A Scoping Review of Home Produced Heroin and Amphetamine Type Stimulant Substitutes: Implications for Prevention, Treatment and Policy

Several home-produced substances such as krokodil and boltushka are prevalent in many Eastern European countries. Anecdotal reports of its use have been circulating in Germany and Norway; however, this has not been confirmed. Its use has also been reported by the media in the USA, although only one confirmed report of its use exists. Home-produced drugs are associated with high levels of morbidity and a number of complex health issues such as the spread of blood borne viruses, gangrene, and internal organ damage. The high incidence of HIV rates amongst people who inject home-produced substances is a public health concern. The resulting physical health consequences of injecting these crude substances are very severe in comparison to heroin or amphetamine acquired in black markets. Due to this fact and the increased mortality associated with these substances, professionals in the area of prevention, treatment, and policy development need to be cognisant of the presentation, harms, and the dangers associated with home-produced substances globally. This scoping review aimed to examine existing literature on the subject of home-produced heroin and amphetamine-type stimulant substitutes. The review discussed the many implications such research may have in the areas of policy and practice. Data were gathered through the use of qualitative secondary resources such as journal articles, reports, reviews, case studies, and media reports. The home production of these substances relies on the utilisation of precursor drugs such as less potent stimulants, tranquillizers, analgesics, and sedatives or natural plant ingredients. The Internet underpins the facilitation of this practice as recipes, and diverted pharmaceutical sales are available widely online, and currently, ease of access to the Internet is evident worldwide. This review highlights the necessity of prevention, education, and also harm reduction related to home-produced drugs and also recommends consistent monitoring of online drug fora, online drug marketplaces, and unregulated pharmacies

Erratum: Why Do the Clients of Georgian Needle Exchange Programmes Inject Buprenorphine?

<i>Aim:</i> The aim of the study was to understand the prevalence and patterns of the non-medical injecting use of buprenorphine among drug injectors in Georgia. <i>Method:</i> A self-administered questionnaire was distributed among injecting drug users enrolled in Georgian needle exchange programmes. The questions covered topics related to drug use career, patterns (frequency, history, dosage) and reasons for the use of buprenorphine. <i>Results:</i> Pharmaceutical buprenorphine in the form of Subutex® was the most commonly injected drug in terms of lifetime (95.5%) and last-month (75%) prevalence of use. 48% of those study participants who had injected Subutex at some point reported having used it to cope with withdrawal or to give up other opioids. 90.5% of Subutex injectors used 1–2 mg as a single dose, and the mean frequency of its injection was 6 times per month. 75% of Subutex injectors had used 3 or more types of illegal drugs during the last 30 days. <i>Conclusion:</i> While widely misused by Georgian drug injectors, Subutex is neither the principal nor the favourite drug, and it is rather used as self-treatment. The authors consider the introduction of buprenorphine maintenance treatment to be a promising effective measure to decrease its non-medical and illegal use