4.4 Article

Drug use related problems among nonmedical users of prescription stimulants: A web-based survey of college students from a Midwestern university

Journal

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
Volume 91, Issue 1, Pages 69-76

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.05.010

Keywords

prescription stimulants; prescription drug abuse; drug dependence; screening; route of administration; college students

Funding

  1. NIAAA NIH HHS [U18 AA015275] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDA NIH HHS [R03 DA019492, R03 DA018239-02, DA018239, R03 DA018239-01, R03 DA018239] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This college-based study compared nonmedical users of prescription stimulants to other types of drug users regarding drug use related problems. A Web survey was self-administered in 2005 by a probability sample of 3639 full-time undergraduate students (68% response rate) at a large public Midwestern 4-year university in the United States. The survey consisted of measures to assess substance use and misuse, including a modified version of the Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST-10). Nonmedical users of prescription stimulants were more likely than other drug users to report polydrug use. Nonmedical users of prescription stimulants had over four times greater odds than other drug users to experience three or more DAST-10 items in the past 12 months (AOR = 4.61, 95% CI = 3.28-6.48). Among nonmedical users of prescription stimulants, those who used prescription stimulants via intranasal and other non-oral routes of administration had greater odds than oral only users to experience three or more DAST-10 items in the past 12 months. The findings of the present study suggest that the majority of nonmedical users of prescription stimulants are polydrug users and should be screened for potential drug abuse or dependence, especially those who report non-oral routes of administration. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available