Thanksgiving Thoughts

The blog is updating a little late this week because of the holiday. I hope that you all had wonderful Thanksgivings, and that you got the opportunity to spend time with your families and think about the things in life you’re thankful for. Though eating and shopping have become large traditional parts of this weekend, it’s always worthwhile to stop and reflect on what we are grateful for in our lives.

It’s always difficult to feel thankful when you’re suffering from a long-term illness, and the disease of addiction has a uniquely destructive effect on the lives of those it afflicts. The behavioral and psychological aspects of the disease often lead to broken families, as theft, lies, and betrayal take their toll on relationships with parents, spouses, and children. The financial drain of drugs and treatment can prevent addiction patients from being able to provide a large Thanksgiving feast. It’s a long, hard road to emerge from this disease, and it’s difficult at any point to feel particularly thankful for the troubles it brings.

But there are still reasons to be grateful. We now live in one of the few decades in history where an effective treatment for addiction is generally available. That treatment is not a cure, and it is not as widely available as I would like, but there is more hope of a normal life for addicted patients than there has ever been before. With more understanding of and education about this disease, the family members of addicted patients can learn to help their suffering loved ones and make treatment easier. And it is my sincere hope that understanding and treatment will only continue to improve.

Thanksgiving is now over, but I think it is worthwhile to remember what we have to be thankful for every day of the year. I am thankful for the ability to help my patients, and I will continue to reflect on that opportunity on Monday. Until then, I wish you all happy holidays.

Studies and Blame

A study was published in the Archives of General Psychiatry this week with the aim of determining the effects of counseling on addiction treatment with and without maintenance medications like buprenorphine. The results and the response to the study were, for me, completely unsurprising. The abstract linked above reported that counseling had no significant effect on patient recovery at any stage of research, and that treatment with buprenorphine and naxolone produced a tenfold increase in the number of patients with “successful outcomes”. Once medication was tapered off, success rates returned almost to baseline (8.6% successful outcome, compared to 6.6% successful before beginning medication). The study concludes that “[p]rescription opioid-dependent patients are most likely to reduce opioid use during buprenorphine-naloxone treatment: if tapered off buprenorphine-naloxone, even after 12 weeks of treatment, the likelihood of an unsuccessful outcome is high, even in patients receiving counseling [...].”

The results of this study are unambiguous. It is concrete evidence for what I have been saying to my colleagues and patients for years: counseling, while it has its place in patient care, is not a sufficient or even particularly effective  treatment for the medical condition of opioid dependence. This is not revolutionary or counter-intuitive. There is no chronic medical condition on Earth that can be cured by counseling alone. Neither high blood pressure nor diabetes would show a counseling effect if tested in a similar study. Yet officials in the field of addiction continuously demand counseling as the sign of a valid treatment strategy.

What really surprises and upsets me about this study is the reaction to it, as expressed in this article from Addiction Professional. The very first paragraph of the article cautions that because the results for counseling were “disappointing”, the study required a “careful read” and in fact “should not be interpreted as diminishing any role for talk therapy”. Never mind the fact that counseling has been empirically shown to be ineffective when not combined with a well-informed medical treatment strategy; never mind that, even before this study, counseling-based addiction treatment programs have had abysmal success rates for decades. None of that is any reason to think there might be a diminished role for talk therapy!

I do happen to think that talk therapy should take diminished role in addiction treatment, but that isn’t even the most upsetting part of the article. It goes on for several paragraphs to express surprise at the fact that, once the medication was taken away from the patients, many stopped doing well; this culminates in one of the final sentences, in which a quote from Roger D. Weiss of Harvard Medical School blames the patients for the failure of counseling to make a good showing in this study.

Weiss’ quote implies that the counseling failed to make a difference because “[Patients] wanted the medication — that’s what they were there for.”

This trend, of blaming patients for not wanting to improve, is a despicable and predatory practice that goes back to the earliest days of addiction treatment, and would never be tolerated in any other field. It’s one I have written about a great deal, so I won’t go into again here, except to say that a more medication-based approach to addiction treatment would do a great deal to weed this idea of sickness as a moral failing.

The study published this week did a great deal to advance the study of addiction treatment, and it is my fervent hope that as time goes on this data, like all empirical data, will be used to create a more effective and comprehensive system of treatment in this field.

A New War on Drugs

 

A great deal is made of the ‘War on Drugs’ in this country, and while it’s important to try and keep illegal drugs from falling into the wrong hands where they can be used for harm, there’s a much easier and possibly even more important battle over drugs that we simply aren’t fighting.

I’ve mentioned the epidemic of pain pill abuse a few times before on this blog. Prescription narcotics rank among some of the most addictive substances, activating exactly the same systems as heroin and cocaine. While they do have legitimate uses, they also have a huge potential for abuse — one that very few doctors, legislators, or even patients seem to be aware of. And while I’m always in favor of educating people about the nature of addiction, the epidemic of pain pill abuse has passed the point where education alone will be enough to stem the tide. It has been reported that 3% of the nation’s physicians supply more than 67% of the pain pills, a vast number of which get diverted, or are taken because of addiction rather than chronic pain. Those 3% of physicians must be aware that at least some of their patients are inappropriately dependent on the medication, and yet no attempt is made to limit it. No, education alone is no longer the answer in this battle against rampant abuse of drugs.

Thankfully, this battle isn’t one that requires actual violence, like the devastating fighting that can occur when police try to seize quantities of dangerous illegal substances. Fighting pain pill abuse won’t require us to police the nation’s borders against well-armed cartels of smugglers and profiteers. We know exactly where the the massive supply of inappropriate pain pills comes from; the prescription pads of physicians. Every prescriber of these pills is registered as a physician, and is a well-known figure in their community. All it would take to fight this epidemic is a few sentences written into the law restricting overprescription of painkillers, and a few DEA agents with a computer. That’s all it would take to essentially shut off the supply of prescription pain pills that are being diverted or taken inappropriately. Physicians who prescribe buprenorphine for addiction are limited to 100 patients each; if we exceed that limit, the DEA comes calling. How is it, then, that while we are kept strictly to our limit, other physicians can write for thousands of patients to get an unlimited number of painkillers, without any monitoring of progress or tracking of prescriptions? Take Michael Jackson’s death as an example. How was it possible for a single physician to order that many medications without a single red flag going up anywhere in the records of some pharmacy or pharmaceutical company? How is that no one every questioned him? If all the medications were for a legitimate course of treatment, they needn’t have been stopped, but it should at least have been looked into. The lack of oversight when it comes to prescription painkillers is appalling.

I understand that government intervention is often inefficient and can easily go wrong, but in this case it is vitally necessary. I have had more than one patient who was caught scamming my office, taking buprenorphine prescriptions while also going to another doctor for narcotic pain pills, either to take them in conjunction with buprenorphine or sell them on the street. These patients are usually discovered via the pharmacy, the point where their two prescriptions interact. The thing we need to do, then, is get the pharmacies on board and begin tracking some of these prescriptions from the point of sale. Obviously we need to protect the availability of narcotic medications for all those who need them for legitimate purposes, but there also needs to be some effort to control what is, in fact, a dangerous family of substances with therapeutic potential. Our current strategy — completely unrestricted flooding of the market — is resulting in nothing but widespread addiction, overdose, and massive diversion of prescribed medications.