Impact of methamphetamine precursor chemical legislation, a suppression policy, on the demand for drug treatment
Research is needed to help treatment programs plan for the impacts of drug suppression efforts. Studies to date indicate that heroin suppression may increase treatment demand. This study examines whether treatment demand was impacted by a major US methamphetamine suppression policy--legislation regulating precursor chemicals. The precursors ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, in forms used by large-scale methamphetamine producers, were regulated in August 1995 and October 1997, respectively. ARIMA-intervention time-series analysis was used to examine the impact of each precursor's regulation on monthly voluntary methamphetamine treatment admissions (a measure of treatment demand), including first-time admissions and re-admissions, in California (1992-2004). Cocaine, heroin, and alcohol treatment admissions were used as quasi-control series. The 1995 regulation of ephedrine was found to be associated with a significant reduction in methamphetamine treatment admissions that lasted approximately 2 years. The 1997 regulation of pseudoephedrine was associated with a significant reduction that lasted approximately 4 years. First-time admissions declined more than re-admissions. Cocaine, heroin, and alcohol admissions were generally unaffected. While heroin suppression may be associated with increased treatment demand as suggested by research to date, this study indicates that methamphetamine precursor regulation was associated with decreases in treatment demand. A possible explanation is that, during times of suppression, heroin users may seek treatment to obtain substitute drugs (e.g., methadone), while methamphetamine users have no comparable incentive. Methamphetamine suppression may particularly impact treatment demand among newer users, as indicated by larger declines in first-time admissions.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 66 (2008)
Issue (Month): 7 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:66:y:2008:i:7:p:1463-1473. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.