Donald R. Wesson

Bio: Donald R. Wesson is an academic researcher from University of California, Los Angeles. The author has contributed to research in topics: Buprenorphine & Methadone. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 48 publications receiving 2420 citations. Previous affiliations of Donald R. Wesson include San Francisco General Hospital.

The Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS)

Abstract: The clinical opiate withdrawal scale (COWS) is a clinician-administered, pen and paper instrument that rates eleven common opiate withdrawal signs or symptoms. The summed score of the eleven items can be used to assess a patient's level of opiate withdrawal and to make inferences about their level of physical dependence on opioids. With increasing use of opioids for treatment of pain and the availability of sublingual buprenorphine in the United States for treatment of opioid dependence, clinical assessment of opiate withdrawal intensity has received renewed interest. Buprenorphine, a partial opiate agonist at the mu receptor, can precipitate opiate withdrawal in patients with a high level of opioid dependence who are not experiencing opioid withdrawal. Since development of the first opiate withdrawal scale in the mid-1930s, many different opioid withdrawal scales have been used in clinical and research settings. This article reviews the history of opiate withdrawal scales and the context of their initial use. A template version of the COWS that can be copied and used clinically is appended. PDF formatted versions of the COWS are also available from the websites of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, the California Society of Addiction Medicine, the UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, and AlcoholMD.com.

Buprenorphine maintenance treatment of opiate dependence: a multicenter, randomized clinical trial.

Abstract: Aims. To evaluate the safety and ef® cacy of an 8 mg/day sublingual dose of buprenorphine in the maintenance treatment of heroin addicts by comparison with a 1 mg/day dose over a 16-week treatment period. As a secondary objective, outcomes were determined concurrently for patients treated with two other dose levels. Design. Patients were randomized to four dosage groups and treated double-blind. Setting. Twelve outpatient opiate maintenance treatment centers throughout the United States. Participants. Two hundred and thirty-nine women and 497 men who met the DSM-III-R criteria for opioid dependence and were seeking treatment. Intervention. Patients received either 1, 4, 8 or 16 mg/day of buprenorphine and were treated in the usual clinical context, including a 1-hour weekly clinical counseling session. Measurement. Retention in treatment, illicit opioid use as determined by urine toxicology, opioid craving and global ratings by patient and staff. Safety outcome measures were provided by clinical monitoring and by analysis of the reported adverse events. Findings. Outcomes in the 8 mg group were signi® cantly better than in the 1 mg group in all four ef® cacy domains. No deaths occurred in either group. The 8 mg group did not show an increase in the frequency of adverse events. Most reported adverse effects were those commonly seen in patients treated with opioids. Conclusions. The ® ndings support the safety and ef® cacy of buprenorphine and suggest that an adequate dose of buprenorphine will be a useful addition to pharmacotherapy.

A controlled trial comparing buprenorphine and methadone maintenance in opioid dependence.

Abstract: Background: Buprenorphine is a partial agonist at the μ-opioid receptor that has been proposed as an alternative to traditional full agonist maintenance therapy for the treatment of opioid addiction. We report on a clinical trial in which the relative safety and efficacy of long-term fixeddose buprenorphine maintenance was examined in comparison to low- and high-dose methadone maintenance. Methods: Two hundred twenty-five treatment-seeking opioid addicts (46 women, 179 men) were randomly assigned to receive, in a double-blind manner, either 8 mg/d of buprenorphine, 30 mg/d of methadone, or 80 mg/d of methadone maintenance over a 1-year period. Objective and subjective measures of efficacy (urine toxicology, retention, craving, and withdrawal symptoms) were examined at the study midpoint and at termination, and safety data were tabulated over the entire 52-week study period. Results: Patients assigned to high-dose methadone maintenance performed significantly better on measures of retention, opioid use, and opioid craving than either the low-dose methadone or the buprenorphine group at both 26-week and 52-week time points. Performance on these measures was virtually identical between the latter two groups. No serious adverse health effects attributable to buprenorphine were noted. Conclusions: Buprenorphine maintenance at 8 mg/d appears to be less than optimally efficacious under the conditions of the present study. Continued research is needed to reconcile these findings with the more positive results reported by other investigative groups. There are no apparent health risks associated with long-term buprenorphine maintenance at this dosage.

Abuse of Flunitrazepam (Rohypnol) And Other Benzodiazepines in Austin and South Texas

Abstract: Flunitrazepam (Rohypnol) is a benzodiazepine sedative-hypnotic that has generated significant media attention in the United States because of its abuse and its association with “date rape.” A field...

Drug Dependence, a Chronic Medical Illness: Implications for Treatment, Insurance, and Outcomes Evaluation

Abstract: The effects of drug dependence on social systems has helped shape the generally held view that drug dependence is primarily a social problem, not a health problem. In turn, medical approaches to prevention and treatment are lacking. We examined evidence that drug (including alcohol) dependence is a chronic medical illness. A literature review compared the diagnoses, heritability, etiology (genetic and environmental factors), pathophysiology, and response to treatments (adherence and relapse) of drug dependence vs type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and asthma. Genetic heritability, personal choice, and environmental factors are comparably involved in the etiology and course of all of these disorders. Drug dependence produces significant and lasting changes in brain chemistry and function. Effective medications are available for treating nicotine, alcohol, and opiate dependence but not stimulant or marijuana dependence. Medication adherence and relapse rates are similar across these illnesses. Drug dependence generally has been treated as if it were an acute illness. Review results suggest that long-term care strategies of medication management and continued monitoring produce lasting benefits. Drug dependence should be insured, treated, and evaluated like other chronic illnesses.

Buprenorphine maintenance versus placebo or methadone maintenance for opioid dependence

Abstract: Methadone is widely used as a replacement for illicit opioid use such as heroin in medically-supported opioid substitution maintenance programmes. Two other drugs have been used to help reduce illicit opioid use, specifically buprenorphine and LAAM (levo-alpha-acetylmethadol). LAAM is not used in current clinical practice. Buprenorphine is currently used and can reduce illicit opioid use compared with placebo, although it is less effective than methadone. Buprenorphine is an opioid drug that is not as potent as heroin and methadone, although the effects of buprenorphine may last longer. Buprenorphine can be taken once every two days. The trials include different formulations of buprenorphine: sublingual solution, sublingual tablets, combined buprenorphine/naloxone sublingual tablet and an implant. Key results The review of trials found that buprenorphine at high doses (16 mg) can reduce illicit opioid use effectively compared with placebo, and buprenorphine at any dose studied retains people in treatment better than placebo. Buprenorphine appears to be less effective than methadone in retaining people in treatment, if prescribed in a flexible dose regimen or at a fixed and low dose (2 - 6 mg per day). Buprenorphine prescribed at fixed doses (above 7 mg per day) was not different from methadone prescribed at fixed doses (40 mg or more per day) in retaining people in treatment or in suppression of illicit opioid use.

The Prescription Opioid and Heroin Crisis: A Public Health Approach to an Epidemic of Addiction

Abstract: Public health authorities have described, with growing alarm, an unprecedented increase in morbidity and mortality associated with use of opioid pain relievers (OPRs). Efforts to address the opioid crisis have focused mainly on reducing nonmedical OPR use. Too often overlooked, however, is the need for preventing and treating opioid addiction, which occurs in both medical and nonmedical OPR users. Overprescribing of OPRs has led to a sharp increase in the prevalence of opioid addiction, which in turn has been associated with a rise in overdose deaths and heroin use. A multifaceted public health approach that utilizes primary, secondary, and tertiary opioid addiction prevention strategies is required to effectively reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. We describe the scope of this public health crisis, its historical context, contributing factors, and lines of evidence indicating the role of addiction in exacerbating morbidity and mortality, and we provide a framework for interventions to address the epidemic of opioid addiction.

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT): Toward a Public Health Approach to the Management of Substance Abuse.

Abstract: Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is a comprehensive and integrated approach to the delivery of early intervention and treatment services through universal screening for persons with substance use disorders and those at risk. This paper describes research on the components of SBIRT conducted during the past 25 years, including the development of screening tests, clinical trials of brief interventions and implementation research. Beginning in the 1980s, concerted efforts were made in the US and at the World Health Organization to provide an evidence base for alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary health care settings. With the development of reliable and accurate screening tests for alcohol, more than a hundred clinical trials were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care, emergency departments and trauma centers. With the accumulation of positive evidence, implementation research on alcohol SBI was begun in the 1990s, followed by trials of similar methods for other substances (e.g., illicit drugs, tobacco, prescription drugs) and by national demonstration programs in the US and other countries. The results of these efforts demonstrate the cumulative benefit of translational research on health care delivery systems and substance abuse policy. That SBIRT yields short-term improvements in individuals' health is irrefutable; long-term effects on population health have not yet been demonstrated, but simulation models suggest that the benefits could be substantial.