0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Research Letters |

Pseudoephedrine Sales and Seizures of Clandestine Methamphetamine Laboratories in Kentucky FREE

Jeffery Talbert, PhD; Karen Blumenschein, PharmD; Amy Burke, PhD; Arnold Stromberg, PhD; Patricia Freeman, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Institute for Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy, Lexington (jtalb1@uky.edu).


Letters Section Editor: Jody W. Zylke, MD, Senior Editor.

More Author Information
JAMA. 2012;308(15):1524-1526. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.12992.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

To the Editor: The illicit production of methamphetamine from the precursor pseudoephedrine in clandestine laboratories fuels up to 35% of the domestic supply.1 Public health, law enforcement, and medical associations support restricted access to methamphetamine precursors; manufacturers oppose restrictions.

Kentucky law limits pseudoephedrine sales in all counties to 7.2 g/person/month (as of July 2012, formerly 9 g/person/month), sufficient to allow a patient to take the maximum daily dose (240 mg/d) each day. Electronic tracking of sales is also required. Despite these restrictions, increases in the number of reported methamphetamine laboratory seizures (called laboratories) continue.24 We analyzed the relationship between pseudoephedrine sales and the number of laboratories reported in Kentucky.

Using county level data from 2010, we examined the association between the natural log of the number of laboratories and county pseudoephedrine sales (grams/100 residents) adjusting for the number of law enforcement officers and the percentage of high school graduates. Law enforcement regulations define laboratories as “requiring two or more chemicals or two or more pieces of equipment used in manufacturing methamphetamine.”5

Pseudoephedrine sales data were obtained from the National Precursor Log Exchange, the real-time electronic system mandated for use by pharmacies to track all sales of non–prescription pseudoephedrine medications in Kentucky. The number of full-time law enforcement officers in a county was used as a proxy for the influence of law enforcement on laboratory seizures. Data on laboratories and law enforcement officers were obtained from the Kentucky State Police. The percentage of high school graduates was used as a socioeconomic control and was obtained from the US Census.

We first visualized the relationship using a scatterplot, and then calculated a log-linear regression model using Stata version 11 (StataCorp). All reported P values are 2-sided, with P < .05 considered statistically significant. The University of Kentucky institutional review board approved the study.

Four Kentucky counties reported no pseudoephedrine sales, leaving 116 counties for analysis. In 2010, Kentuckians purchased a mean 24 664 g (SD, 60 313 g) of pseudoephedrine per county (per county mean, 49 [SD, 39] g/100 residents) and there were 1072 laboratories reported (per county mean, 9.28 [SD, 20.91] laboratories). There was considerable variability in pseudoephedrine sales per county from 0.26 g/100 residents (population: 13 752) to 147 g/100 residents (population: 25 581).

Variability in the number of laboratories was also evident from 0 in many counties to 154 laboratories. The natural log of the number of laboratories reported in each county and the grams of pseudoephedrine sold per 100 residents (Figure) indicates a relationship between sales and laboratories. Regression results in the Table were consistent with the visual representation in the Figure.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure. Association Between Pseudoephedrine Sales and Reported Clandestine Methamphetamine Laboratory Seizures in Counties in Kentucky in 2010
Graphic Jump Location

The regression line representing a linear model was fit using Stata Graph 11.2.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable. Statistical Modeling of Methamphetamine Laboratory Seizures in 116 Kentucky Counties in 2010a

Counties with greater pseudoephedrine sales were significantly associated with greater numbers of laboratories. In this model, a 1-g increase in pseudoephedrine sales per 100 people was associated with a 1.7% increase in laboratories. For a typical county, a 13-g per 100 resident increase in pseudoephedrine sales was associated with approximately 1 additional laboratory.

The strength of this study is that it is the first, to our knowledge, to provide empirical evidence that pseudoephedrine sales are correlated with the clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine. While the incidence of conditions for which pseudoephedrine is indicated is not known, and may vary by county, our results indicated a 565-fold variation in pseudoephedrine sales between Kentucky counties.

Our study is limited by the ecological design, possible underdetection and underreporting of laboratories, purchase of pseudoephedrine across county lines, and importation of pseudoephedrine into Kentucky. In addition, law enforcement's use of pseudoephedrine sales data to identify questionable pseudoephedrine purchases could have affected the association between pseudoephedrine sales and laboratories. Nevertheless, this study highlights the need for research on various approaches to containing clandestine methamphetamine production, including restriction of pseudoephedrine sales to only those patients who have a true medical need for its decongestant properties.

Author Contributions: Dr Talbert had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Study concept and design: Talbert, Blumenschein, Stromberg, Freeman.

Acquisition of data: Talbert, Freeman.

Analysis and interpretation of data: Talbert, Blumenschein, Burke, Stromberg, Freeman.

Drafting of the manuscript: Talbert, Blumenschein, Stromberg, Freeman.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Talbert, Blumenschein, Burke, Stromberg, Freeman.

Statistical analysis: Talbert, Burke, Stromberg.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Talbert.

Study supervision: Talbert, Stromberg.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: The authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Drs Talbert, Blumenschein, and Stromberg reported being supported by grant UL1RR033173 from the National Center for Research Resources and grant UL1TR000117 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Dr Freeman reported receiving past grant support from the National Association of State Controlled Substance Authorities for preparation of a white paper on laws regulating methamphetamine precursors. Dr Burke did not report any disclosures.

Disclaimer: The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Additional Contributions: We thank Yevgeniya Gokun, MS (University of Kentucky Applied Statistical Laboratory), for statistical consultation during the preparation of this research letter. Her analytical services as a statistician are available to all investigators free of charge.

Prah PM. Methamphetamine. CQ Researcher. July 15, 2005:589-612
US Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center.  National Drug Threat Assessment, 2011. http://www.justice.gov/archive/ndic/pubs44/44849/44849p.pdf. Accessibility verified September 14, 2012
Nonnemaker J, Engelen M, Shive D. Are methamphetamine precursor control laws effective tools to fight the methamphetamine epidemic?  Health Econ. 2011;20(5):519-531
PubMed   |  Link to Article
McKetin R, Sutherland R, Bright DA, Norberg MM. A systematic review of methamphetamine precursor regulations.  Addiction. 2011;106(11):1911-1924
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kentucky State Police.  Methamphetamine manufacturing in Kentucky, 2010. http://odcp.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/BCB964F4-8365-4E3D-BC3D-E30A50C19930/0/MethamphetamineManufacturinginKY2010Final.pdf. Accessibility verified September 14, 2012

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure. Association Between Pseudoephedrine Sales and Reported Clandestine Methamphetamine Laboratory Seizures in Counties in Kentucky in 2010
Graphic Jump Location

The regression line representing a linear model was fit using Stata Graph 11.2.

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable. Statistical Modeling of Methamphetamine Laboratory Seizures in 116 Kentucky Counties in 2010a

References

Prah PM. Methamphetamine. CQ Researcher. July 15, 2005:589-612
US Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center.  National Drug Threat Assessment, 2011. http://www.justice.gov/archive/ndic/pubs44/44849/44849p.pdf. Accessibility verified September 14, 2012
Nonnemaker J, Engelen M, Shive D. Are methamphetamine precursor control laws effective tools to fight the methamphetamine epidemic?  Health Econ. 2011;20(5):519-531
PubMed   |  Link to Article
McKetin R, Sutherland R, Bright DA, Norberg MM. A systematic review of methamphetamine precursor regulations.  Addiction. 2011;106(11):1911-1924
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kentucky State Police.  Methamphetamine manufacturing in Kentucky, 2010. http://odcp.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/BCB964F4-8365-4E3D-BC3D-E30A50C19930/0/MethamphetamineManufacturinginKY2010Final.pdf. Accessibility verified September 14, 2012

Letters

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 1

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
JAMAevidence.com

The Rational Clinical Examination
Seizures