↓ Skip to main content

Non-medical and illicit use of psychoactive drugs

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 470: Injection of Pharmaceuticals Designed for Oral Use: Harms Experienced and Effective Harm Reduction Through Filtration
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Injection of Pharmaceuticals Designed for Oral Use: Harms Experienced and Effective Harm Reduction Through Filtration
Chapter number 470
Book title
Non-medical and illicit use of psychoactive drugs
Published in
Current topics in behavioral neurosciences, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/7854_2016_470
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-960014-7, 978-3-31-960016-1
Authors

McLean, Stuart, Patel, Rahul, Bruno, Raimondo, Stuart McLean, Rahul Patel, Raimondo Bruno

Abstract

Several pharmaceutical products are liable to 'abuse' or use outside their prescription, which frequently involves their injection. Examples are slow-release forms of morphine and oxycodone, and sublingual buprenorphine. During injection preparation, the drug is extracted into water, after crushing and heating the tablet if considered necessary. Since these products are designed for oral administration, they can contain excipients (ingredients other than the drug) which are poorly soluble, resulting in suspension of particles in the injection solution. Injected particles are able to produce medical complications such as the blockage of small blood vessels leading to ischaemia (inadequate blood flow) and tissue damage. Filtration can be used to remove particles from the suspension; including bacteria if the porosity is small enough (0.2 μm). However, filters are liable to blockage when overloaded, especially if the pore size is small. This problem can be minimised by using a larger pore size (e.g. 5-10 μm), but the resulting filtrate will contain many residual small particles. The use of two filters, coarse and fine, either sequentially or in a double membrane device, enables removal of the majority of particles as well as bacteria, although not quite meeting pharmaceutical standards for safe injection. Although not yet evaluated by a clinical trial, this highly effective filtration process would be expected to greatly reduce the risk of vascular and related complications, as well as non-viral infections. Careful technique ensures that drug is not lost by filtration, a priority for most drug consumers. Practical issues that affect acceptability of filtration by injecting drug users, including ease of use and cost, will need to be considered. However, given the laboratory evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of filters it is time to consider these tools as essential for safe injection as sterile needles/syringes for the world's approximately 16 million people who inject drugs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 16%
Student > Master 5 13%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 11 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 August 2019.
All research outputs
#6,851,818
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Current topics in behavioral neurosciences
#189
of 497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,809
of 308,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current topics in behavioral neurosciences
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,869 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.