’s focus is inevitably on Phoenix as an organisation, she hopes it might eventually help to increase confidence in the rest of the field. ‘But if everyone involved in Phoenix can feel empowered to be able to speak with confidence about the importance of treatment, and the potential of recovery, then it will have done its job.’

www.phoenix-futures.org.uk

A different pain

James Elander shares his new research on painkiller addiction and how to spot the warning signs.

Addiction to prescribed pain relief is a serious and growing problem. With 4.7m people in the US dependent on painkiller medication and numbers in the UK rising quickly, it is being described as a potential public health disaster.

Many people take painkillers to help them live with pain, with some becoming addicted to the medication – making their pain even harder to control. Other people are so afraid of addiction they don’t take painkillers and suffer unnecessarily from pain.

It is hard to get the balance right between the benefits of painkillers and the risk of addiction, so a quick way to tell if you are at risk could help people manage their pain better, as well as help the health professionals who work with them.

With a team of researchers at the University of Derby, I have carried out some new research into painkiller addiction. Our study identified two key questions that people can ask themselves to find out whether they are at really at risk of addiction to painkillers, or if they are worrying unnecessarily. They are:

• Would you be unwilling to reduce your pain medication? • Do you feel you depend on your pain medication?

If your answer to both those questions is ‘yes, definitely’, you can take steps to reduce your risk of addiction to painkillers. On the other hand, if it is ‘definitely not’, then perhaps you are more concerned about addiction to painkillers than you need to be.

Our research used information from 683 people with different types of pain, the most common of which were headaches, back pain, joint pain, muscle pain and period pain.

The painkillers that were the most commonly used by people in the study were strong opiates such as morphine, fentanyl, and tramadol; weaker opiates such as dihydrocodeine and codeine-based compounds such as co-codamol; and non-opiates, mainly non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as naproxen, diclofenac, and ibuprofen.

One aim of the study was to find key signs of how likely a person is to get addicted to painkillers. We produced a short questionnaire to measure different aspects of people’s concerns about painkillers, and their answers to those two key questions were the best predictors of how addicted or psychologically dependent they were on painkillers.

The research combined data from three studies by myself, Dr Frances Maratos, reader in emotion science, Derby PhD students Omimah Said and Malcolm Schofield, and undergraduate psychology students Ada Dys and Hannah Collins.

The studies were funded by a university research for learning and teaching fund grant, a British Psychological Society undergraduate research assistantship bursary and a university undergraduate research scholarship scheme bursary.

In the first study, people completed a pain medica­tion attitudes questionnaire with 47 questions and had their painkiller dependence measured. The links between their answers to each of the 47 questions and their dependence score were then examined to produce a version with just 14 carefully selected questions.

In the other two studies, different groups of people with pain completed the version with just 14 questions. This short version worked as well as the one with 47 questions, and in all three studies those two key questions consistently predicted how dependent on painkillers people were.

These findings build on previous University of Derby research, published in 2014 in the journal Pain Medicine, which showed people were more likely to become dependent on painkillers if they took more prescription painkillers more often, had a prior history of substance-related problems, or were less accepting of pain.

This showed that there was more than one way to become dependent on painkillers, so people who answer ‘yes’ to the two questions identified in the most recent study might then use these questions to reflect on how the way they use painkillers may be developing into an addiction:

• Am I using strong painkillers more often than I used to?
• Am I using painkillers a bit like I used to use drugs or alcohol?
• Am I getting more sensitive to pain, or having more trouble living with it, than I used to?

We hope to use the findings to develop better information and education for people about painkiller addiction.

For the moment, anyone who is worried about how they use painkillers should talk to their doctor, or phar­m­a­cist, or even a friend or family member about how their relationship with painkillers may be changing.

They could also use the information that is already available, including the website of Cathryn Kemp, author of Painkiller Addict – From Wreckage to Redemption at www.painkiller-addict.com.

James Elander is head of psychological research at the University of Derby

Family members urged to share their experiences

A major new national survey on the impact of addiction and recovery on family members has been launched by Adfam and Sheffield Hallam University, with funding from Alcohol Research UK.

The Family Life in Recovery project aims to provide vital insight into the experiences of family members to support and encourage others, as well as create the first evidence-based resource able to recommend ‘which support services are urgently needed for family members of people at each different stage of recovery’. The survey is open to ‘anyone who considers themselves a family member, friend or loved one’ of someone with substance issues or in recovery, with the results to be published later this year.

‘Much is known about the economic and social costs of addiction and problematic drug use, but we know very little about what happens to family members of those using or in recovery, and how they manage their own wellbeing through this incredibly stressful and challenging process,’ said project lead, Professor David Best of Sheffield Hallam University.

‘The survey will explore what people can do to look after themselves and to support the person in recovery, which is particularly pertinent at a time of personalised budgets and reductions in specialist care and support.’ The results would not only identify the most urgently needed services but would also give ‘a voice to a disempowered population’, he added.

‘We have been working with families affected by substance misuse for over 30 years and we know that the journey of recovery has a large impact on the lives of family members,’ said Adfam chief executive Vivienne Evans.

‘As the national charity for children and families affected by substance misuse, we are looking forward to the findings from this research to see how we can better support and advocate on behalf of families dealing with issues surrounding addiction and recovery.’

Survey at www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/LTKX65N

Clinical Eye – our new nursing column

A mutual respect

Ishbel Straker joins us as a regular columnist to give insights on nursing in addiction. This month she asks, why is there tension between doctors and nurses?

I want to start by saying I like doctors. I like what they do, what they stand for and their practice – in fact, some of my best friends are doctors! So why am I talking about the occasionally/more often than not strained relationship between a doctor and nurses?

When I trained a decade ago, I decided psychiatry was the place for me – not only because of the subject matter, but also the relationships between nurses and doctors. During placements on the general ward I would witness nurses who had 30 years experience behind them putting their knowledge to one side in favour of a third-year medical student.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I absolutely value doctors – their skill is essential. However a mutual respect seemed to be lost in translation within the general and paediatric wards I was placed on. I was drawn to the relationship between the psychiatrist and the psychiatric nurse as it was one of mutual respect, with a clear understanding that both roles were equally important and neither could work as effectively for the patient without the other.

When I moved into addictions, this working relationship continued and progressed. Over the years I experienced some fantastic working relationships with doctors and watched the coordination of skills within the addictions services, which I feel has been the backbone of excellent care for substance misuse clients. However, I am sad to say, I have also witnessed the recent demise of this relationship and I question whether this is due to the rise of the non-medical prescriber (NMP).

The field of addiction has become the NMPs’ stomping ground on which they have thrived. We now have clinical leads who are NMPs, when ten years ago this would have been unfathomable. Services are recruiting prescribers competitively and no longer differentiating between doctors and NMPs, but deciding who has the best skills at interview.

This is a fantastic step for nurses but one that has destabilised our medical colleagues – at times affecting our relationships. I hear of doctors terrifying NMPs with the dangers of what they are doing, highlighting the risks – and I wonder, is this down to a lack understanding of the jurisdiction of an NMP or is it a deeper issue?

One thing I can conclude is that if we are to provide the best treatment we can for our under-represented client population, then we must work together. We must keep the client at the forefront of our minds and not our own agenda. We must utilise one another’s skills and not be fearful of what each other brings to the table.

Ishbel Straker is clinical director for a substance misuse organisation, a registered mental health nurse, independent nurse prescriber (INP), and a board member of IntANSA.

Bookshelf – recommended reading

Guilty Thing – A Life of Thomas De Quincey

by Frances Wilson, published by Bloomsbury
ISBN: 9781782115489, £10.99
Review by Mark Reid

Thomas De Quincey was the author of the renowned Confessions of an English Opium-Eater, first published in 1821. Guilty Thing covers De Quincey’s many fixations, which also included poets and murderers.

At the time his drug of choice was very much the opium of the masses – used for almost every ache and pain. De Quincey appeared to champion its recreational use. When he first took opium in 1804 he hailed it as ‘the secret of happiness, which philosophers had disputed, at once discovered’.

Were De Quincey to walk into a drug service today, there would not be that much a worker would not recognise in his underlying state of mind. What is striking is that he used opium to self-medicate his neuroses and ease his character defects in its dizzying dreams.

Frances Wilson asserts that ‘addiction is now believed to be a shield against childhood trauma’. De Quincey exemplified this. His obsessive mindset was embedded by seeing the body of his nine-year-old sister Elizabeth who died when he was six. That sepulchral image prompted a lifelong search for the infinite and the sublime, which always had an element of terror at its heart. De Quincey later observed that ‘an adult sympathises with himself as a child because he is the same and he is not the same’.

De Quincey the drug addict did his own cost-benefit analyses on his habit. He accepted opium was bad ‘for health and vigour’ and a ‘personal appearance tolerably respectable’. But this change-talk was outweighed by opium’s ‘mastery over anger and fear, capacity for abstract thinking and emancipation from worldly cares’.

De Quincey did stop using opium sometimes: for 90 hours once. The result was ‘unspeakable misery of the mind’ in withdrawal with no substitute.

Another of his addictions was debt. Like opium this was born out of dread of ordinary life, allowing a second personality; apart and alone. Inevitably fear redoubled, as he was endlessly hunted by creditors.

Could modern-day counselling, medication and a programme of recovery have turned the opium-eater around? Can you imagine being Thomas De Quincey’s keyworker? If so, this many-sided and accomplished biography is for you.

Mark Reid is participation and recovery worker at East London Federation Trust Addictions Services

The emperor’s new clothes

Pockets of good practice throughout the country should not mask the fact that the ‘recovery agenda’ is failing, says Howard King.

Since the end of the last decade the substance misuse field has been increasingly focused on recovery. From the way we all talk about it you could be mistaken for thinking that there has been a substantial and consistent increase in the recovery rate nationally. Unfortunately that has not been the case, and indeed there is a marked absence in terms of any debate regarding how as a sector we are performing. So here are two figures that stand out.

1. According to the NDTMS website the current recovery rate for opiate users is 6.6 per cent – a drop from 8.59 per cent in 2011-12. For all service users the rate is 38.24 per cent – a rise since 2011-12 of just 3.52 per cent.

2. During the same period, drug-related deaths have risen and continue to rise. They have risen higher than at any point since data was first collected in 1993.

All major providers talk about their commitment to recovery, but what about outcomes? The evidence seems to indicate that as the recovery narrative has driven commissioning practice, the recovery rate has actually declined. We cannot ignore this clear disconnect between the narrative and the outcome.

If you were in central government and could see that all the investment into the field in recent years was achieving an annual recovery rate of only 6.63 per cent, and that this had consistently dropped year on year, then surely, in this time of evidence-based practice, you would want to review how you allocated resources?

Other areas of health and social care are expected to achieve so much more than the substance misuse field. IAPT (services for improving access to psychological therapies) for example, has a target of 50 per cent recovery. While it is important that we lobby for resources to be directed into people with substance misuse needs, perhaps we as a sector should also be doing more to actually deliver positive outcomes consistently across the country?

Of course it’s not just providers who are responsible for this current situation. Commissioners have played a central role in this also. Service specifications proclaim the need for recovery-focused services, but in most cases when commissioners change service providers, the recovery rate in the first year drops and it takes 18 months to two years for the new provider to achieve what the old provider was doing – if indeed there is any improvement at all. This isn’t good for service users and the view sometimes taken by commissioners that changing provider improves services is not generally supported by the evidence.

A recovery rate that has dropped to 6.63 per cent nationally proves that the current commissioning process is not generally achieving its goal. Changing providers on a regular basis does not seem to work and can negatively impact on patient care. Competition and best value is important but patient safety and consistency of provision should not play second best. Re-tendering is always an option, but one that should only be seen as a last resort when a service is failing and agreed remedial action plans have not led to the required change. It should not be the first response or an automatic reaction to contracts coming to an end, as evidence suggests this does not improve performance.

In addition to declining recovery rates, there is also the worrying trend of rising drug-related deaths. It is difficult to make a definite correlation between rising deaths, the emphasis on a recovery agenda which fails to deliver real recovery, and changing delivery models driven by increasing financial constraints. The emphasis placed upon an organisation’s ability, resilience and expertise in providing services that are correctly governed is often undervalued in procurements. The duty of care to service users extends not only to providers but also to those who commission services, and we all need to be held responsible for services when the recovery rate drops, drug-related deaths rise, trained professionals are replaced by unqualified staff and prescribing practice deteriorates.

This is not to say that the recovery agenda has not driven improvements in our field. Seeing the amount of peer-led recovery events that are taking place, the more powerful user voice and the ideas that are discussed about what recovery can mean, is hugely encouraging. However overall this shows that there are pockets of good practice, but these are not embedded ways of working that are consistent across the country. We can’t hide from the national figures or pretend to ourselves that it is everybody else or a handful of poor performing projects.

We do need to be careful about pushing a narrow concept of recovery onto those that aren’t ready or aren’t able. I am not suggesting that clients should be forced to reduce scripts or to detox against their wishes. The first aim of treatment should be to keep clients safe and harm reduction must be central to any treatment system, as should options for maintenance prescribing and long-term support. However, If we as a sector are saying that 6.63 per cent recovery is the best we can achieve without force, then we need to stop saying our services are recovery focused and look at other outcomes to prove what we are doing adds value to the communities we work in.

It’s time that we started to have an open and honest conversation in the field about recovery. While it is important to highlight good practice, it doesn’t change the fact that 6.63 per cent is a low recovery rate and the fact that more clients are dying is an uncomfortable truth. The reorientation of the drug treatment provider landscape may have reduced cost and increased competition, but it hasn’t brought a forward a leap in terms of recovery, innovation or best practice. Ironically a by-product of this is the demise of many small and medium sized drug treatment providers, creating a less divergent market place and potentially losing the localism that these smaller agencies provided.

We, providers and commissioners, need to do things differently if we want things to improve for service users. What we have now isn’t working, and funding will be lost if we don’t improve or change the discussion on what recovery means. Fundamentally it’s time that the sector actually offered meaningful, consistent, focused and evidence-based recovery-orientated services to our clients, based on an agreed range of outcomes.

Commissioners need to change their approach and not see re-tendering as the solution to their problems; if a service is working leave it alone and if it needs to improve, work with the provider to make it happen. Commissioners have tried financial penalties, retendering and changing providers, but in many cases the systems they oversee are producing worst results than they did five years ago. Isn’t it time to listen to the evidence and try a different approach?

We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that many services provide a comprehensive range of effective interventions to service users, many of whom make significant lifestyle changes that improve their quality of life and also that of their family and wider community. We should celebrate these individuals and their success – but to say that as a sector we run recovery-focused services when so few of our clients achieve recovery is just not true.

Howard King is head of Inclusion

 

On borrowed time

The delayed drug strategy – and lack of plan for an alcohol strategy – is pulling the lifeline from a sector in crisis, hears DDN

The new drug strategy is in limbo. Delayed for months without explanation, the questions are mounting against a backdrop of the highest number of drug-related deaths ever recorded. In the new year, the government said ‘soon’. In February they confirmed ‘shortly’.

On 30 March, Liz McInnes MP asked for a date for the strategy, telling the house: ‘Local authorities have seen their funding for drug and alcohol treatment slashed by 42 per cent since 2010… there are more than 1m alcohol-related hospital admissions each year, and alcohol is a contributory factor in more than 200 different health conditions. Let us hope that both a drugs strategy and an alcohol strategy will be forthcoming as a matter of urgency.’

At the end of April, Sarah Wollaston MP asked the parliamentary under-secretary of state at the Home Office, Sarah Newton, when it would be published. She answered: ‘We are currently developing the new drug strategy, working across government and with key partners. The new strategy will be published in due course.’ With the general election taking place on 8 June, no one is expecting progress anytime soon.

Furthermore, there is no hint of an alcohol strategy, apart from in Scotland, despite problematic alcohol use affecting many more people than drugs.

At the latest cross-party parliamentary group on drugs, alcohol and justice, Colin Drummond, professor of addiction psychiatry at King’s College London, was invited to speak about alcohol misuse and treatment.

He began by outlining the worsening picture on alcohol, stating that ‘alcohol-related health conditions, including liver disease, have increased and alcohol-related hospital admissions have doubled.’ But his talk went on to explore the deepening crisis for the drug and alcohol sector.

‘We’ve had a world-class addiction system in the UK, and we’re in danger of losing it. We’re in danger of it not existing in a few years’ time,’ he said. Looking at the recent rise in drug-related deaths (DRDs) he referred to the government’s reaction to a previous epidemic around 2001: ‘In the 2000s we had a huge investment in treatments, so drug deaths began falling. But they’re now at their highest since records began.’

So what’s going wrong? Why are we failing? ‘Declining resources for this population’ were an obvious factor, combined with the disastrous effect of constant retendering. Prof Drummond stated that ‘people with complex needs are not getting the same access to treatment as before’ and went on to say that the ‘biggest impact of constant retendering is going to be on people with the most complex needs. They’re not attractive people to treat – they’re costly, with poor outcomes.’

Furthermore, when contracts are tendered, the expectation is that the service will see ‘twice the number of people with half the amount of money,’ he said. ‘So they strip staff costs and have fewer qualified staff and more volunteers.’ It was also an extremely expensive process – ‘money that could have been spent on treatment instead of lawyers drawing up contracts’.

With retendering taking place every three years in local authorities, clients were constantly affected by the changeover process.

Add to this the loss of specialists to the field – ‘in addiction psychiatry we’ve lost 60 per cent of training places in England’ – and you have the perfect storm, he said. ‘It looks like there are plenty of people in treatment, but the people in most need are being denied care. If they’re not being taken care of here, they will pop up elsewhere – in A&E, GPs’ surgeries and in prison… there is an artificial separation between health and social care.’

So what needs to change? Prof Drummond suggested immediate recommendations for the incoming government:

Ring-fence funding that’s going into addiction treatment. ‘Ring-fencing needs to be safeguarded not further depleted,’ said Prof Drummond. ‘Cutting these services is a false economy. Local authorities will only see it from their perspective, but it will cost them more money in the long term.’

Bring the NHS back into the fold: ‘We felt it was wrong to put everything in the control of local authorities.’

Put a moratorium on retendering. ‘We see no evidence that it improves services.’

Protect specialism and experience, eg addiction psychiatry. ‘No area should fall over for lack of experience.’

Deal with people with complex needs properly. ‘We need to rebalance the system to do this – and if we don’t treat them, they cost a lot to the economy.’

Back minimum unit pricing (MUP). ‘It would have huge benefits – to both moderate drinkers and to people at the severe end of the spectrum.’

Increase research capacity. ‘If we don’t understand the impacts, we won’t learn.’

Discussion between members of the APPG – which includes MPs, treatment providers, specialist and advisory groups and people representing service user and recovery communities – reinforced the need for action.

‘A lot of this isn’t new but political will is lacking,’ said Alex Boyt, who worked for years in service user involvement. ‘It’s a lose-lose conversation – people who are not cost-effective are not being treated.’ The ‘relentless commissioning’ also exacerbated the situation: ‘Each time clients are lost, old and new providers blame each other.’

Prof Drummond said that ‘those most affected by cuts have been rehabs’, to which Caroline Cole, interim chief executive at Broadway Lodge, added: ‘We’ve had to pull back on the numbers of people with complex needs as the local authority can’t pay us what it costs us to treat them.’

The prison population was also being failed. ‘There’s a massive spike in deaths on release,’ said Prof Drummond. ‘The window when they come out is vital – we used to be better at that. There was better throughcare, but the programmes have been dismantled.’

‘Work happens inside, but the problem is when they come out,’ said a volunteer at a prison recovery service. ‘Places are limited – there’s nowhere to go – so they go back to old stamping grounds, old habits and back inside. I sat on a drug strategy group at prison and they do their best, but they’re stretched – and once people are back inside they’re lost again.’

‘We see people who are retoxed in prison, put back on methadone, with no link with community services,’ added Sunny Dhadley from the Service User Involvement Team (SUIT) at Wolverhampton.

‘There seems an inability to have that very basic conversation about economic commonsense,’ said Boyt. ‘With the election looming, even fewer people are listening than usual. Is there anything we can be doing practically – other than lamenting – to make the case?’

‘Why doesn’t the treasury see the madness of the way we’re running things? Why aren’t they looking for a rational approach?’ asked one MP.

‘What we’ve done as a group is to approach all the ministers responsible [see below] and given them the evidence,’ said Lord Ramsbotham, the APPG’s chair. ‘They’ve patted us on the head but not reflected the evidence. The cost of not doing one thing in an area is going to be seen in another – all exemplified in the lack of a national drug strategy.’

**********

‘We need a single government minister for drugs and alcohol’

The Drugs, Alcohol and Justice Cross-Party Parliamentary Group submitted a ‘charter for change’, calling upon the government to tackle drug and alcohol-related illness and deaths through investment, education, and a commitment to evidence-based practice.

Top of the list was the call for a single government minister to be responsible for drug and alcohol policy, accountable to parliament.

The minister would be empowered to:

• Focus drug policy on health, mental health and social inclusion, looking particularly at people with multiple needs, such as mental health issues and homelessness.

• Develop a harm reduction strategy to reduce drug and alcohol-related deaths and illness.

• Create a national commissioning ombudsman to ensure transparency and accountability.

• Widen the Care Quality Commission (CQC)’s remit to include all local authority-commissioned drug and alcohol services.

• Ensure competence and accreditation of the workforce by investing in an independent association.

• Commit to reviewing drug policy at national and global levels, building on progress at last year’s United Nations General Assembly Special Session on drugs (UNGASS).

The minister’s priorities should include following guidance provided by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) – including ensuring comprehensive access to the life-saving drug naloxone across the whole of the UK, and making NICE-approved treatments available to all patients diagnosed with hepatitis C.

Wiltshire police issue Xanax warning

Police in Wiltshire have issued a warning to parents following incidents in which around 20 young people in the Salisbury area have received medical treatment after taking the prescription drug Xanax. All of the incidents took place within the past week.

There is increasing concern that the drug – the brand name for the potent benzodiazepine alprazolam – is gaining popularity among young people, partly as a result of its perceived celebrity associations (DDN, April, page 6). All of the young people receiving medical treatment in Wiltshire were 15-16 years old, say the police.

Although Xanax is a prescription drug for anxiety disorders, it is increasingly widely available via the dark web. It can slow users’ reactions and cause lethargy and drowsiness, as well as cardiac and respiratory difficulties in some cases. It can also cause significant physical dependency and dangerous withdrawal symptoms, with young people unlikely to be fully aware of the risks.

‘We are concerned about these incidents in which young people are deliberately risking their health,’ said Inspector Pete Sparrow of Wiltshire Police. ‘The effects of taking any drugs which haven’t been specifically prescribed for you can have serious or even fatal consequences and we urge parents/guardians to talk to their children about the dangers. We are investigating where the supply to these young people has come from and ask that anyone with information comes forward.’

Wiltshire Council said that its young people’s drug and alcohol service was ‘already engaging’ with young people in the area to make them aware of the risks associated with the drug.

Read Kevin Flemen’s article on the risks and availability of Xanax, in our April issue.

Send us your letters!

We love receiving your letters at DDN. Please send your thoughts and ideas relating to any aspect of your work or personal experience – as well as your feedback on our articles – by emailing the editor, claire@cjwellings.com. Letters for publication should be up to 350 words.

Deadly Serious

I enjoyed both attending the recent DDN national service user involvement conference, and reading the coverage in the latest issue of the magazine.

Meeting and networking with some fantastic projects from around the country really opens your eyes to the innovative work that is going on, especially in the face of reduced resources.

Unfortunately while we can’t wave a magic wand to increase funding levels and improve treatment for all, challenging stigma and highlighting the human tragedy of addiction and in particular drug-related deaths is something that can be done. There are some fantastic campaigns that do this such as ‘Support Don’t Punish’ and the Remembrance Day events in July, but I would be keen to hear of any more projects or initiatives that local groups like ours can get involved in.

John Matthews, by email
If you are involved in any campaigns that challenge stigma, please let us know – ed.

Be a knockout!

We are gearing up for our fourth annual recovery games for the Yorkshire and Humber region and are looking for ways to support the event.

We usually host it at a local water park near Doncaster and it is an ideal opportunity for groups of individuals to come and participate, as well as family, friends and children. The event is based around It’s a Knockout, with groups of approximately ten taking part in trials throughout the day, with a final obstacle course race to decide the winning team.

Year on year we have seen more than 400 people attend and last year over 600 people joined us and took part in our fantastic ‘colour run’ and games.

This year we are keen to invite other organisations to help support the games, as they are a fantastic opportunity to celebrate visible recovery and tie into the ‘five ways to wellbeing’.

If you are interested in sponsoring this event, or are able to contribute in any way, please contact me on 01302 303902 or Stuart.Green@rdash.nhs.uk.

Stuart Green, service manager, Aspire

SMMGP launches substance misuse training scheme

SMMGP has launched an updated website and ‘premium membership’ CPD scheme, which offers additional high quality professional development including regular clinical and policy updates, webinars, podcasts and training discounts.

‘We are delighted to announce the launch of our new membership scheme with enhanced CPD for the substance misuse field,’ said clinical director Dr Steve Brinksman. ‘Our years of experience, coupled with clinical expertise, will provide quality training for those who care for people who use alcohol and other drugs problematically.’

Visit the SMMGP’s new website for details

DDN May 2017

‘Who can offer the political leadership the sector needs?’

Hogwash and purdah – it’s election season again and where is the long-awaited drug strategy? The pages of this issue will tell you that we need change, but unlike many of the party political broadcasts they are specific about what’s wrong and what must change.

From funding to commissioning to ‘recovery outcomes’ there is a sense that we are getting it wrong – and that politicians are refusing to listen. The evidence from within the sector comes down to one key question that is hard to ignore: why are politicians happy to condone a treatment system that costs so much but, despite the best efforts of those working in it, delivers so little? Whichever way you look at it, drug deaths are at their highest since records began and the toll of death and illness related to alcohol is just massive.

Our contributors are united in their condemnation of constant retendering, and the plea ‘enough!’ has been heard many times recently on these pages. The costly process has driven organisations out of business, treatment workers out of the sector, and cost how many lives? In the two years that it takes for a new provider to take over, clients are disconnected, lost – and possibly dead.

Over the past few years we have lost the post of ‘drugs minister’ – the named person who used to interact with the sector and shape policy from its expertise. A little bit of policy from this department and a little from that is doing nothing to bring the dynamism, accountability and results that this sector so desperately needs. Will this election offer a lifeline from any side?

Claire Brown, editor

Read the PDF version or the mobile magazine.

National Crime Agency issues fentanyl warning

The National Crime Agency (NCA) has taken the ‘unusual step’ of warning drug users to be vigilant following the detection of powerful synthetic opioid fentanyl in heroin supplies in the north east of England. Fentanyl and its analogue carfentanyl are thought to have contributed to recent deaths among drug users in the Yorkshire, Cleveland and Humber areas.

Fentanyl is a licensed medicine used to treat severe and terminal pain, and is around 100 times more potent than morphine, while carfentanyl is more powerful still. Even in the ‘unlikely event’ that users know their drugs contain fentanyl, the risk of overdose is high, warns the NCA.

The NCA and West Yorkshire Police recently targeted a laboratory suspected of producing the drugs, and there are concerns that the substances could have been ‘distributed to drug dealers across a much wider area’, putting people in other regions at risk. While initial toxicology revealed fentanyl analogues in ‘a small number’ of the north east deaths, ‘specific re-testing has started to indicate that the influence of fentanyl is greater than first suspected’, said the NCA’s head of drugs threat and intelligence, Tony Saggers.

‘We now believe UK customers beyond the north east region are likely to have received consignments of these drugs,’ he continued. ‘I am particularly concerned that drug dealers within established heroin markets may have purchased fentanyl, carfentanyl, or similar substances from this facility. They may not know how dangerous it is, both to them when they handle it, and to their customers.’ The criminal justice implications of supplying fentanyl mixed into other drugs would ‘inevitably’ be deemed aggravating, he stated, and ‘claiming ignorance of the consequences’ would be no defence.

Public Health England has also issued a drugs alert to emergency services, treatment agencies and other bodies, urging them to advise heroin users to ‘be extra cautious about the sources from which they get their drugs, and about the drugs they take, maybe starting with just a quarter hit of a new supply’. Drug services should also supply naloxone to ‘all those at risk’, it adds, while any areas seeing spikes in drug-related deaths should contact local coroners to establish if fentanyl is routinely screened for in toxicology results. ‘If it is not, consideration should be given to resubmitting samples for re-testing,’ it states.

‘We are urging heroin users to be extra careful about what they are taking,’ said PHE’s director of drugs, alcohol and tobacco, Rosanna O’Connor. ‘They need to look out for each other and be alert to any signs of an overdose, such as lack of consciousness, shallow or no breathing, “snoring”, and blueing of the lips and fingertips. If possible, they should use naloxone if someone overdoses, and immediately call for an ambulance. We strongly advise all dependent drug users to get support from local drug services.’

Drugs alert at https://www.cas.dh.gov.uk/Home.aspx

A challenging relationship

While maintaining a productive relationship with CQC is essential, so is challenging any worrying issues on their draft reports, says Nicole Ridgwell.

Over the past year, one topic is a regular feature when substance misuse providers meet at conferences, at training events, and in the waiting rooms of law firms; that their CQC inspection reports are peppered with negative commentary. This commentary, according to providers, does not address their core services but the more tangential and arguably minor aspects of their services. Frustratingly for providers, these critical reports appear to disregard clear evidence of statistically positive outcomes being achieved by the service in question.

The reputational and financial damage caused by such negative reporting is leading some to reflect on whether they are able to sustain services in a sector whose regulator appears to be at war with it.

This fear of being ‘regulated out of the sector’ is also being reported to us at Ridouts. The concern is that CQC has a fundamental misunderstanding of the services they are now regulating. As previously covered within this section, some of the uncertainty of this inspection cycle arises because it has been the first under the new inspections regime. Indeed, by declining to publish ratings during the first year, CQC tacitly acknowledged that this set of inspections was a trial run. However, providers are worried that their experiences indicate more than the initial hurdles of a newly implemented system; there is a disquieting suspicion that CQC inherently distrusts the motives of the substance misuse sector.

The CQC press release of September 2014, setting out the planned changes to the inspection regime, acknowledged that ‘substance misuse treatment is a unique, diverse sector and people using these services often have complex and varied needs’. However, it is this very complexity and the corresponding diversity of treatments used which has been at the core of much of the criticism directed at providers.

As with other sectors brought into regulatory regimes, it may take time for the sector and its regulator to understand each other. I would argue that this only strengthens the need for both sides to engage at every opportunity.

Providers may hesitate to challenge an allegation of regulatory breach even in situations where the thing they are being criticised for is at the heart of the care they provide. A common example of this is where the treatment regime is not that recommended within the NICE guidelines. In my experience, it is not that providers were unaware of the guidelines, nor that they had a ‘devil may care’ attitude to compliance, but that they and their experts had thought long and hard about the nature and experiences of their service user group and concluded that an alternative care pathway was required.

This returns us to the importance of an outcomes-based inspection process and the corresponding need to challenge CQC’s assumptions. If CQC’s chief inspector of hospitals, Professor Sir Mike Richards, meant what he said in his September 2014 press release – that ‘it is vital when looking at substance misuse services that the views, opinions and experiences of people who use them are listened to and that any judgement that we make about those services reflects what we have heard’ – then service user outcomes must be central to all inspections.

‘It is understandable that providers feeling under siege may hesitate to object, for fear that CQC inspectors would return with a grudge.’

It is understandable that providers feeling under siege may hesitate to object, for fear that CQC inspectors would return with a grudge. Yet, not only is there a separate and well-worn complaints process to tackle such blatant prejudice but the advantages of challenging through the factual accuracy process are two-fold: for the service, using legitimate routes to submit a well-drafted and forensically evidenced appeal does lead to substantive changes to reports; for the sector, a cogent explanation of a service’s rationale helps CQC to better understand the sector as a whole.

The impact of challenging draft reports will become even more stark from this month; April 2017 is identified within the CQC strategy 2016–2021 as the month CQC intends to introduce ratings to the substance misuse sector. As any CQC-rated service understands, the blunt headline description of a service as ‘inadequate’ or ‘requires improvement’ will turn away far more private referrers and local commissioners than reading the more nuanced contents of the actual CQC report balancing the good with the bad.

It is therefore vital that providers scrutinise their draft reports and challenge where they fundamentally disagree. Productive interaction with the regulator can and indeed does lead to measurable improvements in outcomes both in terms of industry standards and inspection results. To do otherwise is to allow public misunderstanding of the individual service, whilst perpetuating the mistrust between the sector and CQC.

Nicole Ridgwell is a solicitor at Ridouts LLP, www.ridout-law.com

Time to talk

Talking therapies are among the many options that should be offered alongside OST, says Clive Hallam.

Recently, a post on social media considered the question of whether talking therapies added any value to people who were committed to opioid substitution treatment (OST) on a long-term basis.

National data shows the group of long-term, committed recipients of OST is growing, month on month, across the country. However it isn’t clear whether this is because of a personal desire for, and commitment to, long-term OST, or because people have been stranded on repeat prescriptions, with minimal contact from a practitioner – both conditions exist.

Certainly, the figures correspond with cohorts of individuals who have long careers of substance use and are highly complex, and this brings into question the ability of current treatment delivery to respond appropriately.

People may commit to long-term, or lifetime, treatment for a variety of reasons, objective and subjective. There may be a clear clinical need in certain cases; however, people also resist change and avoid challenge.

Pharmacological interventions are comparatively well researched and evidenced, with the effects quite easy to predict and observe. Therapeutic doses can also be achieved relatively quickly, enabling an individual’s physical circumstances to be moderated effectively. But the effect of those doses may be more than we envisaged in terms of affecting someone’s ability to interact, and some researchers have linked methadone with significant cognitive impairment.

By comparison, talking therapies depend almost exclusively on the specific relationship between the person and the practitioner to be effective – the emotional context and connection, and a desire to respond or change dynamically.

NICE considers that few talking therapies have the evidence base to warrant their use, particularly in this client group, preferring contingency management to support people in OST. But if a person’s ability to reason is adversely affected by opiate use, might this be the primary reason for the failure of talking therapies – and should this be factored into decisions about treatment?

Other issues also come into play here. At what point has the impact on the individual been measured? How resistant is the person to talking? Do they regularly miss appointments believing they won’t benefit from them? Do they present on the autistic spectrum? Can they get their prescription and side-step psychosocial altogether? All these questions are as relevant for the long-term methadone patient as for the person just starting treatment, and make the success of talking therapies difficult to qualify.

What could be of more importance is a person’s access to meaningful use of time, whether to pursue hobbies, learning, look for volunteering or work opportunities, or otherwise be diverted from their established courses of action and interaction. There is a clear role here for mutual aid, residential rehabilitation and therapeutic communities – yet aren’t these types of talking therapies?

Nicholas Christakis (Connected, Harper Press, 2009) speaks of changing people’s outlooks and cultural position. He argues that individuals in a concentrated network naturally exhibit its predominant emotions, actions and cultural perspectives. To effect positive and sustainable change, exposure to ‘integrated’ networks, with a range of views and cultural stances is necessary. Mutual aid and recovery communities are excellent gateways to such networks; concepts such as time-banking and co-production enable individuals to explore their aspirations, skills and knowledge. This is supported by the observations of William L White in the United States.

Experience across the country has demonstrated the value of running such programmes side by side, enthusing people to be involved in activities such as equine therapy, working in the countryside, and time-banking with local communities, at the same time as receiving OST.

Fundamental to this approach has been psychosocial support, providing an opportunity to discuss issues, events and concerns in an encouraging, supporting and enabling environment. Keyworkers and psychosocial practitioners can have a crucial role to play in enabling individuals to experience and understand their worth in such environments.

Any viable system must offer a range of interventions that present the most options for pursuing a full life. If this isn’t also given to lifetime methadone patients, including the option to stop OST, how can they make an informed judgement?

During my career as a commissioner, I’ve resisted the concept of tendering every few years to find the ‘best response’, the ‘most economically advantageous tender’ and the ‘best provider’ for the task. Treatment provision is fundamentally different to purchasing stationery and, while there’s a place for market testing, it can be detrimental to long-term care and outcomes that celebrate the best in individuals.

Commissioning is an art form, working with people in treatment, families and communities, providers and partners to ensure maximum opportunities are identified, explored and delivered. It is about seeking solutions that are sometimes the best, sometimes wrong, often pragmatic, but always looking to offer individuals the chance to choose something that is right for them. That may be a lifetime prescription – equally, it may be a detox through a personal realisation after years that there’s something more to life. We shouldn’t define either aspiration, or delivery, by saying one way or another is the only way.

‘The best treatment system provides a spectrum of interventions… there isn’t one size that fits all.’

The best treatment system provides a spectrum of interventions for those wishing to explore them. While we live in a time of ‘austerity’ there has to be sufficient funding in the system to adequately care for people through prevention, harm reduction, early intervention, structured community and residential interventions and aftercare – and, underlying it all, mutual aid and positive social networking. The question should be, how do we employ all interventions in a way that enables individuals to achieve their highest potential, benefiting themselves and those around them. There isn’t one size that fits all.

Our current system of drug treatment, begun under the tenets of harm reduction, remains predicated on the criminal justice arguments of the early 2000s, which unfortunately hides the more relevant harm reduction message. People do not need to be placed on methadone for life and until this argument changes, options for recovery will remain limited, with interventions responding in part only to the needs of the individual.

The narrow argument concerning what is right for individuals needs to be consigned to history. Individuals, commissioners and providers must move to one that liberates individuals to make the decisions that are right for them – governed by facts, aided by considered support, and revelling in aspiration and recovery. There are many routes to recovery; as many as there are people who need them.

Clive Hallam has worked in the sector for 13 years as a commissioner and consultant

Reflection of hope

With their roots in harm reduction services, Kaleidoscope Project provide both community and residential drug and alcohol treatment. Their new 20-bed detoxification unit in Merseyside continues their tradition of providing life-changing support for every individual. 

Birchwood Residential Treatment Centre

‘For the last 49 years Kaleidoscope has worked with some of the most marginalised clients with the highest need,’ explains chief executive Martin Blakebrough. So when the opportunity came up to incorporate Arch Initiatives into the Kaleidoscope family and add to the residential detox facilities at Birchwood House, it seemed a logical step for the organisation.

The move was never part of an attempt to become ‘the next big player’, Blakebrough emphasises, but rather a natural progression for Kaleidoscope. ‘Running Birchwood provides a chance to develop a bespoke inpatient treatment facility. A place that can support a broad range of clients, including those with complex needs.’

To achieve this, it was important to have the right team in place, which Blakebrough is confident about. ‘In Kaleidoscope executive lead, Rondine Molinaro we have someone who is passionate and knows what is required, but is looking to learn from the latest research and thinking,’ he says. ‘And our clinical team of full-time NMPs and substance misuse nurses working alongside both a GP and a consultant psychiatrist allows us to accept people with significant difficulties.’

The unit at Birchwood comprises 20 single occupancy bedrooms, including three on the lower floor for those with specific requirements or mobility issues. The service is for both men and women, including pregnant women and those with complex needs. The newly refurbished rooms and the superb onsite catering help to create that ‘home away from home’ feel that provides the right therapeutic atmosphere for clients’ treatment.

Staff provide treatment tailored to the needs of the client

‘Within Birchwood we offer a flexible, individually tailored treatment regime, by carefully screening all potential admissions to ensure that we can safely assist the withdrawal of substances,’ explains Birchwood’s clinical director, Dr Mohan De Silva. ‘Medical screening is done by a doctor. We look at GP medical history, previous hospital letters, any previous detox experiences, current medication and recent blood investigations. Having as complete a history as possible enables us to build a picture of the health of the patient and ensure their safety while at Birchwood.’

A range of programmes are offered for opiates, NSPs, stimulants, prescription medications and alcohol. These include a rapid five to seven day detox programme for individuals requiring urgent detoxification, a three to four day stabilisation and detoxification initiation that will be continued in a community setting, and both standard and complex detoxification programmes that can last between seven and 21 days, depending on the needs of the client. In addition, alternative regimes for alcohol detoxification can be offered, which are non-benzodiazepine based.

‘Having an experienced clinical team on site allows Birchwood to offer this range of interventions,’ says consultant psychiatrist, Dr Julia Lewis from Pulse Addictions. ‘As well as working with them to develop their clinical policies and procedures, I provide regular clinical supervision to their permanent team of experienced nursing staff who are committed to continuous service improvement. The aim of everyone involved in Birchwood is to ensure that the treatment on offer is safe, effective and meets the needs of the client.’

A medical team is based on site

The client-centred approach goes beyond detox, and a range of mutual aid packages are offered, including 12-step, SMART Recovery, and access to the Life Ring service. In addition a weekly health clinic is available to identify wider healthcare issues and other chronic conditions that may have been masked by a client’s drug taking.

The client-centred approach is something that Rondine Molinaro hopes to take beyond treatment provision to the running of Birchwood itself, with a long-term aim to transform it into a social enterprise. This would create the opportunity to provide a free detox space each month to someone who is unable to access funding through conventional means – ‘someone who may need another chance,’ she says.

Central to Kaleidoscope’s culture is an understanding that detox is not a miracle cure, and for many clients may be just part of their journey – an ethos underlined by equipping clients with relapse prevention training, RPM medication, and take-home naloxone on leaving the facility.

What is very clearly on offer at Birchwood is the opportunity for people to reset their lives and make fundamental changes. ‘While this is not a one-fix-wonder, hopefully it can inspire people to live life better,’ says Blakebrough.

Birchwood House residential treatment centre welcomes referrals from a range of clients including statutory, criminal justice and private clients. To find out more please contact executive lead, Rondine Molinaro on 07773 211461 or email enquiries@birchwoodtreatment.com

This article appeared in the April issue of DDN Magazine.

Trump administration to step up ‘war on drugs’

The US administration under President Donald Trump has signalled that it intends to intensify the ‘war on drugs’, with a return to 1980s-style prevention campaigns and the use of marijuana possession as a means to deport immigrants who don’t have proper documentation.

The direction is in contrast to that of the Obama administration, which steered prosecutors away from pursuing low-level drugs offenders, while one of President Obama’s final acts in office was to commute the sentences of 330 prisoners. The ‘vast majority’ of these were serving ‘unduly long sentences for drug crimes’, the White House said (DDN, February, page 4).

‘Let me be clear about marijuana,’ said homeland security secretary, John Kelly. ‘It is a potentially dangerous gateway drug that frequently leads to the use of harder drugs.’ The US Immigration and Customs Enforcement department (ICE) would ‘continue to use marijuana possession, distribution and convictions as essential elements as they build their deportation/removal apprehension packages for targeted operations against illegal aliens,’ he stated.

While marijuana remains illegal under US federal law, eight states have now legalised the drug for adult use – including five which did so at the time of last year’s presidential elections (DDN, December 2016, page 4) – and almost 30 states have medical marijuana laws. ‘It’s outrageous to think that anyone following medical advice under state law would be subject to deportation,’ said policy manager at the Drug Policy Alliance’s Washington-based office of national affairs, Jerónimo Saldaña. ‘The Trump administration has signalled its desire to use the drug war as a tool to persecute immigrants.’

The announcement follows a speech last month by the US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, in which he praised the drug prevention campaigns of the 1980s and ’90s and stressed the need to prevent ‘people from ever taking drugs in the first place’. Treatment often came ‘too late to save people from addiction or death’, he said.

‘Too many lives are at stake to worry about being fashionable,’ he stated. ‘I reject the idea that America will be a better place if marijuana is sold in every corner store. And I am astonished to hear people suggest that we can solve our heroin crisis by legalising marijuana – so people can trade one life-wrecking dependency for another that’s only slightly less awful. Our nation needs to say clearly once again that using drugs will destroy your life.’

President Trump is also expected to appoint a hardline drug war advocate, Tom Marino, as the next head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy – the country’s ‘drug czar’. Marino strongly supports a ‘punitive, 1980s approach to drugs’, says the Drug Policy Alliance, which called him a ‘disastrous’ choice. ‘Our nation needs a drug czar that wants to treat drug use as a health issue, not someone who wants to double down on mass incarceration,’ said its director of national affairs, Bill Piper. ‘The American people are moving in one direction and the Trump administration is moving in another. There are few hardcore supporters of the failed war on drugs left, but those that are left seem to all be getting jobs in the administration.’

Jeff Sessions’ speech is at www.justice.gov

Stuck in the system

New treatment for hepatitis C has opened up massive opportunity for all-round health gains that we are just not taking, hears DDN.

We need to look at syndemics, said Charles Gore – when a set of linked health problems such as hepatitis C, drug and alcohol issues, mental health and homelessness interact to increase the person’s poor state of health and chances of disease. As chief executive of the Hepatitis C Trust and vice chair of the Hepatitis C Coalition, Gore was speaking to the Drugs, Alcohol and Justice Cross-Party Parliamentary Group about access to treatment.

Charles Gore: ‘Treating the prison population represents a huge opportunity… one area where you could send people out of prison better than they went in.’

In Scotland, treating people who injected drugs for hepatitis C had reduced death rates for this group by 50 per cent – ‘so treating hepatitis C might be a way of breaking this syndemic apart’, he said.

People who were treated were more motivated to address other factors, he explained, ‘so hep C treatment has a bigger effect than you might think’.

There had been ‘great breakthroughs’ in hep C drugs, which had a 95 per cent cure rate and were very tolerable to take (compared to previous treatment, which took a year and was ‘very unpleasant’) – ‘so we’re in a new era here’, he said.

In England there were around 160,000 people with hepatitis C, but a budget to treat only 10,000 of them. Treating all of them, at a cost of around £200m, would be ‘a lot of money – but not compared to other disease areas’.

The first year of new drugs had seen an 11 per cent decrease in mortality and a 50 per cent decrease in demand for liver transplants. ‘The gains in terms of health are enormous,’ said Gore.

The reasonably short course of eight to 12 weeks for the new treatment also meant there could be a big impact on treating people in prison.

Despite this, hep C testing and treatment levels in prison were low and prevention strategies ‘quite muddled and not homogenous across the prison estate’, failing to tackle the common transmission routes of shared needles, tattooing and sex.

In the community, there were wide variations in treatment strategy throughout the UK. In Wales, health boards had put money aside but could not find enough people to treat, while in England, a cap on numbers was stopping many people from accessing treatment. ‘Some areas of the country have massive waiting lists, but some are running out of people,’ said Gore. Financial incentives for finding and following up people after treatment also risked making low priority cases of those who were hard to follow up – ie the drug-using population.

The NHS was investigating procurement deals with pharmacies, and Gore explained that the Hepatitis C Trust had a preferred model of ‘one price for an unlimited amount of treatments, so there would be a great incentive to treat as many people as possible. At the moment, the system disincentivises treatment and the cap disincentivises testing.’

Treating the prison population represented a ‘huge opportunity’, Gore believed – ‘It’s one area where you could send people out of prison better than they went in.’ There were 10,000 people in prison with hepatitis C, and ‘if we took this population and treated them we could make a big difference’.

The current cap and rationing system did not prevent members of the population with advanced liver disease from being treated as a priority. The problem was for those who had to wait two years – ‘and this assumes you’re in services,’ he explained. ‘But you may be in prison. You may be a person who might not be in touch with services again, and when you do, you may have liver cancer.’ Prison might be the only chance you have to treat them, so we were missing a significant public health opportunity, he said.

Gore also underlined ‘the tremendous importance’ of linking with people who are released from prison, who might be part way through treatment. ‘If we concentrated on prisoners’ health, we would have a much better chance of improving their chances.’

The parliamentary group’s discussion reflected PHE and NHS England’s need to work together on a hep C prevention strategy, but there was concern that ‘fragmented commissioning’ was hampering efforts, with costs falling in different parts of the system and no ‘strategic flow’ between them.

‘There’s a lot of joining up to do,’ said Gore. ‘People who spend and people who gain are different people.’

 

Under pressure

The celebrity craze for stress pills is even reaching schoolchildren – should we be concerned? Kevin Flemen looks at the risks and availability of alprazolam, branded as Xanax.

A friend of mine in Hackney was recounting a recent case involving the death of a child at her daughter’s school. While the inquest results were still awaited, it appeared the death may have involved alprazolam. When I voiced some surprise at this drug being a factor, my friend said: ‘All of my daughter’s friends are going on about Xanax. It’s really the thing at the moment.’

Xanax is the brand name of the benzodiazepine alprazolam. It is highly potent – some 20 times the strength of diazepam (Valium) – with a medium duration of effect and a half-life of around 12 hours. It is widely prescribed in America with claims that it is now the number one prescribed psychiatric medication. Most legal use in the UK is from private prescriptions as it is not prescribed on the NHS, but it is also available via the dark web.

Over the past few years, most UK reports of alprazolam have referred to it as a cut in heroin rather than a significant drug in its own right. Norwich police warned of alprazolam in heroin back in 2004, and in the more recent heroin ‘drought’ around 2010, reports circulated of orange-tinted heroin linked to overdoses.

Historically, the most popular benzodiazepine in the UK has been diazepam, which was frequently diverted from legitimate prescriptions. As prescribers were repeatedly reminded about the need to address widespread over-prescribing, people seeking sedation have had to resort to looking elsewhere.

Some injectors turned to temazepam, albeit with disastrous health consequences following the intro­duction of Gelthix capsules intended to deter injecting.

Pregabalin and gabapentin increasingly became the prescribed drugs of choice, and workers and peer educators reported an increase in ‘pregabs’ as a core drug of polydrug use – initially in custodial settings and then in community settings too. ‘It’s like sciatica is a catching condition,’ commented a prison drugs worker on a training course, noting ruefully how many prisoners presented to the medical team complaining of neuropathic pain in the hope that it would result in a pregabalin prescription.

Further afield, online pharmacies represented a ready source of tablets sold as diazepam. Overseas suppliers sold it in the form of blue pills – some genuine, but others containing a range of compounds or none of the drug at all. Canny consumers became increasingly wary of purchasing diazepam from such sources.

The explosion of novel psychoactives brought with it the advent of numerous novel benzodiazepines, includ­ing phenazepam, etizolam and flubromazepam. These worked, and were cheap and widely available. Rather than seeking dwindling NHS prescriptions or chancing random blue pills from Asia, more of the depressant market turned to these NPS benzodiazepines.

So back to Xanax. Is it becoming a ‘thing’ in the UK? If so, why – and to what extent is this likely to become a trend?

The drug has gained profile significantly. It has been linked to a number of high-profile celebrity deaths and continues to be associated with the media, earning mentions in music and film as well as appearing in many internet memes.

If diazepam is possibly a bit old and fusty, Xanax has become the sedating pill for those stressed by celebrity rather than mundanity. The school-age peers of the friend I mentioned at the start had come to Xanax via its associations with American celebrities. It was fashionable.

In recent sessions with young people in a number of settings, I’ve been exploring awareness of Xanax. In one (albeit small) group of young people in Norwich, all had heard of it and they mentioned memes that they had seen.

Although alprazolam isn’t significantly prescribed in the UK, there’s good availability via the dark web. A search filtered for European suppliers returned 297 entries on Dream Market. By comparison, diazepam returned 391 entries. Costs varied significantly, but 200 x 2mg tablets (the equivalent of 4 x 10mg diazepam) worked out at around £1 a tablet. There is clearly no shortage of people offering alprazolam, with the product range including raw powder and pills in various strengths.

Increased restriction on other sedating substances could further encourage its use. The existing non-regulated benzodiazepines were all automatically covered by the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 (PSA), reducing legitimate access to these compounds via head shops and online suppliers.

The ACMD has pushed for further regulation, suggesting they be made temporary class drug order (TCDO) drugs, with a view to later making them fully controlled drugs. However, the government has declined, arguing that this would reduce the capacity to control these drugs in custodial settings. Nonetheless, it is likely that all the novel benzodiazepines will be scheduled at some point in the future.

The ACMD and government are also concerned about the diversion of prescribed medicines, and the misuse of pregabalin is a key issue. Therefore it seems increasingly likely that this, alongside gabapentin, will be made a controlled drug in the coming months. So for anyone seeking non-prescribed sedation, the dark web and illicit markets will be the main source of drugs, and alprazolam is increasingly a feature. This will be especially true for people who have built up significant tolerance to benzo-type drugs pre-PSA, and who will need to cross-substitute with similarly strong benzos to stave off withdrawal. Someone with a 2g a day flubromazolam habit would probably need 80mg of diazepam for a similar effect.

A discussion on an NPS forum made a similar point, highlighting a red 5mg alprazolam bar on the market, saying: ‘There are now vendors based in the UK producing their own Xanax bars for our market… there’s one in particular that has just this week come out with red bars containing 5mg alprazolam. These are pressed and sold in the UK. I do not think it is a coincidence that this is happening right after the Psychoactive Substances Act has come into force. No one with a clonazolam habit is going to get much out of diazepam after all…

‘This could be the start of an interesting new trend in the UK. Alprazolam has never previously been a big thing here, but some of these UK Xanax vendors are geared up specifically to sell in bulk to dealers. I don’t doubt this is a direct result of UK benzo users getting a taste of more potent benzos from the RC [research chemicals] scene. I also fully expect etizolam bars to come onto the UK market shortly, but I suspect these will be more popular given the street cred of Xanax.’

It is too soon to know if alprazolam will become a significant drug on the UK scene, but some of the key risks and issues are:

• Alprazolam may crop up unexpectedly in compounds where it was not the sought-after drug. It may also crop up in a variety of strengths, with pills containing alprazolam ranging from 0.5mg to 5mg (equivalent of 20mg – 100mg of diazepam.) On its own this is a significant risk of overdose. This risk goes up significantly when used in combination with alcohol or opiates.

• If alprazolam is appealing to a younger demographic, there is likely to be a high level of ignorance in relation to risks around benzodiazepine use.

• As with other benzodiazepines, alprazolam can cause significant physical dependency and dangerous withdrawal symptoms. Tapered reduction may be required, including high-dose prescribing as part of a transfer from illegally sourced drugs.

Alprazolam is certainly a significant drug – and a big problem – in America, and increasingly crops up in polydrug overdoses. From looking at its growing influence in this country, it would seem that the risks are very real.

Kevin Flemen runs the drugs education and training initiative, KFx. Visit www.kfx.org.uk for free resources.

More choice, more options

New versions of drugs are constantly being developed and trialled, including injections of naltrexone and buprenorphine that can last up to six months, as well as a rapidly dissolving buprenorphine wafer, now approved in the UK as Espranor.

Flock of birds

It hasn’t always been the case, but opioid substitution therapy is now accepted as a key instrument in enabling recovery. Having got this far – and despite the ever-present threat of cuts – is improving choice the next key step, asks DDN.

Although divisions inevitably still exist, and probably always will, we’ve come a long way since the sector was polarised by those bitter harm reduction versus abstinence arguments, with concerns over budget reductions and the austerity agenda perhaps helping to focus minds on the bigger picture.

A significant step on this journey was the NTA’s 2012 Medications in recovery report (DDN, August 2012, page 5), which has come to be seen as a landmark document. A fundamental re-examining of the treatment methods and objectives that can lead to recovery, it concluded that while ‘entering and staying in treatment’ and ‘coming off opioid substitution treatment’ (OST) were undoubtedly important indicators, they did not constitute recovery ‘in themselves’.

Delivered properly, OST had ‘an important and legitimate place within recovery’, providing as it did a platform of ‘stability and safety that protects people and creates the time and space for them to move forward,’ it stated.

What was also vital, it stressed, was to focus on broader support and make sure that OST is always delivered in line with clinical guidance.

Shortly after the report’s publication, Professor Oscar D’Agnone – at the time clinical director of CRI, and now medical director of London’s OAD Clinic –wrote a DDN article expressing hope that the report might help put an end to the false dichotomy between abstinence and prescribing and bring about a situation where services would simply choose what worked best from a range of interventions (DDN, September 2012, page 23).

Prof Oscar D'Agnone
Prof Oscar D’Agnone: ‘We’ve been witnessing massive reductions in treatment budgets… the recent rise in death rates is probably related.’

Nearly five years on, he feels it ‘was positive to move from a strategy based only on harm minimisation to a recovery-focused one that included harm minimisation,’ but that the creation of that ideal treatment landscape has been hampered by budget cuts. ‘Over the last couple of years we’ve been witnessing massive reductions in treatment budgets, which has had massive implications for treatment and implementing recovery strategies,’ he says. ‘I think the recent rise in death rates we’re seeing is probably related to these policies, and not just to aging populations.’ Those groups are simply the most vulnerable to these policies, he believes. ‘You have a lot of people over 55 or 60 who have been on prescriptions for years and they have been removed from those prescriptions for reasons that I don’t think are related to the recovery agenda, but to budget reasons.’

Indeed, the Medications in recovery report concluded that, while people should not be ‘parked indefinitely’ on substitute drugs – and that all prescriptions should be regularly reviewed – neither should arbitrary time limits be imposed. Is the sector more accepting of that position now? ‘Well, I think those statements are made from Mount Olympus, if you like – people on the ground are seeing different things,’ he states. ‘In my clinic, I have 48 people over 60 and eight people over 70. You can argue that these people should not be on high methadone or other prescriptions, whether that’s right or wrong, but what I’m saying is these people are alive and kicking and I’ll keep them on the same dosage. If I impose a reduction on them, they’ll start dying. And that’s what we’re seeing in the north west of England and other areas.’

It’s argued that time limiting OST not only threatens people’s ability to sustain their recovery but also risks increasing blood-borne virus transmissions, drug-related deaths and more. Would he go along with that? ‘Absolutely,’ he says. ‘It’s for the patient to say when the time has come to stop, not for me to impose that. The problem is that a heroin user nowadays is an old adult – they’ve been on heroin for a long time. Setting time limits for these patients is very, very risky. All these considerations about time limitations are based, basically, on budget reasons, not clinical reasons. There’s not a shred of evidence that time limiting will produce better outcomes.’

Ultimately, choice is vital when it comes to prescribing, he believes. ‘At my clinic I have patients coming from the public sector and the private sector, and we have a more open-minded view – they have more freedom to discuss the medications they’d like to take, and the doses. I’m receiving people who are on 1.5mg of buprenorphine, and all they wanted to be is on 2mg, but they’ve been told, “no, you have to be on 1.5, and reducing”. That’s ridiculous, and it’s putting people at risk.’

As part of the quest to respond to patient need, new versions of drugs are constantly being developed and trialled, including injections of naltrexone and buprenorphine that can last up to six months, as well as a rapidly dissolving buprenorphine wafer, now approved in the UK as Espranor. As standard buprenorphine capsules can take between five and ten minutes to dissolve – clearly far from ideal for supervised consumption in a busy pharmacy or prison setting – it’s hoped that products like this can help cut the drop-out rates for buprenorphine treatment, which currently stand at about 50 per cent within six months.

‘We’re finding administering Espranor takes about 30 seconds, so it’s certainly a much quicker product than the generic hard compressed tablet,’ says GP and substance misuse specialist Dr Bernadette Hard, who has been prescribing Espranor in her Cardiff-based service since January. While her service began using it in a criminal justice setting, they have since had some clients move their prescriptions to community pharmacies, she points out.

‘Our main motivation for wanting to trial this new preparation was the challenges we faced around diversion and misuse, and we had around 30 people when we did the initial switch,’ she says. ‘The people that we felt were appropriately on buprenorphine and benefitting from it had a very positive experience with switching – they liked the fact that it dissolved quicker and they didn’t feel they were being scrutinised, because if you are taking it properly but someone feels you might not be, that can be quite uncomfortable. Some pharmacists are really good and respectful, others less so.’

Patient feedback

The feedback on espranor so far has been very positive, she says. ‘For those clients where we were always a little bit suspicious around their motivation for wanting to be on buprenorphine, some of them did struggle with the switch. Some found that – where they probably hadn’t been taking their full amount before – when we switched them onto Espranor they had to reduce their dose because they were finding it a little too strong. One or two have actually said they used to get bullied for their tablets, so they’d prefer to be on Espranor because they have fewer people requesting them, things like that.’

So how important is choice in substitute prescribing generally? ‘Well, we don’t have many options,’ she says. ‘You can try and categorise via a patient’s history who you think is going to do better on methadone or buprenorphine, and most of the time we’re right about that. But not always, and some people just gel with one product and I think it’s important that we respect that, in the same way we would in primary care. It’s part of building a mutual relationship, where you’re not just dictating to them.’

The DDN Conference

At the recent DDN service user conference, however, it was pointed out by user involvement activists that this is perhaps the only medical area where people don’t always have those conversations about choice with their doctors (DDN, March, page 8). It can often be a case of ‘here you go, I’m giving you this’.

‘I would challenge that, actually,’ she says. ‘There are areas where we can sound quite paternalistic and also where we’re being driven by budget, but that’s not exclusive to substance misuse. I think it can sometimes feel that way in substance misuse because an awful lot of the way we deliver services is by its very nature patern­alistic – because we’re supervising people and so on.

‘But I think more choice and more options is always going to be beneficial, and we have to get in there and use these things,’ she states. ‘I’ve been on development groups and the like, and we can all sit around as experts and ponder how this is going to pan out and where it’s going to be of most use, but sometimes you just need to use it – obviously in controlled way – to really understand where people are going to go with it.’

This article has been produced with support from Martindale Pharma (now an Ethypharm Group Company), which has not influenced the content in any way.

 

Hub Manager – Oxfordshire

At Turning Point, we support people across the UK with substance misuse issues. In fact, we’ve developed our own fully integrated Drug and Alcohol service that provides its users with personal care and support that’s tailored to their individual needs.

Delivering this service from one single point of access, it’s all about doing things in a new way, and doing them more efficiently and effectively than ever before. Which is where our Hub Manager comes in.

Making a real difference to our users’ lives, you’ll manage our local Hub in Oxford – making sure its services are delivered efficiently, effectively and to the highest standards of quality. As well as leading and coordinating senior recovery workers, recovery workers, support workers and administrators, you’ll get to work closely with clinicians and line managers as you contribute to the planning of care and responding to ever-changing local needs. Which means it’s crucial for you to stay abreast of new developments in substance misuse and use your initiative to identify and explore new opportunities.

View this and over 50 other opportunities at: www.drinkanddrugsnews.com/jobs

Set target to cut Scots alcohol consumption by 10 per cent, say campaigners

The Scottish Government should establish a target to reduce overall alcohol consumption by 10 per cent over the next decade, says a new report from Alcohol Focus Scotland.

The government also needs to ‘address alcohol’s role in health inequalities’ and implement a 50p minimum unit price ‘as soon as legally possible’, urges Changing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol: recommendations for further action. The 10 per cent cut in drinking levels could potentially ‘deliver a 20 per cent reduction in deaths and hospital admissions’ after 20 years, the report states.

Scotland continues to have the highest level of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm in the UK, says document, which is published in association with BMA Scotland, SHAAP and Scottish Families Affected by Alcohol & Drugs. Despite the fact that 22 Scots die from alcohol-related causes each week – twice the rate of the 1980s – the Scottish Government has cut direct funding for alcohol and drug services by more than 20 per cent, the report states, leaving the NHS to ‘plug the gap’.

Alongside more investment in treatment and prevention, the document’s other recommendations include the prohibition of all price discounting, restriction of off-sales licensing hours, reducing children’s exposure to advertising and sponsorship, and improving the identification of children affected by parental drinking. The government needs to develop a strategic approach to reducing availability, it stresses, and provide clearer information about health risks to consumers. The recommendations come ahead of the Scottish Government’s ‘refresh’ of its 2009 alcohol strategy, Changing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol: a framework for action (DDN, 9 March 2009, page 4), which is due to be published in the summer.

‘Scotland is awash with alcohol,’ said Alcohol Focus Scotland chief executive Alison Douglas. ‘Widespread availability, low prices and heavy marketing are having a devastating effect, not only on drinkers but on their children and families too. Minimum unit pricing will hopefully be introduced next year, but further action is required to turn off the tap of alcohol harm, rather than simply treating the symptoms. This report provides a blueprint which, if implemented, will improve the lives of millions of Scots, make our communities better and safer places to live, and reduce demand on our over-burdened public services.’

‘As doctors we see first-hand the damage that alcohol misuse does to patients and their families,’ added chair of BMA Scotland, Dr Peter Bennie. ‘It is essential that as a society we redouble our efforts to tackle Scotland’s damaging relationship with alcohol. The proposals we are jointly publishing today will be the yardstick against which the Scottish Government’s willingness to go further will be measured, and show how we can build upon the work that has already been done to reduce the harms that are caused by alcohol misuse in Scotland.’

Meanwhile, the percentage of Scottish drug users seeking treatment for heroin has fallen from 64 per cent in 2006-07 to 47 per cent in 2015-16, according to the latest figures from the Scottish Drug Misuse Database, while the number of under-25s reporting recent heroin use fell from 58 per cent to 25 per cent over the same period. Although the percentage of people injecting has also fallen (from 28 to 18 per cent), drug-related death rates in Scotland remain worryingly high (DDN, September 2016, page 4).

Changing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol: recommendations for further action at www.alcohol-focus-scotland.org.uk

Scottish drug misuse database: annual report, 2015/16 at www.isdscotland.org

Springboard to success

RAPt’s apprenticeship programme is helping people to use their experience of addiction to get back into work, as Nathan Motherwell explains.

Since 2013 RAPt have been running an apprenticeship programme with a difference, and it’s been quite successful. We recruit apprentices to work in our drug and alcohol treatment services across the country, helping people to address their addiction – and our apprentices are all in recovery themselves. So while helping people into work, the scheme also supports people in their own recovery.

The apprenticeship scheme is about recognising the value of people’s personal experience of addiction and recovery, so we don’t have any maximum age restriction. In fact, I’m quite proud to say, the average age of a RAPt apprentice is 45. RAPt managers report that apprentices provide a visible example of recovery in action, bring new energy to the teams, and offer extensive personal experience of addiction and recovery. Feedback from other RAPt staff has been that apprentices bring fresh motivation, as well as a unique energy and passion that can change the whole team dynamic in a very positive way.

Many of our apprentices have little or no work experience, and no previous experience is required. Some have been in recovery a while and are looking for a career change after working in another field, while others have voluntary experience and are looking to get their first paid job.

The apprentices work towards a level 3 NVQ qualification in substance misuse or counselling. The scheme ensures that we offer significant support and learning every step of the way – all apprentices are allocated a mentor as well as a line manager. They get a wage of just under £20,000 a year for the London areas, and we also pay an allowance for external supervision and provide regular support meetings.

A lot of our apprenticeships are based within prisons in London, Kent, Norfolk, Surrey and Sussex. One of the challenges has been getting people with criminal convictions the security clearance to work in the prison system. We have also offered a large number of apprenticeships within our community projects and administration roles at our head office.

The results of the scheme are amazing, especially considering the challenging nature of working inside prisons. In the last three years we have offered more than 80 recovering addicts and alcoholics apprenticeship placements at RAPt. We only have a 15 per cent dropout rate from the scheme and 80 per cent of all apprentices who started with us completed their apprenticeships and went on to secure further employment. Many of them have moved on and are now working for other service providers, as well as many being employed permanently with us at RAPt.

With the new government apprenticeship levy coming into force this month, funding could become available for apprentices of all ages. We are hoping this could enable RAPt to expand the scheme and roll out our apprentice programme to other service providers. Nathan Motherwell is RAPt apprenticeship co-ordinator and a former RAPt client in recovery

 

‘Their faith in me was priceless’

Former RAPt apprentice Gary Broadway shares how the scheme started his career.

I had my last drink in 1995 and I’ve been sober ever since. When I found out about the RAPt apprentice scheme, it seemed like the ideal next step for me.

My role as a drug and alcohol practitioner apprentice involved a huge variety of things, from admin to working with clients. I went to college as part of the scheme, gaining NVQ levels 2 and 3 in counselling. RAPt were great and made sure that I got the help I needed.

My favourite thing was working with challenging clients and seeing the difference in them, as well as learning new skills. I’d never used a computer before I started, but soon learnt to use one to write reports. My confidence grew so much, as well as my skills. When a job as an alcohol worker came up, I decided to go for it and I got it.

To be given a chance to be an apprentice is an honour and I’m eternally grateful. RAPt had faith in me and that feeling is priceless. It’s wonderful to be able to tell my kids about what I’m doing – they’re so proud of me. I would tell anyone to have a go at the apprenticeship. It has been an amazing chance and has shown me I can now have a career in a job I love.

 

Creating a future

Prison can be an opportunity to change deep-rooted behav­iour and begin to flourish, say the team at Addaction tell DDN.

‘I have learnt that the crime I was doing and the drugs I was taking didn’t just affect me, it also affected other people – it’s a ripple effect,’ said a prisoner at HMP Lincoln, describing the effect Addaction’s Trans4orm programme was having on him. ‘It has helped me to share my problems and understand different ways to cope.’

Another participant called it ‘a bright light in a dark place’, and this was the intention of Louise Scherdel, Addaction’s Lincolnshire Prisons service manager, when she wrote and developed the programme under the supervision of Andrew Beaver, operations manager at Grantham Community Service.

‘Our ultimate goal on the Trans4orm project is to equip prisoners with strong life skills to change deep-rooted negative behaviour patterns, so they can go on to live life free from alcohol or substance misuse,’ she says.

Up to 12 prisoners at a time volunteer to engage in the programme and are screened first to make sure of their commitment. Once accepted, the participants are moved from their existing prison accommodation to a small community on a self-contained ‘recovery landing’, where they live together for 12 weeks. In these new surroundings – which have been refurbished and painted with bright motifs and motivational statements by Trans4orm participants – the prisoners are given intense daily therapy sessions, both individually and as a group, by Addaction’s substance misuse experts assisted by peer mentors.

An important part of this programme is the Cognitive Approach to Recovery, written by Addaction to address the deep-rooted attitudes and thoughts that have resulted in negative behaviours and continuing substance misuse.

It’s a ’holistic, whole-person approach’, says Scherdel. ‘We are always recovery-focused and work hard with the prisoners at HMP Lincoln to encourage enhanced levels of confidence, motivation and drive to achieve their own recovery… for many of the people who participate in Trans4orm it is the Addaction self-esteem, self-belief and self-confidence therapies that appear to offer them the most motivation to change negative patterns of behaviour.’

HMP Lincoln’s governor, Peter Wright, says ‘the level of need among people in Lincoln Prison is almost overwhelming’, but believes the programme is making ‘a profoundly important difference to the lives of the men who take part’. The 90 per cent completion rate has set a new benchmark for success.

‘The best times I have here are when I meet people on the programme for their final session,’ he says. ‘It is a privilege to hear them tell their stories and how they have been able to face up to issues in a safe environment… Above all, I know from the moving testimony of service users that potentially life changing things are happening.’

The holistic approach to recovery includes a growing range of activities developed by the Addaction substance misuse team across both Lincolnshire prisons – HMP Lincoln and HMP North Sea Camp. Art therapy workshops have resulted in pieces by prisoners being exhibited in a London gallery; a theatre company and music therapy group are performing regularly within both prisons, and a very popular ‘recovery garden’ project is enabling service users to grow vegetables for homeless people and the local church.

It’s all about promoting recovery as a genuine possibility – and a genuine alternative to drugs, says Scherdel. ‘Keeping prisoners engaged and motivated, and helping them to reflect on their lives is very important. We want people to leave prison and live a life free of drug and alcohol dependency and reoffending, and that means finding a balance between security and supportive therapy.’

Prison perspectives

A first-person account of nearly a decade at the frontline of prison substance misuse services.

‘I feel compelled to share what I feel is a poor level of care offered to clients in prisons.’

Last year I resigned from my position as a service manager due to burnout, having spent the last two years fighting to offer the best level of treatment and support to the clients we had in our care. I am a resilient individual but the experiences I encountered made it impossible for me to continue in my role as I felt my personal and professional integrity were being compromised.

Now, having had time to reflect, I am finally in a place to share my experiences. Furthermore, I feel compelled to share what I feel is a poor level of care offered to clients in prisons. This substandard level of care changed very little over my time working within the service.

I started working in addiction services because I felt I could make a difference. A great deal of the frontline staff that I worked alongside, and then managed, had the same belief. These staff maintained their dedication and commitment to the clients even though they were directed to work with programmes and models of treatment they knew were not best practice. We knew that we could offer more and do more but were prevented from doing so.

I have seen some of the best and worst practice in my time with the service, including the dismissive and unethical ethos of some managerial staff regarding clients in their care. I worked in a unit where every year it was common practice that clients would be rushed through a very intense treatment programme in less that the minimum time, so the yearly targets could be met. This demonstrated a real lack of care for clients and a compromise of good treatment practice.

I took on the role as service manager so that I could make sure such bad and unethical practices could no longer take place, and with the support of my line manager – who was amazing – I introduced a new programme that was open to all clients engaged in the service. This included holistic interventions such as Tai Chi, mindfulness, yoga and animal therapy. I established a recovery wing and integrated clinical and psychosocial services, and as a result more clients engaged with the service, referrals to rehabs increased, and the number of clients on methadone scripts declined by over 50 per cent.

Despite the improvements, I felt there was more we could do but it required the support of the organisation that I worked for, and its ability to adapt and grow. However the resistance was constant, even though the positive changes that we had already made demonstrated good results and a better level of care and treatment for the clients. The pressure from the organisation was immense, with increased audits, visits, meetings and constant questioning, and without acknowledgement or recognition that positive change was occurring.

Slowly the organisation fragmented the integrated service that I was successfully running and improving. I was no longer allowed to manage the whole service, and clinical services were re-allocated to another manager. As a result, this served only to withdraw the single point-of-service contact for the client, and, ultimately, the number of clients receiving prescribed medication began to increase once more. Any data collected led to little or no change in practices, and there is now no single point of contact for the client due to ineffective management and a separation of clinical and psychosocial treatment, leaving the client unsure who is taking the lead in their care.

I would like to add that prisons are very difficult places to work and over the past seven years they have suffered dramatically due to well-publicised funding cuts. It would also be easy to say ‘why should we care about these clients?’ Yet those of us who have worked with them know how valuable the work and the clients are, and that most have suffered mental and physical abuse, are from deprived upbringings – often growing up in the care system – and have fallen through the cracks in society.

Nevertheless, they can and do change, addiction can be effectively treated, and these clients can go on to live happy and productive lives. But we cannot do that without change. We need organisations that are prepared to evolve, accept change, become innovative and creative, and listen to the caseworkers and the clients. Without this, the level of care will continue to decline and clients will continue to suffer.

I believe that for a short period of time I scratched the surface of what could be achieved, and saw the real tangible effects for clients. I sincerely hope that change will come soon and, as we approach the next round of tendering, the ‘same-old, same-old’ does not prevail.

England and Wales should introduce minimum pricing, say Lords

England and Wales should follow suit if minimum unit pricing is introduced in Scotland and proves ‘effective in cutting down excessive drinking’, says a report from the House of Lords Select Committee on the Licensing Act 2003.

The legality of minimum pricing is still being considered by the UK Supreme Court, however (DDN, December 2016, page 4). A legal challenge to the Scottish Government’s minimum pricing plans from the Scotch Whisky Association and others was rejected by the Scottish Court of Session last year (DDN, November 2016, page 4), which in turn prompted the current appeal – the latest part of a protracted legal battle.

‘The argument that a policy should not be introduced because there was no conclusive evidence that it would be effective was once deployed to oppose compulsory seat belts and restrictions on smoking,’ says the report. ‘It does not make sense for a decision for England and Wales to be postponed indefinitely. UK ministers must be guided by the Scottish experience.’

The committee also states that the Licensing Act 2003 is fundamentally flawed and in need of a ‘radical overhaul’. It was ‘shocked by some of the evidence it received on hearings before licensing committees’, said committee chair Baroness McIntosh of Pickering. ‘Their decisions have been described as “something of a lottery”, “lacking formality”, and “indifferent”, with some “scandalous misuses of the powers of elected local councillors”,’ she stated.

The report concludes that the government made a ‘substantial error’ in creating new committees for local authorities to deal with licensing, with planning committees ‘more effective and reliable’. The report wants to see immediate coordination between the licensing and planning systems, with licensing appeals going to the planning inspectorate instead of magistrates’ courts. It also calls for licensing fees to be set locally rather than nationally, and for the ‘late night levy’ – which was intended to pay for the cost of policing – to be repealed.

Meanwhile, Public Health England and the Department of Health have published their latest estimates of alcohol dependence in England. The estimated prevalence of people with alcohol dependence and ‘potentially in need of specialist assessment and treatment’ in 2014-15 was 595,131, representing just under 1.4 per cent of the population aged over 18, says the report. Of these, 313,753 displayed mild dependence, 173,399 moderate dependence and 107,979 severe dependence.

Select committee on the Licensing Act 2003: post-legislative scrutiny at www.publications.parliament.uk

Estimates of alcohol dependence in England based on APMS 2014, including estimates of children living in a household with an adult with alcohol dependence

The Licensing Act 2003 is fundamentally flawed and in need of a ‘radical overhaul’, states the Select Committee

DDN April 2017

‘We need to understand the risks of Xanax and the culture behind it’

It’s never easy to weigh up the level of drug risk based on America – remember the hysteria over crystal meth a few years ago, with drug services in the UK gearing up for the scale of devastation seen in some communities of the US? But with evidence of cases multiplying and including many young people, we need to understand the risks of Xanax (alprazolam) and the culture behind it. Anxiety is starting to be well documented, particularly among young people, and Xanax’s link with celebrity makes it difficult to deter experimentation with the drug. Kevin Flemen’s article explains the nature of the threat and what to look out for.

Throughout the rest of this month’s issue we talk a lot about prison – including the perspective of a service manager, who until recently was working at the frontline of prison substance misuse services. He feels compelled to share experience of clients being rushed through very intense treatment programmes, and of many opportunities for holistic interventions being dismissed or unsupported.

We can see the results of life-changing interventions through Addaction’s Trans4orm programme and RAPt’s thriving apprenticeship programme – both of which have the activities that are essential to self-sufficiency and self-esteem at their heart, and demonstrate results of properly supported initiatives. The other huge opportunity in investing in engagement with those in the criminal justice system is, as Charles Gore reminds us in relation to hepatitis C, to offer life-saving inventions and ‘send people out of prison better than they went in’.

Claire Brown, editor

Read the PDF version or the mobile magazine.

Keep in touch – email the editor, join our Facebook page and tweet us @DDNmagazine

Finding balance

In the therapy room at DDN Conference, Lois Skilleter and Sam Lofthouse gave delegates a taster of massage and Reiki. Lois explains the treatments.

This was my fourth year of offering voluntary therapies at the DDN conference – it’s becoming a wonderful annual event for me, and my students who have come have also enjoyed it very much. This year Sam accompanied me, and we were able to offer Indian head massage, Reiki and hand massages.

Indian head massage has only been around in the West for about 35 years, and is a very relaxing mix of the Indian traditions of hair oiling, chakra balancing and barbers’ head massage, combined with the shoulder, neck and upper back massage that is so needed by westerners with our high stress levels. Our clients loved it and found they felt surprisingly lighter and happier after experiencing it.

Reiki is Japanese in origin and provides an energy balance, leading to relaxation and clarity of mind. Clients are often surprised to feel tingling or ‘hot spots’ even when the practitioner is not physically touching them. The practitioner is acting as a channel for the Reiki energy, allowing the client to draw what is needed through them – hence this treatment is very empowering for the client as they are in fact doing their own healing, with the practitioner merely a facilitator.

Hand massage is somewhat underrated, I feel: it’s non intrusive, very versatile, yet can bring real relaxation to the recipient. Our clients who opted for this treatment really enjoyed it, noticing how much lighter and less tense their hands felt afterwards. I have recently done hand massage with a dementia group and both carers and patients found it soothing and helpful. It’s also a good bonding therapy: some of the mums I work with like to do it for their children at night to help with sleep.

All of these therapies are gentle, relaxing and have few side effects, and can be used with vulnerable people as long as basic cautions are taken into account and a doctor’s note received if the client is suffering from any contraindications. It is heartening to see complementary medicines becoming more accepted: while they do not replace medical advice and treatment, they can be a valuable support when used alongside conventional medicine.

Lois’s website is www.eartherealofyorkshire.co.uk and she is always happy to discuss training and treatments.

All party group lobbies PHE for prescription drug helpline

The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Prescribed Drug Dependence has set out its case for a national helpline for people struggling to withdraw from prescription drugs such as opioid-based painkillers, tranquilisers and anti-depressants. Prescribing for the latter has risen by more than 500 per cent since 1992, says the APPG.

Up to 10m people in the UK are taking benzodiazepines, sleeping pills, antidepressants or other psychiatric medications at any one time, says the group, while 10m people a year also receive opiate painkiller prescriptions. ‘It is therefore proposed that the government should fund a national helpline to provide support and advice for this group of patients, most of whom have become dependent simply because they followed their doctor’s advice,’ it states.

A declaration of support for the proposed 24-hour helpline has been signed by leading medical bodies including the royal colleges of GPs, physicians and psychiatrists, while a recent meeting of the APPG heard from researchers at the University of Roehampton that around 770,000 long-term users of anti-depressants in England could be taking the drugs unnecessarily, at a cost to the NHS of £120,000 per day. Researchers also found that more than 250,000 people were taking benzodiazepines and ‘z drugs’ for more than six months, far beyond the NICE-recommended limit of two to four weeks.

The response of doctors and psychiatrists to prescription drug dependence varies widely, states the APPG, but is characterised by a ‘lack of awareness and relevant training’. The absence of specialist NHS support means that those with dependency issues are reliant on small, struggling independent charities for help, several of which have had to close through lack of funding. The proposed helpline would be low-cost and could provide appropriate support during withdrawal as well as help with symptom management, says the APPG.

‘Long-term users of antidepressants, tranquilisers and opioid painkillers can suffer devastating effects when they try to withdraw, often leading to years of unnecessary suffering and disability,’ said APPG chair Paul Flynn MP. ‘And yet – unlike illicit drugs – there are hardly any dedicated services to support them. The cost of unnecessary antidepressant and tranquiliser prescribing is now estimated at £60m a year in England alone. We therefore urge Public Health England to set up a national helpline to support individuals wishing to withdraw from these drugs, and to reduce the tremendous cost to patients’ lives and the public purse.’

PHE’s director of alcohol, drugs and tobacco, Rosanna O’Connor has agreed to consult with colleagues about the proposal, the APPG has announced.

Call for national helpline to support patients affected by prescribed drug dependence (PDD) report at prescribeddrug.org

Counter culture

As the friendly and regular face at the heart of community-based medicine, the pharmacist has an opportunity to profoundly influence welfare, as DDN reports.

Lee Collingham: ‘The pharmacy is central to everyone’s treatment… it’s not about checking people out, it’s about helping.’

‘If you’re struggling, you say, “I’m alright”. People pass you and ask, “Are you OK?” and you say, “Yes, I’m fine.” It’s just a normal greeting. But you could say, “You’re going to wish you’d never asked me that. Do you really want to know? I feel like shit, I can’t be arsed with anything, I’m just going through the motions.”’

Lee Collingham is explaining how it can feel when you’re trying to stay in treatment for problematic drug use. He speaks from personal experience and as a service user advocate and peer supporter.

‘You may not have seen your drug worker for a month. You may have had a breakdown, got yourself back together, had another breakdown.’

And from his own experience: ‘I’ve regularly started to miss doctor’s appointments. Sometimes it’s because it’s the opposite week to when I get paid and I have to walk two miles. Or it might be because my appointment’s at 8.30am and with me not sleeping well, I might have dropped off at 7am.’

He sees his local pharmacist regularly, just a short walk away, and points out that at the heart of an overloaded treatment system, the pharmacy has an increasingly important role.

‘The pharmacy is central to everyone’s treatment and they see people more often than anyone else in the system. So there’s a lot of stuff they can do.’ He reels off a list of basic interventions and harm reduction advice, as well as the opportunity to introduce patients to the right kind of hepatitis C treatment to suit their condition – ‘if you’re on OST [opioid substitution treatment] you get one kind of treatment, if you’re a drinker you get another one, and so forth.’

But there’s an overseeing role that can be equally important as far as he’s concerned. ‘The chemist is the one place they will attend regularly, and there could be better integration with other services,’ he says.

‘Some people might come in for daily OST pick-up on a Monday, then miss Tuesday and Wednesday. They’re just keeping in treatment, but what are they doing for the other two days if they’re not needing their script? Are they still using? It’s not about checking people out, it’s about helping them to reach their goals and where they want to be – about not making it problematic so they can’t even come forward with an issue.’

Personally, he values the regular contact and the concern for his welfare – the little chat while waiting for medication to be made up. ‘They’ll say “are you alright Lee? You seem a bit quiet” or “you seem a bit off these last few days”. It’s the conversation that leads to help with all aspects of health and wellbeing.

‘As services and needle exchanges are cut, your prime relationship is more and more with your pharmacist,’ says Nick Goldstein, who is tasked with helping to make this relationship a positive one. Called upon as a representative of the drug-using community (a label he is uncomfortable with, as ‘we’re not all alike’), he is involved in an initiative by Martindale Pharma with Boots, supporting current and former service users to engage with pre-reg pharmacists as part of their addictions training programme.

Goldstein is cautious about overvaluing his role for several reasons. He is talking to pharmacists at the start of their career, rather than decision-makers in charge of culture change. He only has a slot of about half an hour in the training day – not enough time to go into the level of detail he would like, although questions from participants often take the session beyond its allocated slot.

‘If I was cynical I’d say it was a case of saying, “hey, come and watch the bear dance”. It’s a show for them,’ he says. ‘In a dry academic day I turn up and I’m a little bit different. And they’re always fascinated, always paying attention.’

But while paying attention, he hopes they are picking up the core points he’s giving them – and while doing so, that the sessions are helping to address stigma and personalise the process of coming to the pharmacist for OST. ‘I try to get them to look beyond the reductive labeling and see that we should be treated as individuals,’ he says.

Beginning the training three years ago, Goldstein came face to face with the scale of his task.

‘I realised after doing a few of these sessions that pharmacists have a huge miscomprehension about why people are actually in treatment – they seem to think we’re there for one long party on the state,’ he says. ‘And you have to explain to them that that’s not true, especially nowadays. No one goes into treatment for a gig or a good time. You’re there because you’ve lost control of your life, basically. And that’s a very scary thing.’

The stigma is not usually deliberate, but the product of ‘a mixture of ignorance and apathy’, he says.

‘They have preconceived prejudices until someone points it out – that these people are more than the label you’re slapping on them. They’re people’s husbands, fathers, sons, mothers, daughters, and they have careers and a whole range of interests, fears and fantasies. The difference is that they’re addicted to drugs, but apart from that they are just like you. They’re not from Mars.’

While they ‘don’t even realise beforehand that their attitude could be described as problematic’, there’s a slow dawning process that ‘addiction’s just a label and these are human beings just like them, and should be treated with the same respect’.

With chemist shops moving more and more into community-based medicine, we have a ‘golden oppor­tunity’ to give pharmacists a better frame of reference for interacting with the community, says Goldstein.

In his short, rushed training slot, he is aware that staff from a large pharmacy chain are going to be restricted by standard shop layout and company protocol, relating to the routines they can influence – things like whether OST should be dispensed from a separate window – but he introduces the idea of ongoing dialogue.

‘I’ll say to the pharmacists, ask your clients what they want and at least take that into account when making your decision. Don’t just present them with a fait accompli because that just disenfranchises people from the process and from the treatment.’

Both Collingham and Goldstein talk about the importance of fair play on both sides of the counter. Collingham mentions behavioural contracts as a way of establishing a respectful relationship, for example: ‘I promise that I won’t treat you like an idiot by stealing from your shop – and on the pharmacy side, I won’t keep you waiting past clients that come in after you, or identify you as an OST user.’

Goldstein sometimes comes across pharmacists who are keen to share episodes of bad behaviour that took place in their shop, and agrees there are responsibilities that the client must sign up to. He reminds them: ‘We are individuals. Some of us are fat, some of us are thin. Some of us are nice guys and some of us are assholes. Be clear about this – but believe in giving the assholes a fair break.’

He is also acutely aware that pharmacists just entering their profession will have no influence over long-established company protocols. ‘You can point out the dangers of these protocols till you’re blue in the face, but it’s not going to help because they’re not responsible for them. Somebody needs to talk to head office and say “hey guys, have you thought about x,y and z?”’

But through the modest training initiative, Goldstein hopes to awaken a desire to know more – and there is a lot to learn. For instance, they are ‘completely ignorant’ about naloxone. ‘Out of the few hundred I’ve trained now, I’ve had only two or three who know what it is. They’re pretty clueless about it,’ he says, adding, ‘Naloxone is one of those things that should have been around for years, and now it’s happening that’s a great thing. But the way it’s being implemented and put out there leaves a lot to be desired.’

In the limited time he has with the trainee pharmacists, he hammers home the increasingly important role they have to play: ‘You see your key worker once in a blue moon. You see your consultant even more infrequently. You see your pharmacist fairly regularly, so I point out that they become a key point of contact in the treatment chain.

‘And that can be the difference – their attitude and behaviour – between someone staying in treatment and someone leaving. That’s the difference between life and death in some cases.’

This article has been produced with support from Martindale Pharma, which has not influenced the content in any way.

Finding the pieces

There are many varied components to recovery as Dr Gordon Morse reflects.

John and Louise met under a railway arch in London; they shared an old mattress and slept under cardboard boxes. They had both run away from very abusive families – John from the West Country, Louise from Yorkshire. They left their homes when they were only just teenagers, completely under the radar of social services. No one noticed they had left, no one even bothered to report them missing. John hadn’t been to school for years and was unable to read or write.

By the time that they met under that railway arch they were in their late teens, both with injecting heroin habits. Their relationship was more about self-preservation than anything else, and John started stealing more so that Louise wouldn’t have to continue to sell herself.

After another year or two, they decided to move back to Somerset where John had friends. It was there, after Louise had been discharged following an emergency admission with another accidental overdose, that I met them, about eight years ago. I got them both titrated up to a proper dose of methadone and allocated them the support of a keyworker. Without the daily demands of miserable withdrawal symptoms, obtaining funds, using drugs and repeating this several times a day, they were able to take stock of their lives and what they wanted to achieve.

Opportunities are few for those with drug addiction, criminal records and health problems, and progress has not been quick – but it has been remarkable. When I last saw them, they had been housed in a tiny bungalow. John had been to literacy classes and they were both working in the local business – poetically, a cardboard packaging company – where Louise was supervisor. They lead quiet lives – John likes a bit of fishing, Louise likes walking their dog. They are both still on methadone, and when they come home from work each day, they still smoke a bit of heroin to ease old memories.

So Louise and John have come a very long way. OST hasn’t achieved this for them – their own resilience and the opportunities offered by my colleagues have done most of that. And if anyone says to me that this is not ‘recovery’ because they are still smoking a bit of heroin, all I can say is that this story is the embodiment of what recovery from addiction really means – and I doubt it would have been possible without the stability and safety that OST has given them. Indeed I doubt that they would still even be alive.

Dr Gordon Morse is medical director at Turning Point and a member of SMMGP. First published in the IDHDP newsletter, March 2017.