logo
Study finds strong link between illegal drug use and homelessness — and unmet need for treatment

Study finds strong link between illegal drug use and homelessness — and unmet need for treatment

Illegal drug use is deeply intertwined with homelessness, both increasing the risk of losing housing and arising or worsening when people find themselves on the streets, a new study has found. But it also found that a large majority of people living on the streets are not drug users.
The study, published in the medical journal JAMA by the Benioff Homeless and Housing Initiative at UC San Francisco, gives a complex statistical picture of a topic that has been fraught by conflicting narratives. Against a public perception that drug use is endemic to homeless camps, service providers and advocates see an exaggerated reaction to open drug use on the street that stigmatizes the majority of homeless people who do not use drugs.
The Benioff study supports some elements of both viewpoints. Contrary to common perception, only about 37% of homeless people were using illicit drugs regularly, and 25% said they had never used drugs. But drug use is far more prevalent among homeless people than in the general population. Just over 65% reported having regular used at some point in their lives, and 27% had started after becoming homeless.
Another twist: 35% said their drug use had decreased after they became homeless. Some were parents worried about losing custody of their children. Others had 'just reached that point,' said lead author and Benioff director Margot Kushel.
That finding highlighted the need for better treatment options, Kushel said. Many told interviewers that had already cut back and would like help to cut back more.
'One of the most poignant findings was that 1 in 5 told us they are actively seeking treatment and couldn't get it,' Kushel said in an interview.
In-depth interviews illustrated their frustration, Kushel said, with respondents saying, 'I'm showing up where they tell me to show up, calling where they tell me to call,' only to be turned away.
Only 7% of those with any lifetime use said they were receiving treatment.
'Its hard to get treatment,' Kushel said. 'It shouldn't be. You shouldn't scrounge to save money to go somewhere and be told you'll be put on a waiting list. That should not happen, but it does.'
Housing is the solution, Kushel said, but until enough of it is available, there is a need to bring more resources to the street, such as methadone or other medications that treat opioid addiction.
Kushel also urged increased access to residential treatment as long as it could lead to housing and that those who relapse in treatment — 'very common and part of the natural history of substance use disorders' — would not be returned to homelessness.
The report, Illicit Substance Use and Treatment Access Among Adults Experiencing Homelessness, is one of a series of reports based on Benioff's 2023 Statewide Study of People experiencing homelessness. The largest representative sample of homelessness since 1990s, it consisted of 3,200 questionnaires and 365 in-depth interviews.
Prior Benioff reports based on the survey have covered intimate partner violence and pathways to homelessness.
Unlike the 1990s survey, which included only people using homeless services, Benioff canvassed both shelters and encampments, noting that homeless patterns had changed, with a higher proportion unsheltered, and drug preferences in the general population had shifted from cocaine to methamphetamine and fentanyl.
The new report found that methamphetamine was, by far, the most used drug on the street.
'People are telling us that it helps them survive,' Kushel said. 'It keeps them awake and alert. They are using it either because they are traumatized, they have been assaulted, they are afraid or depressed, using it as coping to make it all go away.'
Only about 10% of respondents said they were regularly using opioids, most mixing them with methamphetamine. But even intermittent use, or unwitting use through contamination, poses a high risk of death. Just under 20% had experienced an overdose in their lifetimes and 10% in their current episode of homelessness.
About a quarter reported having naloxone, a medicine that reverses an opioid overdose, but Kushel said it should be in the hands of every opioid user and everyone around them.
'What we've heard from a lot of people is, 'I've seen an overdose,'' she said. 'You can't often wait for a first responder.'
Despite the high lifetime use of cocaine, at 58%, only 3% said they were currently using it.
'Like a lot of things we talk about in medicine, some things get worse, some things get better, some things stay the same,' Kushel said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Diabetes Tech Use On the Rise But A1c Reductions Still Lag
Diabetes Tech Use On the Rise But A1c Reductions Still Lag

Medscape

timea day ago

  • Medscape

Diabetes Tech Use On the Rise But A1c Reductions Still Lag

Use of diabetes technology has dramatically increased and glycemic control has improved among people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the US over the past 15 years, but at the same time, overall achievement of an A1c level < 7% remains low and socioeconomic and racial disparities have widened. These findings came from an analysis of national electronic health records of nearly 200,000 children and adults with T1D by Michael Fang, PhD, of the Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, and colleagues. The study was published online on August 11, 2025, in JAMA Network Open . Use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) increased substantially from 2009-2011 to 2021-2023, from less than 5% in both children and adults to more than 80% and over half, respectively. While A1c levels did drop over the 15 years, just 1 in 5 children and slightly over a quarter of adults achieved a level < 7%. The average A1c level stayed above 8%, with ethnic minorities and low-income patients seeing the smallest gains. 'Additional opportunities for individualized patient and clinician education can help optimize the use of technologies. In our analyses, the increase in CGM and insulin pump use substantially outpaced gains in glycemic control,' Fang and colleagues wrote. In an accompanying editorial, Diana Soliman, MD, of the Division of Endocrinology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine in Miami, and colleagues wrote, 'As technological innovation continues to accelerate, it is encouraging to see signs of progress in glycemic management. Ensuring that these advances benefit all individuals with T1D must remain a priority.' Asked to comment, Anne L. Peters, MD, professor of clinical medicine and director of Clinical Diabetes Programs at the Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, told Medscape Medical News that a key component is having staff to help with prior authorization paperwork and certified diabetes care and education specialists (CDCES) to help train patients and troubleshoot. 'These health disparities are real but fixable. However, it takes staff to make it happen.' Tech Use On the Rise But A1c Level Hasn't Dropped Much Fang and colleagues used the OptumLabs Data Warehouse to identify 186,590 eligible individuals with T1D, of whom 26,853 were younger than 18 years. Three quarters were White, 12% were Black, and 7% were Hispanic individuals. Few previous studies of T1D have included such representative population-based data, the authors noted. From 2009-2011 to 2021-2023, among youths, the use of CGMs rose from 4% to 82%, insulin pumps from 16% to 50%, and the combination from 1% to 47% ( P for trend < .001 for all). Such use in 2021-2023 was higher among White youths and those with commercial insurance. During the same period, among adults, the use of CGM rose from 5% to 57%, insulin pumps from 11% to 29%, and the combination from 1% to 22% ( P for trend < .001 for all). Throughout, adults who were White, younger, and commercially insured were more likely to use CGMs. Overall, mean A1c levels dropped from 8.9% to 8.3% in youths and from 8.2% to 8.0% in adults from 2009-2011 to 2021-2023. Among youths, the prevalence of achieving glycemic control, defined as an A1c level < 7%, rose from about 7% in 2009-2011 and 2014-2017 to 19% in 2021-2023 ( P for trend < .001). Glycemic control improved for all youth subgroups except for Black youths. Differences by race, ethnicity, and insurance type increased after 2018-2020. During 2021-2023, 21% of White youths vs 17% of Hispanic and 12% of Black youths achieved glycemic control. Those with commercial health insurance also had higher rates of glycemic control than those with Medicaid insurance (22% vs 13%). For adults with T1D, glycemic control rose from 21% in 2009-2011 to 28% in 2021-2023 ( P for trend < .001). Again, the prevalence of achieving glycemic control was higher among those who were White (30% vs 20% of Hispanic and 21% of Black patients in 2021-2023) and those who had commercial insurance (30% vs 19% of those who had Medicaid insurance). Implications for Clinical Practice These findings have important implications for clinical practice and policy, Soliman and colleagues said. 'Barriers to diabetes technology access, including financial costs, lack of clinician prescription, and inadequate clinical communication, continue to disproportionately affect medically underserved populations. While the increase in diabetes technology may be attributed to expanded insurance coverage, incorporation into guidelines, and improved technology, there remains a crucial need to extend this technology more widely.' Addressing these challenges, they said, 'requires coordinated efforts that combine reduced financial barriers with clinician training, shared decision-making, and culturally competent communication to promote equitable and effective use of technology.' Peters has one practice in the relatively wealthy west side of Los Angeles and another in an underserved area in East Los Angeles. On the west side, she has a full-time staffer who exclusively handles prior authorizations for diabetes devices and a CDCES who trains patients and follows them weekly. The patients there all speak English and have high health literacy. On the east side, there aren't any educators and no classes on advanced technology. A prescription for an automated insulin delivery device can take months to get filled. Non-English speaking patients may have difficulty accessing manufacturer assistance and may lack smartphones compatible with their devices. Even when patients are able to start using the technology, they may not have the support they need to continue. 'The systems of care often lack what it takes to provide adequate care for under-resourced people with T1D. When we've had research funding to provide a CDCES, my patients in East LA do great. The training often takes longer than in those who are starting at a higher knowledge level, but technology is very useable by under-resourced people,' Peters said. The study was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Fang had no other disclosures. Soliman had no disclosures. Peters reported recording videos for Medscape Medical News, being on the advisory board for Vertex, and having stock options for Omada Health.

Brain Stimulation Promising for Progressive Aphasia
Brain Stimulation Promising for Progressive Aphasia

Medscape

timea day ago

  • Medscape

Brain Stimulation Promising for Progressive Aphasia

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) may augment standard language therapy to help slow the progression of primary progressive aphasia (PPA), a neurodegenerative disorder that erodes communication. In a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial, 6 months of active intermittent theta-burst TMS plus language therapy improved or mitigated decline in regional brain metabolism, trained language abilities, functional impairment, and neuropsychiatric symptoms in adults with PPA. The study was published online on August 11 in JAMA Network Open . Added Value? PPA is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome marked by progressive speech and/or language impairment. Most cases stem from frontotemporal degeneration or Alzheimer's disease. There are currently no effective drug treatments, although speech-language therapy has proven to be helpful. TMS can induce changes in cortical excitability, potentially promoting the reorganization of language networks, and has shown promise as adjunctive treatment for post-stroke aphasia. Previous studies examining the short-term effects of TMS on PPA reported 'encouraging' results, but the longer-term effects, beyond more than a few weeks of intervention, have not been examined, until now. For the study, the researchers led by Jordi Matias-Guiu, MD, PhD, with the Department of Neurology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain, recruited 63 adults with early-stage PPA (42 women; mean age, 72 years). Participants were randomized (2:1) to either active intermittent theta-burst TMS or sham TMS for 6 months, immediately followed by evidence-based language therapy for PPA. The trial consisted of a 24-week treatment that included a 2-week intensive course, in which active TMS or sham TMS combined with language therapy was applied daily, followed by a maintenance phase in which the same stimulation was applied weekly for 22 weeks. Participants were assessed at baseline, 3 months after the start of the treatment, and at the end of the treatment (6 months following baseline). The main outcome was the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) on FDG PET imaging in the left hemisphere, assessed at baseline and at 6 months (immediately following the intervention). Feasible, Effective Option The primary outcome was positive with higher adjusted mean SUVR in the active group than in the sham TMS group (0.78 vs 0.77; P = .046). Active TMS was also associated with significant improvement on all secondary language outcomes at 6 months, including the mini linguistic state examination, with an adjusted mean difference at 6 months of 7.71 ( P = .002). Patients in the sham group worsened on this measure compared with those in the active group. Active TMS also led to improvement in confrontation naming of trained words, which improved by a mean 23.8 points in active recipients compared with sham TMS recipients. Functional independence also benefited, with daily-living scores falling (indicating better performance) by 5.4 points in the active group compared with the sham TMS group. Neuropsychiatric symptoms eased as well, with a 4-point advantage on the neuropsychiatric inventory scale. There were no significant differences in the number of adverse events. Adherence to treatment protocol was high (92%). 'Overall, these findings suggest that the combination of TMS and language therapy is a feasible and effective treatment option for PPA,' the researchers concluded. They said future studies should investigate the potential for TMS paired with an evidence-based speech-language intervention to sustain or extend these benefits beyond 6 months.

As use of telehealth for medication abortion grows, new data offer window into patient population
As use of telehealth for medication abortion grows, new data offer window into patient population

Boston Globe

time2 days ago

  • Boston Globe

As use of telehealth for medication abortion grows, new data offer window into patient population

On Monday in JAMA, researchers Advertisement Population-based rates of telemedicine abortion were highest in Southern and Midwestern states, particularly those with abortion bans, during a 15-month period starting in July 2023. That's when several telehealth abortion providers, including Aid Access, began prescribing medication abortion under state shield laws intended to protect abortion care providers who treat patients in areas with bans. In those 15 months, 84% of Aid Access' prescriptions went to patients in states with near-total abortion bans or bans specifically on telemedicine abortion. Notably, rates of abortion provision were higher in areas where people had to travel farther to the nearest clinic, and in counties with higher poverty levels. Advertisement The study 'confirms that telehealth really changed the abortion care landscape,' said Upadhyay, echoing results from a Telehealth's growth is not just a product of state shield laws, said professor of law Nicole Huberfeld, who co-directs Boston University's program on reproductive justice. 'It's also a reflection of the necessity that exists across the country in places that were already maternity care deserts and or medically underserved areas.' When patients visit a telehealth website that provides medication abortion, they undergo the same screening process they would in person, said Elisa Wells, co-founder of Plan C, an informational site about self-managed medication abortion. A survey or provider will screen for medical contraindications like bleeding disorders or factors that might put a patient at risk of an ectopic pregnancy. If medication is prescribed, a patient will receive information about when and how to follow up with questions or concerns, and how to spot signs of an incomplete abortion. Advertisement In-person abortion care, including both procedural and medication abortion, remains much more common than telehealth. But 'there's growing support in the community for this model because restrictions have become tighter, and the likelihood of people accessing procedural or clinic-based abortion is becoming nonexistent in many states,' said Subasri Narasimhan, a public health social scientist at the Emory School of Medicine. Even in states where in-person abortion care is legal and readily available, telehealth abortion can be preferred because of the convenience it offers. 'There's the travel, there is the time off work, the stigma of having to go to an abortion clinic and sit in a waiting room,' said Upadhyay. Telehealth can also be more affordable: Aid Access and similar sites often offer a sliding payment scale, with many visits and prescriptions costing $200 or less. Concern over restricted access to abortion care has driven several distinct surges in telehealth demand. Honeybee Health, a mail-order pharmacy that fulfills medication abortion prescriptions, Medication abortion's safety, and telehealth's by extension, has been called into question repeatedly by lawmakers and anti-abortion organizations during the second Trump administration. When asked during his Senate confirmation hearing whether he would end telehealth access to mifepristone, FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said he would 'build an expert coalition' to review the medication's postmarket safety data. On prodding from abortion opponent Sen. Josh Hawley, (R-Mo.), Makary has recently Advertisement At the same time, shield laws are being put to the test, as the authors of a JAMA 'Our laws are not yet a match for telehealth and its promises and perils,' said Huberfeld, who co-authored the editorial. 'I think that we will continue to see that there is this mismatch so long as we are relying on state laws for regulating access to care.' By the end of 2024, a monthly average of more than 12,000 medication abortions were provided to patients in states with bans or telehealth restrictions, according to data from the Society of Family Planning. As patients attempt to access abortion care, findings from Aid Access 'underscore the public health importance of telemedicine, both as an alternative to the unsafe abortion methods that prevailed under abortion bans before Roe v Wade and as a means of reducing access disparities,' wrote the study's authors. 'These are life-saving services for so many people, especially the poorest of the poor,' said Upadhyay. 'These providers are really filling a public health gap where people need these services.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store