Joseph J Palamar1,2, Monica J Barratt3,4,5, Jason A Ferris6,7, Adam R Winstock8,9,10. 1. Department of Population Health, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York City, New York. 2. Center for Drug Use and HIV Research, New York University College of Nursing, New York City, New York. 3. Drug Policy Modelling Program, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW, Sydney, Australia. 4. National Drug Research Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia. 5. Centre of Population Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia. 6. Institute for Social Science Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. 7. ARC Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course, Institute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. 8. South London and Maudsley NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom. 9. Addictions Clinical Academic Group, King's College London, Maudsley Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 10. Global Drug Survey Ltd, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although new psychoactive substances (NPS) continue to emerge at a rapid rate, US national surveys only measure the use of non-specific categories of NPS and are not designed to access high-risk populations. In this paper we report lifetime use of specific NPS (of 58) and examine correlates of use among a high-risk population: nightlife attendees. METHODS: The self-selected sample from the Global Drug Survey (2013) consisted of 2,282 respondents in the US, aged 16-60 years, who reported nightclub attendance in the last year. Multivariable logistic regression models determined unique predictors of lifetime use. RESULTS: Lifetime use of a wide range of NPS was reported (any NPS; 46.4%), including synthetic cannabinoids (24.8%), tryptamines (eg, 4-AcO-DMT, 23.0%), psychedelic phenethylamines (eg, 2C-B, 25I-NBOMe; 21.7%), euphoric stimulants (eg, BenzoFury; 16.2%), and synthetic cathinones (eg, methylone; 10.5%). Females (AOR = 0.49 [.41, .60]) and older respondents (age 22-60; AOR = .73 [.59, .89]) were at lower odds of reporting any lifetime NPS use. Frequent nightclub attendance was associated with increased odds of reporting lifetime NPS use overall (eg, weekly compared with less than once a month, AOR = 2.33 [1.70,3.19]), but not specifically with synthetic cannabinoid use. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Among a self-selected sample of nightclub attendees, a large range of novel substances were reported, and young attendees, males, and those who attended more frequently were at increased odds of reporting use. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Harm reduction initiatives are needed to reduce risk of harm in this population, where environmental characteristics may augment risks associated with consuming lesser-known psychoactive substances. (Am J Addict 2016;25:400-407).
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although new psychoactive substances (NPS) continue to emerge at a rapid rate, US national surveys only measure the use of non-specific categories of NPS and are not designed to access high-risk populations. In this paper we report lifetime use of specific NPS (of 58) and examine correlates of use among a high-risk population: nightlife attendees. METHODS: The self-selected sample from the Global Drug Survey (2013) consisted of 2,282 respondents in the US, aged 16-60 years, who reported nightclub attendance in the last year. Multivariable logistic regression models determined unique predictors of lifetime use. RESULTS: Lifetime use of a wide range of NPS was reported (any NPS; 46.4%), including synthetic cannabinoids (24.8%), tryptamines (eg, 4-AcO-DMT, 23.0%), psychedelic phenethylamines (eg, 2C-B, 25I-NBOMe; 21.7%), euphoric stimulants (eg, BenzoFury; 16.2%), and synthetic cathinones (eg, methylone; 10.5%). Females (AOR = 0.49 [.41, .60]) and older respondents (age 22-60; AOR = .73 [.59, .89]) were at lower odds of reporting any lifetime NPS use. Frequent nightclub attendance was associated with increased odds of reporting lifetime NPS use overall (eg, weekly compared with less than once a month, AOR = 2.33 [1.70,3.19]), but not specifically with synthetic cannabinoid use. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Among a self-selected sample of nightclub attendees, a large range of novel substances were reported, and young attendees, males, and those who attended more frequently were at increased odds of reporting use. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Harm reduction initiatives are needed to reduce risk of harm in this population, where environmental characteristics may augment risks associated with consuming lesser-known psychoactive substances. (Am J Addict 2016;25:400-407).
Authors: Joseph J Palamar; Alberto Salomone; Enrico Gerace; Daniele Di Corcia; Marco Vincenti; Charles M Cleland Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2017-08-12
Authors: Joseph J Palamar; Patricia Acosta; Fermín Fernández Calderón; Scott Sherman; Charles M Cleland Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2017-05-09 Impact factor: 3.829