Marked Increase in Amphetamine-Related Emergency Department Visits and Inpatient Admissions in Toronto,Canada,2014

Abstract

French

Background

We report emergency department and inpatient amphetamine-related trends focusing on co-occurring substance use and psychiatric diagnoses at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, the largest mental health teaching hospital in Canada.

Methods

We describe yearly trends in amphetamine-related Centre for Addiction and Mental Health emergency department visits and inpatient admissions out of all emergency department visits and inpatient admissions between 2014 and 2021, along with proportions of concurrent substance-related admissions and mental/psychotic disorders emergency department visits and inpatient admissions among amphetamine-related contacts; joinpoint regression analyses assessed changes in amphetamine-related emergency department visits and inpatient admissions.

Results

Amphetamine-related emergency department visits rose from 1.5% in 2014 to 8.3% in 2021, with a peak of 9.9% in 2020. Amphetamine-related inpatient admissions rose from 2.0% to 8.8% in 2021, with a peak of 8.9% in 2020. Significant increasing trends in the percentage of amphetamine-related emergency department visits happened especially between the second and the fourth quarter of 2014 (quarterly percent change = + 71.4, P <0.01). Similarly, the percentage of amphetamine-related inpatient admissions increased mostly between the second quarter of 2014 and the third quarter of 2015 (quarterly percent change = + 32.6, P <0.01). The proportion of concurrent opioid-related contacts among amphetamine-related emergency department visits and inpatient admission increased markedly between 2014 and 2021; psychotic disorders in amphetamine-related inpatient admissions more than doubled from 2015 to 2021.

Discussion

Prevalence of amphetamine use, mostly from methamphetamine, has been increasing in Toronto as have co-occurring psychiatric disorders and opioid use. Our findings highlight the need for increases in accessible efficacious treatments for complex populations with polysubstance use and co-occurring disorders.

Keywords

methamphetamine longitudinal studies hospitals comorbidity

Introduction

The prevalence of methamphetamine use has been steadily increasing globally, coinciding with similar increases in methamphetamine use disorder and other associated harms (e.g., overdose, emergency department [ED] visits, blood-borne illnesses, and death).¹ Concurrently, rates of simultaneous opioid and methamphetamine use have also seen a dramatic increase.² Co-use may be particularly risky, as it increases the risk of overdose,³ potentially due to stimulant effects “masking” opioid effects or vice versa, resulting in individuals using higher dosages of each.^{4, 5} Individuals with substance use disorders may perceive a benefit to co-use, including methamphetamine prolonging the experience of opioid intoxication or opioids reducing the negative side effects of methamphetamine (e.g., to sleep or reduce withdrawal).⁶ Inspecting the trends of a mental health hospital's ED and inpatient (IP) visits related to methamphetamine use and co-occurring opioid and psychiatric disorders will be relevant to clinicians and harm reduction service providers.

Much of the available evidence in this area comes from the United States,⁷ Australia,⁸ and British Columbia, Canada.³ Despite a 390% increase in methamphetamine-related treatment demand in the province of Ontario from 2012–2017¹ there is very little literature on local trends, and even less on co-occurring mental or other substance use disorders. It has been noted in previous studies that regional patterns can be quite variable,³ being impacted by available resources and the local drug supply. Thus, it is important to analyse geographical overdose “hot spots.” Accordingly, we report ED and IP trends related to methamphetamine use and co-occurring drug use with an emphasis on co-occurring psychiatric diagnoses at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Canada's largest Mental Health teaching Hospital, located in Toronto, Ontario.

Methods

Sample

Our sample included 90,276 ED visits and 28,834 IP admissions at CAMH between April 2014 and December 2021. This timeframe was chosen due to the availability of standardized data. All data were provided by the CAMH Reporting and Analytics and Performance Improvement sector.

Data Collection

We describe yearly proportions of amphetamine-related ED visits and IP admissions out of all ED visits and IP admissions throughout the study period. All the diagnostic categories reported came from the CAMH electronic medical records filed by ED and IP physicians using the ICD-10.⁹ Amphetamine-related ED visits and IP admissions contained an F15 code including the word “amphetamine”. We also report yearly proportions of amphetamine-related ED visits and IP admissions with concurrent opioid-related diagnoses (all F11 codes). We further report alcohol-related diagnoses (all F10 codes) cannabis-related diagnoses (all F12 codes); other drug-related diagnoses (all F codes except for amphetamine and alcohol codes) to control for potential confounds of general increases in drug use; any psychiatric diagnosis (codes F20–29, F30–39, F40–49, F60–69); and psychotic diagnoses (F20–F29). For this data, we reported the yearly proportion of each of the diagnosis categories described out of all amphetamine-related ED visits and IP admissions. We will use the term “amphetamine-related” visits to refer to the data collected by CAMH, following the institution's categorization of hospital contacts. Since it is widely known that the trends involving amphetamines are mostly fueled by the increase in the use of methamphetamines, we will use the term “methamphetamine” when not referring specifically to the CAMH internal data.

Statistical Analysis

We used the Joinpoint Trend Analysis Software version 4.8.0.1¹⁰ for statistical analysis. Joinpoint regression models were used to assess the statistical significance of apparent changes in quarterly trends of amphetamine-related ED visits and IP admission. Joinpoint analysis fits a selected data trend into the most parsimonious model allowed by the data (ref – joinpoint software). Trend lines were connected by joinpoints and the significance of each segment was determined using a regression model. The number of joinpoints in each model was determined according to permutation tests (comparing models with different numbers of joinpoints) performed by the software. The trends are described in average quarterly percent changes (QPCs) obtained from a logarithmic-linear model.

Results

Between April 2014 and December 2021, CAMH had a total of 90,276 ED visits and 28,834 IP admissions. Of those, 5,390 ED visits and 1,773 IP admissions were amphetamine-related, accounting for 6.0% and 6.1% respectively. Sample demographics in 2014 and 2021 are reported in Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic Distribution of Amphetamine Related Visits in 2014 and 2021.

	2014	2021
Emergency visits	n = 122	n = 993
Gender
Man	70%	71%
Woman	24%	28%
Transgender	2%	0.1%
N/A	3%	0.1%
Age Distribution (%)
>25	13%	12%
25–44	76%	73%
45–64	7%	15%
65 +	1%	0.1%
N/A	3%	0
Ethnicity distribution
White	60%	51%
Black	15%	14%
Indigenous	6%	10%
Asian	7%	10%
Middle Eastern	4%	3%
Latin	2%	2%
Other	2%	14%
N/A	4%	10%
Inpatient admissions	n = 76	n = 303
Gender
Man	67%	66%
Woman	32%	33%
Transgender	1%	0
Age distribution
>25	23%	12%
25–44	71%	73%
45–64	4%	15%
65 +	1%	0.3%
N/A	0	0
Ethnicity distribution
White	51%	53%
Black	8%	10%
Indigenous	3%	12%
Asian	3%	13%
Middle Eastern	7%	2%
Latin	1%	2%
Other	1%	2%
N/A	26%	6%

Amphetamine-Related Contacts

Looking at yearly trends, the proportion of amphetamine-related ED visits out of all ED visits increased from 1.5% in 2014 to 8.3% in 2021, with a peak of 9.9% in 2020. In turn, the amphetamine-related IP admissions among all IP admissions ranged from 2.0% in 2014 to 8.8% in 2021, again peaking in 2020 at 8.9% (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Yearly trends of amphetamine-related ED visits and IP admissions at CAMH between 2014 and 2021. IP = inpatient; CAMH = Centre for Addiction and Mental Health; ED = emergency department.

With respect to quarterly trends, the proportion of amphetamine-related ED visits among all ED visits increased from 0.5% in the second quarter of 2014 to 8.0% in the fourth quarter of 2021. The highest proportion of amphetamine-related ED visits was 12.1% in the second quarter of 2020. In turn, amphetamine-related IP admissions among all IP admissions ranged from 1.3% in the second quarter of 2014 to 8.9% in the fourth quarter of 2021, with a peak of 10.3% in the second quarter of 2020.

Joinpoint analyses were used to identify if there are significant deviations in the overall trend during certain quarterly periods between 2014 and 2021. We observed significant increasing trends in the percentage of amphetamine-related ED visits between the second quarter of 2014 and the fourth quarter of 2014 (QPC = + 71.4, P <0.01) and between the fourth quarter of 2014 and the third quarter of 2016 (QPC = + 15.4, P <0.01); after that, there was a non-significant mild increase between the third quarter of 2016 and the third quarter of 2019, followed by a nonsignificant increase between the third quarter of 2019 and the second quarter of 2020 and a nonsignificant decrease in the between the second quarter of 2020 and the fourth quarter of 2021 (see Figure 2). The percentage of amphetamine-related IP admissions increased significantly between the second quarter of 2014 and the third quarter of 2015 (QPC = + 32.6, P <0.01) and between the third quarter of 2015 and the fourth quarter of 2021 (QPC = + 3.0, P <0.01; see Figure 3).

Figure 2.

Joinpoint regression model with quarterly percent changes of amphetamine-related ED visits at CAMH between April 2014 and December 2021. ED = emergency department; CAMH = Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

Figure 3.

Joinpoint regression model with quarterly percent changes of amphetamine-related IP admissions at CAMH between April 2014 and December 2021. IP = inpatient; CAMH = Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

Yearly Proportion of Concurrent Substance use Disorders

The proportion of opioid-related ED visits, among the amphetamine-related visits, increased from 8.2% in 2014 and peaked at 19.8% in 2021, with the lowest proportion in 2015 (4.1%). In comparison, the proportion of alcohol-related ED visits, among the amphetamine-related visits ranged from 15.6% in 2014 and peaked at 17.5% in 2021, with the lowest proportion of alcohol-related ED visits among amphetamine-related visits at 8.5% in 2015. In turn, the proportion of cannabis-related ED visits, among the amphetamine-related visits ranged from 12.3% in 2014 and peaked at 14.7% in 2021, with the lowest proportion of cannabis-related ED visits at 6.5% in 2015. The proportion of amphetamine-related ED visits including other drug codes (excluding alcohol) ranged from 54.9% in 2014 to 35.8% in 2021. The lowest proportion of ED visits related to other drugs among amphetamine-related visits was of 15.9% in 2018, whereas the highest was observed in 2014 (see Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Yearly trends of other drug-related visits among amphetamine-related ED visits and inpatient admissions at CAMH between 2014 and 2021. ED = emergency department; CAMH = Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

With respect to IP admissions, the proportion of opioid-related admissions, among amphetamine-related admissions nearly doubled from 17.1% in 2014 to a peak of 33.8% in 2021. The lowest proportion of opioid-related IP admissions among amphetamine-related visits was of 13.2% in 2015. Conversely, the proportion of alcohol-related admissions among amphetamine-related admissions was 26.3% in 2014 and decreased to 18.5% in 2021, with a peak of 27.6% in 2016 and lowest proportion seen in 2015 (18.4%). In turn, the proportion of cannabis-related IP admissions among amphetamine-related admissions ranged from a peak of 32.9% in 2014 to 27.1% in 2021, with the lowest proportion at 17.4% in 2019. Finally, the proportion related to other drugs (except for alcohol) among amphetamine-related admissions ranged from 52.6% in 2014 to 52.0% in 2021, with the lowest proportion being 42.6%, in 2019, and the highest in 2017 (56.8%) (see Figure 5).

Figure 5.

Yearly trends of visits with mental and psychotic disorders among amphetamine-related ED visits and inpatient admissions at CAMH between 2014 and 2021. ED = emergency department; CAMH = Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

Yearly Proportion of Concurrent Mental Disorders

The proportion of ED visits with any co-occurring mental disorder among amphetamine-related visits ranged from 25.4% in 2014 to 55.4% in 2021. The lowest figure was seen in 2015 (18.4%), and the highest in 2020 (57.1%; See Figure 5). The proportion of amphetamine-related ED visits with a psychotic disorder ranged from 22.1% in 2014 and 27.3% in 2021, with the lowest proportion in 2018 (15.5%), and the highest in 2020 (29.6%). Relatedly, the proportion of amphetamine-related IP admissions with any co-occurring mental disorder ranged from 63.2% in 2014 to 72.2% in 2021, with the lowest proportion in 2018 (62.9%), and the highest in 2015 (77.2%). Comparatively, the proportion of amphetamine-related IP visits with a co-occurring psychotic disorder nearly doubled from 15.8% in 2014 to 35.1% in 2021. The lowest proportion of psychotic disorders among amphetamine-related IP admissions was in 2014, and the highest in 2020 (36.2%).

Discussion

Our findings suggest that Toronto has seen a concerning increase in rates of methamphetamine use paralleling trends seen in the United States,^{7, 11} Australia,⁸ and British Columbia³ and is therefore in need of a corresponding increase in healthcare capacity to respond to growing treatment needs.⁸ Moreover, when inspecting amphetamine-related visits with co-occurring substance use disorders, we found a substantial increase in visits with co-occurring opioid use from 2014 to 2021 relative to visits with co-occurring alcohol, cannabis, or other drug use, which remained relatively stable. These findings support the potential “twin epidemics” emergence of co-occurring methamphetamine and opioid use.⁷ Continuing to monitor the regional trends is imperative for health care providers to facilitate appropriate allocation of resources. While Toronto has seen shifts in attitudes towards harm reduction and an increase in treatment initiatives for opioid use,¹² there remain limited options for individuals who use methamphetamine.¹³ Lack of service is concerning given the increasingly fentanyl-contaminated illegal stimulant supply in the US¹⁴ and Canada,¹⁵ resulting in increasing trends of deaths involving concurrent stimulants and fentanyl, particularly from 2015 onwards.^{14, 16}

Notably, our findings also suggest a dramatic increase in individuals presenting with co-occurring psychotic disorders in the context of amphetamines admitted to IP that was not mirrored in ED visits, potentially indicating more severe psychotic presentations such that most individuals who present with co-occurring methamphetamine use and psychosis require admission to the hospital.¹⁷ It is well-known that acute heavy methamphetamine use is associated with the emergence of psychotic-like symptoms (e.g., paranoia and auditory hallucinations), while prolonged use may result in methamphetamine-induced psychotic disorder that remits during abstinence or, in individuals with pre-existing vulnerabilities, exacerbation of a full psychotic disorder that may not remit even during abstinence.¹⁶ Furthermore, methamphetamine use is also associated with depressive and anxious disorders as well as increases in agitation and aggression.^{18, 19} Our findings demonstrate the high psychological burden experienced by individuals who use methamphetamine and further emphasize the need for interventions capable of addressing co-occurring methamphetamine use and mental illness. Unfortunately, much of the extant literature on available treatments excludes individuals with co-occurring mental illnesses, particularly psychosis, leaving it difficult to determine the effectiveness of existing therapeutic interventions.

Finally, it should be noted that methamphetamine-related IP and ED admissions peaked in the second quarter of 2020 (April to June), shortly after Ontario's first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown. While not a focus of the present study, this trend parallels findings from other trends data indicating a substantial increase in methamphetamine use,²⁰ opioid overdoses, and utilization of harm-reduction and medical system services at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.²¹

Limitations

Limitations are noted. The data comes from administrative documents from ED and IP units. As such, the quality of the reports is highly dependent on each provider and is potentially subject to reporting bias. The timeframe of the study was limited by changes in data collection methods, and data from before 2014 would therefore not be comparable. Finally, we did not account for multiple visits from repeated individuals when reporting trends.

Conclusions and Future Directions

Our findings suggest that methamphetamine use is a growing problem in the Greater Toronto Area. Affected individuals are in need of targeted interventions, such as evidence-based treatment and increased access to harm reduction initiatives. Moreover, research into the psychological and neurological harms of methamphetamine use needs to be explored in the context of co-occurring opioid use and other substance use, warranting overdose prevention measures for individuals with problematic use of methamphetamine. Finally, research into potential treatments for methamphetamine use needs to take into account that the vast majority of individuals who use methamphetamine also present with other co-occurring substance use disorders and mental disorders.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Bernard Le Foll, Departments of Family and Community Medicine, Pharmacology and Toxicology, Psychiatry, Institute of Medical Sciences and Dalla Lana School of Public Health; University of Toronto.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Bernard Le Foll has obtained funding from Pfizer Inc. (GRAND Awards, including salary support) for investigator-initiated projects. Le Foll has obtained funding from Indivior for a clinical trial sponsored by Indivior. Le Foll has in-kind donations of cannabis products from Aurora Cannabis Enterprises Inc. and studies medication donations from Pfizer Inc. (varenicline for smoking cessation) and Bioprojet Pharma. He was also provided a coil for a Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) study from Brainsway. Le Foll has obtained industry funding from Canopy Growth Corporation (through research grants handled by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and the University of Toronto), Bioprojet Pharma, Alcohol Countermeasure Systems (ACS), Alkermes, and Universal Ibogaine. Lastly, Le Foll has received in-kind donations of nabiximols from GW Pharmaceuticals for past studies funded by CIHR and NIH. He has participated in a session of a National Advisory Board Meeting (Emerging Trends BUP-XR) for Indivior Canada and has been a consultant for Shinogi. He is supported by CAMH, Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, a clinician-scientist award from the department of Family and Community Medicine of the University of Toronto and a Chair in Addiction Psychiatry from the department of Psychiatry of the University of Toronto. All other authors have no competing interests to disclose.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Vitor S. Tardelli

David Gratzer

Tony P. George

David J. Castle

References

Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. Methamphetamine. 2020.

Control CfD, Prevention, Statistics NCfH. Underlying Cause of Death 1999–2016 on CDC WONDER Online Database, released December, 2017. Data are from the Multiple Cause of Death Files, 1999–2016, as compiled from data provided by the 57 vital statistics jurisdictions through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2017.

Papamihali

Collins

Karamouzian

Purssell

Graham

Buxton

. Crystal methamphetamine use in British Columbia, Canada: a cross-sectional study of people who access harm reduction services. PLOS ONE. 2021;16(5):e0252090.

Ellis

Kasper

Cicero

. Twin epidemics: the surging rise of methamphetamine use in chronic opioid users. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018;193:14-20.

Lopez

Dhatt

Howe

, et al. Co-use of methamphetamine and opioids among people in treatment in Oregon: a qualitative examination of interrelated structural, community, and individual-level factors. Int J Drug Policy. 2021;91:103098.

Palmer

Scott

Dietze

Higgs

. Motivations for crystal methamphetamine-opioid co-injection/co-use amongst community-recruited people who inject drugs: a qualitative study. Harm Reduct J. 2020;17(1):1-6.

Havens

Knudsen

Strickland

, et al. Recent Increase in Methamphetamine Use in a Cohort of Rural People Who Use Drugs: Further Evidence for the Emergence of Twin Epidemics. Front Psychiatry. 2022;12:2552.

Allan

RHL

Kemp

Snowdon

. Increased demand for amphetamine treatment in rural Australia. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2019;14(1):1-9.

World Health Organization(WHO). The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1993.

10.

Methodology S. Applications Branch SRP, National Cancer Institute. Joinpoint Regression Program. 2013;4(0.0).

11.

Miller

Atala

Sarangarm

, et al. Methamphetamine abuse trends in psychiatric emergency services: a retrospective analysis using big data. Community Ment Health J. 2020;56(5):959-962.

12.

Hyshka

Anderson-Baron

Karekezi

, et al. Harm reduction in name, but not substance: a comparative analysis of current Canadian provincial and territorial policy frameworks. Harm Reduct J. 2017;14(1):1-14.

13.

Hunter

Strike

Barnaby

, et al.

Reducing widespread pipe sharing and risky sex among crystal methamphetamine smokers in Toronto: do safer smoking kits have a potential role to play?

Harm Reduct J. 2012;9(1):9.

14.

Park

Rashidi

Foti

Zoorob

Sherman

Alexander

. Fentanyl and fentanyl analogs in the illicit stimulant supply: results from U.S. Drug seizure data, 2011–2016. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2021;218:108416.

15.

Baldwin

Gray

Goel

Wood

Buxton

Rieb

. Fentanyl and heroin contained in seized illicit drugs and overdose-related deaths in British Columbia, Canada: an observational analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018;185:322-327.

16.

LaRue

Twillman

Dawson

, et al. Rate of fentanyl positivity among urine drug test results positive for cocaine or methamphetamine. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(4):e192851.

17.

Unadkat

Subasinghe

Harvey

Castle

. Methamphetamine use in patients presenting to emergency departments and psychiatric inpatient facilities: what are the service implications? Australas Psychiatry. 2019;27(1):14-17.

18.

Lappin

Roxburgh

Kaye

, et al. Increased prevalence of self-reported psychotic illness predicted by crystal methamphetamine use: evidence from a high-risk population. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;38:16-20.

19.

Degenhardt

Sara

McKetin

, et al. Crystalline methamphetamine use and methamphetamine-related harms in Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2017;36(2):160-170.

20.

Wainwright

Mikre

Whitley

, et al. Analysis of drug test results before and after the US declaration of a national emergency concerning the COVID-19 outbreak. JAMA. 2020;324(16):1674-1677.

21.

Haley

Saitz

. The opioid epidemic during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA. 2020;324(16):1615.

Marked Increase in Amphetamine-Related Emergency Department Visits and Inpatient Admissions in Toronto,Canada,2014–2021

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Discussion

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Sample

Data Collection

Statistical Analysis

Results

Amphetamine-Related Contacts

Yearly Proportion of Concurrent Substance use Disorders

Yearly Proportion of Concurrent Mental Disorders

Discussion

Limitations

Conclusions and Future Directions

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

References