COMMUNITY DENTISTRY
FACTORS INFLUENCING THE USE OF METHAMPHETAMINE BY DENTAL PATIENTS
IN THE UNITED STATES
Lola K. Giusti 1a* , Swapandeep S. Mushiana 2b , Mitchell A. Goodis 3c
Department of Dental Practice, Arthur A Dugoni School of Dentistry, University of the Pacific 155 Fifth Street, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA
Graduate Department of Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of San Francisco 2130 Fulton Street, San Francisco, CA 94117-1080, USA
3
Diamond Springs Dental Center, 6400 Pleasant Valley Road, El Dorado, CA 95623, USA
1
2
DDS, MA, FACD, FICD, Associate Professor
MA, Doctoral Candidate
c
DDS, Lt Col, Retired, U.S. Air Force
a
b
Received: November 01, 2016
Revised: February 28, 2017
Accepted: December 04, 2017
Published: December 06, 2017
Academic Editor: Poul Erik Petersen, DDS, Dr Odont, BA, MSc, Professor, WHO Senior Consultant, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Cite this article:
Giusti LK, Mushiana SS, Goodis MA. Factors influencing the use of methamphetamine by dental patients in the United States. Stoma Edu J.
2017;4(4):290-298
ABSTRACT
DOI: 10.25241/stomaeduj.2017.4(4).art.6
Aim: This literature review explores the multiplicity of issues affecting the use of methamphetamine
by dental patients in the United States. Current sources investigating trends in availability of
methamphetamine from nontraditional (non-dental) resources are presented. Strategies for
communicating with addicted patients are presented.
Summary: Issues of addiction and recovery from this highly addictive drug are explored, as well as
its well-known destructive effects on the dentition.
Key Learning Points: The review draws from current literature in the fields of addiction, substance
abuse and recovery, dentistry and psychology. Treatment recommendations are drawn from evidence
in interprofessional fields.
Data Extraction, Data Synthesis: Not applicable in this article
Keywords: methamphetamine, caries, periodontal disease, addiction, substance abuse.
1. Introduction
To effectively address the methamphetamine issue
in our health care settings, we must have a thorough
understanding of the drug’s historical progression,
and its impact on the United States. Amphetamine
was initially synthesized in Germany in the late
1880’s. Several years later, Japanese pharmacologist
Nagayoshi Nagai’s advancements with ephedrine
allowed for the production of substances containing
amphetamines on a larger scale. Amphetamine-type
stimulants (ATS) gained global prominence during
WWII. Soldiers were administered ATS in order to
increase alertness, reduce fatigue, and diminish
appetite. 1 After the war had ended, Amphetamine
use gained social prevalence in several countries,
including the United States. During the 1960’s,
manufactured ATS pills were commonly used by
young adults, college students, and truck drivers to
increase mood and alertness. The widespread use
of substances that contained amphetamines began
to shed light on the damaging psychological and
physiological impacts to the body. In response,
the United States government attempted to halt
the progression of ATS by implementing the
Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control
Act of 1970, which regulated the use of drugs
containing amphetamines to medical settings. This
caused a sharp decline in use of the drug’s most
commo n form of methamphetamine; curtailing
its presence of meth to the western regions of the
United States. Unfortunately, the following decades
witnessed the rise of Wild West of Meth, fueled by
the triad of Mexican drug cartels, biker gangs, and
high volume of the production of methamphetamine
via rural “meth labs”. Inevitably, methamphetamine
use began to geographically spread and reached
epidemical levels across the nation. Between 1992
and 2002, an alarming spike in treatment admissions
for amphetamine-related instances rose by 920% in
the Midwest, 560% in the South, 455% in the West,
and 45% in the Northeast. 2,3 Social outcry and public
health concerns caused the government to again
attempt to stamp out the issue of methamphetamine
use in America. The Combat Methamphetamine
Epidemic Act of 2005 was incorporated into the
Patriot Act, and signed into law by former President
Bush in March 2006. The Combat Methamphetamine
Epidemic Act regulates over the counter purchases of
products containing ephedrine, pseudoephedrine,
and phenylpropanolamine in hopes of deterring
the production of methamphetamine in meth labs.
While recent federal regulations have decreased
methamphetamine production by individuals in the
United States, the roles of producer and distributor
have been aggressively seized by Mexican drug
cartels. John Carnevale, an economist who formerly
*Corresponding author:
Associate Professor Lola K. Giusti, DDS, MA, FACD, FICD, Department of Dental Practice, Arthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, University of the Pacific, 155 Fifth Street, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA
Tel: 415.351.7104; Fax: 415. 749.4338; e-mail: [email protected]
290
Stoma Edu J. 2017;4(4): 290-298
http://www.stomaeduj.com