The impact of COVID-19 across health services, including treatment services for people who use drugs, is emerging but likely to have a high impact. Treatment services for people who use drugs provide essential treatment services including opiate agonist treatment and needle syringe programmes alongside other important treatment programmes across all substance types including withdrawal and counselling services. Drug and alcohol hospital consultation-liaison clinicians support emergency departments and other services provided in hospital settings in efficiently managing patients who use drugs and present with other health problems.COVID-19 will impact on staff availability for work due to illness. Patients may require home isolation and quarantine periods. Ensuring ongoing supply of opiate treatment during these periods will require significant changes to how treatment is provided. The use of monthly depot buprenorphine as well as moving from a framework of supervised dosing will be required for patients on sublingual buprenorphine and methadone. Ensuring ready access to take-home naloxone for patients is crucial to reduce overdose risks. Delivery of methadone and buprenorphine to the homes of people with confirmed COVID-19 infections is likely to need to occur to support home isolation.People who use drugs are likely to be more vulnerable during the COVID-19 epidemic, due to poorer health literacy and stigma and discrimination towards this group. People who use drugs may prioritise drug use above other health concerns. Adequate supply of clean injecting equipment is important to prevent outbreaks of blood-borne viruses. Opiate users may misinterpret SARS-CoV2 symptoms as opiate withdrawal and manage this by using opioids. Ensuring people who use drugs have access to drug treatment as well as access to screening and testing for SARS-CoV2 where this is indicated is important.

IMPORTANCE There are no medications approved for treating cannabis dependence or withdrawal. The cannabis extract nabiximols (Sativex), developed as a multiple sclerosis treatment, offers a potential agonist medication for cannabis withdrawal.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety and efficacy of nabiximols in treating cannabis withdrawal. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA 2-site, double-blind randomized clinical inpatient trial with a 28-day follow-up was conducted in New South Wales, Australia. Participants included 51 DSM-IV-TR cannabis-dependent treatment seekers.INTERVENTIONS A 6-day regimen of nabiximols (maximum daily dose, 86.4 mg of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and 80 mg of cannabidiol) or placebo with standardized psychosocial interventions during a 9-day admission.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Severity of cannabis withdrawal and cravings (Cannabis Withdrawal Scale), retention in withdrawal treatment, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes include postwithdrawal cannabis use, health outcomes, and psychosocial outcomes.RESULTS Nabiximols treatment significantly reduced the overall severity of cannabis withdrawal relative to placebo (F 8,377.97 = 2.39; P = .01), including effects on withdrawal-related irritability, depression, and cannabis cravings. Nabiximols had a more limited, but still positive, therapeutic benefit on sleep disturbance, anxiety, appetite loss, physical symptoms, and restlessness. Nabiximols patients remained in treatment longer during medication use (unadjusted hazard ratio, 3.66 [95% CI, 1.18-11.37]; P = .02), with 2.84 the number needed to treat to achieve successful retention in treatment. Participants could not reliably differentiate between nabiximols and placebo treatment (χ 2 1 = 0.79; P = .67), and those receiving nabiximols did not report greater intoxication (F 1,6 = 0.22; P = .97). The number (F 1,50 = 0.3; P = .59) and severity (F 1,50 = 2.69; P = .10) of adverse events did not differ significantly between groups. Both groups showed reduced cannabis use at follow-up, with no advantage of nabiximols over placebo for self-reported cannabis use (F 1,48 = 0.29; P = .75), cannabis-related problems (F 1,49 = 2.33; P = .14), or cannabis dependence (F 1,50 < 0.01; P = .89). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn a treatment-seeking cohort, nabiximols attenuated cannabis withdrawal symptoms and improved patient retention in treatment. However, placebo was as effective as nabiximols in promoting long-term reductions in cannabis use following medication cessation. The data support further evaluation of nabiximols for management of cannabis dependence and withdrawal in treatment-seeking populations.

Cannabinoids, when co-administered with opioids, may enable reduced opioid doses without loss of analgesic efficacy (ie, an opioid-sparing effect). The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine the opioid-sparing potential of cannabinoids. Eligible studies included pre-clinical and clinical studies for which the outcome was either analgesia or opioid dose requirements. Clinical studies included controlled studies and case series. We searched Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, and Embase. Nineteen pre-clinical and nine clinical studies met the search criteria. Seventeen of the 19 pre-clinical studies provided evidence of synergistic effects from opioid and cannabinoid co-administration. Our meta-analysis of pre-clinical studies indicated that the median effective dose (ED) of morphine administered in combination with delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC) is 3.6 times lower (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.95, 6.76; n=6) than the ED of morphine alone. In addition, the ED for codeine administered in combination with delta-9-THC was 9.5 times lower (95% CI 1.6, 57.5, n=2) than the ED of codeine alone. One case series (n=3) provided very-low-quality evidence of a reduction in opioid requirements with cannabinoid co-administration. Larger controlled clinical studies showed some clinical benefits of cannabinoids; however, opioid dose changes were rarely reported and mixed findings were observed for analgesia. In summary, pre-clinical studies provide robust evidence of the opioid-sparing effect of cannabinoids, whereas one of the nine clinical studies identified provided very-low-quality evidence of such an effect. Prospective high-quality-controlled clinical trials are required to determine the opioid-sparing effect of cannabinoids.