CEWG January 09 Full Report - National Institute on Drug Abuse

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Section IV. Across <strong>CEWG</strong> Areas: Treatment Admissions, Forensic Laboratory Analysis Data, and Average Drug Price and Purity Data Table 4. Primary Heroin Treatment Admissions in 21 <strong>CEWG</strong> Areas as a Percentage of Total Admissions, Including and Excluding Primary Alcohol Admissions: FY 2008 1 and 1H 2008 2 Primary Heroin Admissions Total Admissions with Primary Alcohol Admissions Excluded 3 Total Admissions with Primary Alcohol Admissions Included <strong>CEWG</strong> Areas # # % # % FY 2008 Miami/Dade 200 4,068 4.9 5,5<strong>09</strong> 3.6 County 4,5 San Francisco 5,974 21,324 28.0 29,462 20.3 1H 2008 Atlanta 179 2,789 6.4 4,242 4.2 Baltimore City 5,317 8,267 64.3 9,729 54.7 Boston 4,215 5,780 72.9 8,722 48.3 Cincinnati 5 465 2,042 22.8 3,260 14.3 Colorado 638 8,286 7.7 13,953 4.6 Denver 428 3,860 11.1 6,<strong>09</strong>4 7.0 Detroit 1,184 2,965 39.9 4,<strong>09</strong>5 28.9 Hawai‘i 100 2,814 3.6 4,431 2.3 Los Angeles 5,208 22,260 23.4 27,944 18.6 Maine 447 3,623 12.3 6,444 6.9 Maryland 8,889 22,510 39.4 34,379 25.9 Minneapolis/ 653 4,713 13.9 9,846 6.6 St. Paul New York City 10,968 30,362 36.1 42,402 25.9 Philadelphia 1,327 5,785 22.9 7,422 17.9 Phoenix 257 1,352 19.0 2,028 12.7 San Diego 1,425 6,160 23.1 7,616 18.7 Seattle 802 4,522 17.7 7,067 11.3 St. Louis 1,088 4,129 26.4 6,248 17.4 Texas 4,680 33,212 14.1 44,983 10.4 1 Data are for fiscal year 2008: July 2007–June 2008. 2 Data are for the first half of 2008: <strong>January</strong>–June 2008. 3 Percentages of primary heroin admissions are obtained from admissions with primary alcohol admissions excluded for comparability with past data. 4 Miami/Dade County data include data for Miami/Dade County and Monroe County (Florida Keys). 5 Heroin and other opiates are grouped together; data are reported in treatment admission tables under heroin only. SOURCE: <strong>January</strong> 20<strong>09</strong> State and local <strong>CEWG</strong> reports Proceedings of the Community Epidemiology Work Group, <strong>January</strong> 20<strong>09</strong> 79
EpidEmiologic TrEnds in drug AbusE: HigHligHTs And ExEcuTivE summAry heroin items were highest in Baltimore City (22.4 percent) and Maryland (19.8 percent), compared with other <strong>CEWG</strong> areas. Heroin drug items identified were lowest in Texas (1.7 percent), followed by Atlanta (1.8 percent) (figure 16; appendix table 2). Heroin was not ranked as the number one most frequently identified drug in any of the <strong>CEWG</strong> areas in the first half of 2008 (section II, table 1), and it appeared as no higher than third in the rankings of drug items identified in that reporting period. However, it ranked third in all areas within the northeastern, southern, and midwestern regions, with the exception of Atlanta (where it ranked seventh) and Minneapolis/St. Paul (where it ranked fifth) in the South and Midwest, respectively. Heroin Domestic Monitor Program (HDMP) Price and Purity Data The map below (figure 17) depicts the most recent data on the average price per milligram pure and the average percentage of heroin purity across <strong>CEWG</strong> areas, as reported by the DEA’s HDMP for 2007. Data from the HDMP suggest that for CY 2007, SA heroin continued to be the primary source of heroin east of the Mississippi River, as has been the case since the mid-1990s. Mexican black tar and, to a lesser extent, Mexican brown powder heroin dominated markets west of the Mississippi. Data shown here are confined to SA and Mexican heroin, since the availability of Southwest Asian heroin was limited in the <strong>CEWG</strong> areas where it was reported—Atlanta, Baltimore Figure 16. Heroin Items Identified as a Percentage of Total NFLIS Drug Items, 22 <strong>CEWG</strong> Areas: 1H 2008 Baltimore City Maryland Chicago Philadelphia New York City Boston Washington, DC Albuquerque Detroit St. Louis Phoenix Cincinnati San Francisco Seattle Los Angeles San Diego Denver Minneapolis/St. Paul Miami Honolulu Atlanta Texas 0 5 10 15 20 25 7.4 6.6 6.4 5.7 5.4 5.1 4.1 3.4 3.3 2.4 2.2 2.2 1.8 1.7 10.6 10.6 10.0 8.9 8.7 12.2 19.8 22.4 SOURCE: NFLIS, DEA, received <strong>January</strong> 4, 20<strong>09</strong>; see appendix table 2 80 Proceedings of the Community Epidemiology Work Group, <strong>January</strong> 20<strong>09</strong>
Page 1 and 2:
EpidEmiologic TrEnds in drug AbusE
Page 3 and 4:
EpidEmiologic TrEnds in drug AbusE:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Foreword Foreword This Executive Su
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36: 58.9 17.5 1.8 1.5 EpidEmiologic TrE
Page 37 and 38: EpidEmiologic TrEnds in drug AbusE:
Page 85: EpidEmiologic TrEnds in drug AbusE:
Page 115 and 116: Participant List Participant List <
Page 117 and 118: Participant List Daniel P. Dooley S
Page 119 and 120: Participant List John A. Newmeyer,
Page 121: NIH Publication No. 09</str
show all

CEWG January 09 Full Report - National Institute on Drug Abuse

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?