A comparison of opioid prescription trends in England and the United States from 2008 to 2020

BACKGROUND: The prescription opioid epidemic in the United States (US) is well documented, and recent measures have reduced prescribing rates in that country. Evidence suggests opioid prescriptions have been rising recently in other countries too. OBJECTIVE: The current paper aimed to compare trends in opioid prescribing in England and the US. METHODS: Trends in rates of prescriptions per 100 members of the population were calculated for England and the US using publicly available government data on prescriptions and population statistics. RESULTS: Rates of prescribing are converging. At the peak of the US epidemic in 2012, there were 81.3 prescriptions per 100 people, but this had fallen to 43.3 by 2020. Prescribing peaked in England in 2016 at 43.2 prescriptions per 100 people, but has fallen only slightly, so that in 2020 there were 40.9 prescriptions per 100 people. CONCLUSION: The data indicate that levels of opioid prescribing in England are now similar to those in the US. They remain high in both countries, despite recent falls. This suggests the need for further measures to prevent over-prescribing and to support people who would benefit from withdrawing from these drugs

Depression: why drugs and electricity are not the answer

The dominant view within mental health services and research suggests that feeling depressed is a kind of medical illness, partially caused by various biological deficits which are somehow corrected by physical interventions. This article critically appraises evidence for the effectiveness and value of antidepressant drugs and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), the two principle physical treatments recommended for depression. It also describes the negative effects of these interventions and raises concerns about how they impact the brain. We propose an alternative understanding that recognises depression as an emotional and meaningful response to unwanted life events and circumstances. This perspective demands that we address the social conditions that make depression likely and suggests that a combination of politics and common sense needs to guide us in providing help for one another when we are suffering in this way. This alternative view is increasingly endorsed around the world, including by the United Nations, the World Health Organization and service users who have suffered negative consequences of physical treatments that modify brain functions in ways that are not well-understood

How do psychiatric drugs work?

Joanna Moncrieff and David Cohen argue that changing our view of the action of psychiatric drugs would help patients to become more involved with decisions about treatmen

Are we repeating mistakes of the past? A review of the evidence for esketamine – CORRIGENDUM

It should be emphasised that Table 1 in the Analysis1 combines data from Phase 2 trials (including open-label and placebo-controlled trial periods) and Phase 3 trials (placebo-controlled efficacy studies, a maintenance of effect study and a long-term open label safety study) submitted by Janssen to the FDA (as indicated by superscript 'b' in the Table), therefore the data does not represent a randomised comparison, and definitive causal inferences cannot be drawn. As indicated by the denominators for each entry there were more patients exposed to esketamine than placebo (and for longer periods) which may be one reason for the higher numbers of suicides in the esketamine group. However, it is worth noting other data that suggest that increased suicidality may be a feature of esketamine treatment. In the long-term safety study 14.5% of patients on esketamine (in a population selected for their lack of active suicidality) reported 'treatment-emergent' suicidal ideation (114/784), 6 patients attempted suicide in addition to the one completed suicide.2 Furthermore, a recent analysis of post-marketing surveillance data reported to the FDA for the 12 months since esketamine was licensed in the US there have already been 64 reports of suicidal ideation, 11 completed suicides, and 6 attempted suicides attributed to esketamine.3 This represents a 24-fold increased risk of report for suicidal ideation for esketamine compared with other drugs, and a 6-fold increased risk for completed suicide.3 The authors of this paper concluded that the safety of esketamine required "urgent clarification."3 It should also be clarified that although ketamine is not used routinely as an anaesthetic agent in high-income countries, like the UK, because of its unfavourable balance of risks and harms, it is used more frequently in low-income countries