Dr Li is an associate professor and addiction-boarded faculty at Harris Health System in the Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Baylor College of Medicine.

Benjamin Li, MD

Tales From the Clinic: The Art of Psychiatry

, we visit the addiction clinic to discuss accidental overdose deaths. Although death by suicide is known to greatly impact psychiatrists, the impact of overdose deaths on physicians is not well studied. Despite the best efforts exerted in treatment, patients on medications for opioid use disorder may die of accidental overdoses on opioids, having misestimated their current opioid tolerance, or overdose on other substances such as sedatives/hypnotics and stimulants. This article is dedicated to 3 patients lost in this past year—AK, EG, and AW—with heartfelt wishes to their families.

“Ms Verona” was a 45-year-old female enrolled in an addictions treatment program and a mother of 7 children who struggled greatly with 

 and anxiety. She was motivated to stop her opioid use, as it was taking a toll on her health and her family. Ms Verona’s children would sense their mother’s lack of engagement with them, as she was constantly preoccupied with how to mitigate the inevitable opioid withdrawal symptoms. She was a good candidate for buprenorphine therapy, as she met criteria for severe opioid use disorder, and she preferred partial agonist therapy as opposed to naltrexone and methadone. Ms Verona was inducted onto buprenorphine, and her dose subsequently increased to 16 mg total daily in order to adequately address opioid cravings.

As treatment progressed, Ms Verona displayed a chronic tendency to arrive more than an hour late to appointments. Despite her tardiness, she would plead to still be seen, often citing traffic or lack of childcare arrangements. The psychiatrist, Dr Smith, would attempt to be flexible, given the understanding of treatment barriers stemming from social determinants of health, as well as recognizing the time-sensitive nature of 

 refills; however, these accommodations were placing Dr Smith and the treatment team under time constraints in a busy clinic. Such accommodation would either cause the psychiatrist to be late for other appointments, or it would lead to the appointment with Ms Verona feeling rushed. After the patient was accommodated for lateness over a few visits, Dr Smith became aware of his growing countertransference toward Ms Verona.

 (ADHD) may have been affecting her presentation. Ms Verona was noticeably circumstantial during sessions and required frequent redirection. She also described a childhood history with symptoms of difficulty concentrating. It was also explored whether her lateness was a manifestation of her inability to focus, organize, and prioritize. She often talked about having gotten Adderall “but not recently, doctor; I know you would not let me.” Dr Smith worked with Ms Verona in problem-solving therapy to help reduce treatment-interfering behaviors and promote punctuality. Ms Verona was also started on bupropion to target ongoing depressive symptoms and simultaneously provide a nonnarcotic option to treat attention-deficit symptoms. There was a concern for her using stimulants or other substances between appointments. Despite these treatment approaches, tardiness to her appointments continued and she appeared even sedated at times, despite negative urine drug screens.

One day, Ms Verona was more than an hour late. She was informed that she could not be seen and had to be rescheduled. She was visibly upset and opted, likely due to splitting defense mechanism, to reschedule to see a different provider in the clinic when this boundary was set. After this, Ms Verona ended up seeing a different psychiatrist for the next 6 months.

One day, Ms Verona’s former psychiatrist met with one of his active patients, Mr Kim, and the following dialog ensued:

Mr Kim: “One of my friends passed away, and I’m attending the funeral. I think you actually used to treat her before.”

Dr Smith: (Somewhat surprised) “I’m sorry to hear about the loss of your friend.”

Mr Kim: “Yea, it was sad… she (Ms Verona) said she used to see you. She was still on buprenorphine, but the suspicion was that she was taking alprazolam the whole time she was in treatment and did not tell anybody, and it is a suspected unintentional overdose. I used to see her all the time, and she would be nodding off. You didn’t hear about this?”

How Do Physicians Cope With Patient Suicide or Overdose?

Dealing with the loss of a patient due to suicide or 

 has a significant impact on the treating physician and is not often talked about. There are a variety of factors that determine how a psychiatrist will be impacted in such a situation. Younger clinicians and trainees are often affected more adversely, as they have not been exposed to the scenario and may feel more vulnerable in terms of their experience and knowledge base.

 According to literature, about 25% to 60% of psychiatrists will report having a patient who died by suicide during their career.

 The number of physicians who lose patients to overdose is not known. However, the rate of overdoses involving opioids jumped by 200% from 2000 to 2014, and between 2013 to 2019, the synthetic opioid-involved death rate increased 1040%.

 The sheer magnitude of these numbers suggest that most physicians dealing with addiction must have been exposed to patient death by overdose.

With these figures in mind, as well as the significant amount of perceived stigma and guilt surrounding disclosure of these outcomes, and with the fear of lawsuits that may occur in these situations, the overall emotional toll it can have on a clinician can be quite intense. The psychiatrist in this scenario was flooded with feelings of guilt related to potential responsibility for the outcome. In addition, there is a possibility of additional emotions of anger toward the patient who was already deceased. We hear team members often saying, “Oh, but they were doing so well,” or “So sad—they stayed off heroin but could not keep off meth.”

When one is processing the suicide of a patient, one should be mindful to not isolate oneself. Efforts should be conducted to reach out to colleagues, as it is likely they would have dealt with similar experiences in the past and can normalize and validate the experience. Discussion of experiences and coping mechanisms may have therapeutic effects for physicians going through such experiences. Clinicians, as part of an organization or group practice, can utilize case conferences—a pragmatic, systematic, and therapeutic approach to exploring the case outcome in more detail. Risk management reviews or meetings could help with apprehension about any impending or perceived lawsuits. This is especially important for clinicians in private practice, who may be more isolated given their work environment structure. The message we need to hear is that a patient loss does not undo or discard the multitude of meaningful life-changing and life-preserving work done with both living and deceased patients. Support and validation go a long way in reminding us why we do what we do.

How Can We Promote Honesty About Recurrence of Substance Use?

 (SUDs), it may be helpful to try to acknowledge and normalize the fear of disclosure of relapses, as well as to emphasize the importance of honesty in recovery from the very beginning of treatment. Although feelings of guilt and internal shame are common, they are not easy to talk about for patients. Whereas the patient may perceive recurrence of use as “starting from scratch,” the clinician can reframe a recurrence of use as a learning point and a way to troubleshoot the circumstances surrounding the use. Being too harsh or strict with the patient may backfire, lead to sustain-talk, erode the therapeutic alliance, and provoke even more feelings of guilt or shame. Relapses sometimes occur because being off substances uncovers a cooccurring mental illness, or because of stress in real life, to which patients with SUDs are more susceptible.

By definition, addiction is a relapsing and remitting illness. Similarly, depression is also a relapsing and remitting illness, but no one benefits from being kicked out of treatment for having a recurrent depressive episode. Thus, patients should not be terminated from treatment for recurrence of use as if often done—they should actually receive more intense care when in a greater time of need. Although recurrence of use might have clinical significance on modifying treatment plans, patients should be informed that using is only a setback if they do not seek further treatment to address it. Patients may be relieved if asked about any internalized and unfounded fear they may have about being terminated from treatment if they divulge recurrence of use.

If a patient states that they are feeling punished for having more frequent visits during recurrence of use, it may help to first empathize with concerns and then reframe the change in treatment plans as a goal toward well-being as opposed to punishment. Utilization of motivational interviewing may be helpful if the patient is still ambivalent about recovery. It is crucial for a provider to have a nonjudgmental approach toward relapses, both past and present. Subconscious criticism, even in the form of subtle body language, can promote denial or reliance on more primitive defense mechanisms in a patient and lead to poorer treatment outcomes, especially if the patient has a harsh superego or difficulty with trusting others.

Previous recurrence of use may lead some patients to think they are a lost cause and lack the willpower and discipline that might be needed for recovery. Internalizing this belief is characteristic of patients with complicated SUD histories. It is important to modify a patient's internal process and remind them that it is not solely willpower or motivation that determines the ability to improve, but also coping and relapse prevention skills, which can be taught through any type of therapy, but especially cognitive-behavioral therapy.

How Do You Find a Balance of Boundaries With the Patient?

Finding the right balance in setting boundaries can be a challenge in a busy schedule, and it requires being mindful of the patient’s perspective while simultaneously acknowledging a patient’s subconscious need for structure to meet treatment goals.

It was important in Ms Verona’s case to validate her struggle with circumstances in her life. After all, the social determinants of health (ie, social, behavioral, and environmental factors) are a predominant influence on treatment outcomes.

 In addition, it is important to acknowledge the role of untreated ADHD (like in Ms Verona’s case) in reducing recovery success.

 At the same time, the medical ethics concept of justice should also be considered. Although justice in this situation may apply to acknowledging Ms Verona’s barriers to care, it may also expose the caveats of this approach since other waiting patients were affected by the patient’s tardiness. A provider is tasked with collectively benefiting all of their patients, treating all with equity and making accommodations where necessary, and without putting 1 patient at risk at expense of another.

In this case, did the boundary-setting change the course of Ms Verona’s clinical treatment? Yes. Would it have been better without it? Not necessarily. Part of the treatment frame is for both physician and patient to be accessible, at a mutually convenient time. Reneging on appropriate boundaries may distort or enable certain expectations of the patient, which can undermine the patient’s perceived responsibility in treatment, reduce the patient’s ability to problem-solve, and lead to the approach that the physician drives the treatment, instead of the dyad making a shared and mutual responsibility. The physician can communicate these messages with empathy and genuine concern in the hopes that the patient will adopt that responsibility. In the case of mitigating overdoses—a poorly understood field—it is essential to know if the patient is using secondary substances outside the opioid being the target of treatment. Secondary substance use significantly increases risk of overdose.

From a larger perspective, a physician’s taking of the alternate approach can contribute to burnout and distress, and potentially adversely affecting outcomes for the other patients. Thus, boundaries can be a mechanism of protection for both the patient and the physician.

Triple Threat of Death: Suicide, Unintentional Overdoses, and COVID-19

Although there is growing literature about how patient 

 can impact physicians, there is a lack of data particularly on how substance overdose may impact a physician’s mental well-being. The lack of data on overdoses and how to cope with them is further compounded by the problem that busy schedules or shift work may inadvertently reduce the physician’s ability to access resources for support while the physician also thinks that “I must carry on.”

In addition, it would be important to differentiate how suicide and overdose are not necessarily the same. Overdoses are not always done with the intention of taking one’s life. In fact, most overdoses are accidental, but ultimately occur due to overestimated tolerance, unknown ingestion, or increasing amounts taken during stressful/inciting events. In 2014, only 12% of drug overdoses were intentional according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

 Although the percentage of intentional overdoses is the minority, another thing to consider is whether clinician perception of guilt is more intense if the overdose is intentional. A physician can be vulnerable to guilt for not effectively being able to treat a patient’s addiction or form a close enough relationship to know of their usage—even if the patient knowingly did not disclose use. Then there is the question of whether some severe addictive disorders could be considered like a “terminal illness,” where a clinician may feel that no matter how many treatment approaches have been tried, it is a matter of “not if, but when” in regards to either overdose or a chronic decompensation toward death.

Although we have seen that doctors who hear about their patients overdosing may actually reduce the amount of their opioid prescribing,

 mental health clinicians may be affected in a somewhat different capacity, as their role is also tied inevitably into also treating comorbid depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. The COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated this problem, as the estimated prevalence of suicidal ideation today is higher in comparison to the prevalence prepandemic.

If a clinician’s natural tendency to do more and become more hypervigilant following the loss of a patient, it is noteworthy to mention that most physicians suffer from burnout at one point in their life. A cross-sectional study was able to demonstrate that increases in suicidal ideation endorsement were significantly correlated with physician burnout rates.

 Considering that overdoses can be as lethal as suicides, it would be a fair but unproven assumption that it would also similarly contribute to physician burnout.

We believe further research is necessary to understand the many ways in which patient overdoses are affecting physicians, as well as developing more efficient strategies and support for dealing with the aftermath. 

is an associate professor and addiction-boarded faculty at Harris Health System in the Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Baylor College of Medicine. He is Director of Harris Health Substance Addiction Treatment Program and Associate Program Director for Baylor College of Medicine Addiction Fellowship Program. 

is currently a resident in psychiatry at Baylor College of Medicine. 

 is an associate professor in the Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, as well as the Ben Taub Adult Outpatient Services director and the medical director of the Stabilization, Treatment & Rehabilitation (STAR) Program for Psychosis, also at Baylor College of Medicine. She also serves on the 

1. Ruskin R, Sakinofsky I, Bagby RM, et al. 

Impact of patient suicide on psychiatrists and psychiatric trainees.

2. Plakun EM, Tillman JG. The impact of patient suicide on clinicians. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/impact-patient-suicide-clinicians

3. Rudd RA, Aleshire N, Zibbell JE, Gladden M. Increases in drug and opioid overdose deaths - United States, 2000–2014. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Accessed September 12, 2022. 

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6450a3.htm

Trends and Geographic Patterns in Drug and Synthetic Opioid Overdose Deaths - United States, 2013-2019.

Relapse prevention and the five rules of recovery.

6. Williams N, Bossert N, Chen Y, et al. 

Influence of social determinants of health and substance use characteristics on persons who use drugs pursuit of care for hepatitis C virus infection.

Adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorders and its correlates in patients with opioid dependence: an exploratory study.

8. Austin AE, Proescholdbell SK, Creppage KE, Asbun A. 

Characteristics of self-inflicted drug overdose deaths in North Carolina.

Opioid prescribing decreases after learning of a patient's fatal overdose.

Suicide, self-harm and suicidal ideation during COVID-19: a systematic review.

11. Menon NK, Shanafelt TD, Sinsky CA, et al. 

Association of physician burnout with suicidal ideation and medical errors.

Articles

My Patient Overdosed and Now I Feel Guilty… 

 Tales of the Clinic: The Art of Psychiatry

, we discuss a patient who was construed as difficult to manage by multiple standards and elicited strong feelings from the treatment team. Ms Grant is a 29-year-old female with a history of alcohol use disorder (AUD) and complicated alcohol withdrawal. This case presentation spans 4 years and highlights the importance of behavior shaping and personality trait management to achieve stability. The focus is treating patients who are at risk of being perceived as “less than likeable, disruptive, and uncooperative.”

, Ms Grant describes her life as wrought with chronic anxiety and depression, with a frequent desire to self-medicate with alcohol. Her story includes multiple rehabilitation programs, inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations, and suicide attempts in the context of alcohol use. Borderline and antisocial traits seemed to influence her clinical presentation. She became well-known to the clinic and hospital staff for one incident that involved her throwing a shoe directly at a police officer’s face.

Social and family history was significant for intergenerational 

, involving her mother, father, and maternal grandfather. Ms Grant relates fond memories of her father, yet reports a childhood dominated by physical abuse and neglect, with the notable absence of her mother. She struggled in school and had suspensions and behavioral problems. Ms Grant became pregnant at 17 years of age and dropped out of school. Her partner left during her pregnancy, so she had to stay with her father.

Substance use and psychiatric history started early, with her first drink during her high school freshman year. She describes peers and boyfriends, whom she shared drinks with, as the support system she never got from family. She abstained from alcohol with her first pregnancy but developed postpartum depression and relapsed when her child turned 5 months old. The stressors of raising her child alone exacerbated feelings of 

. Family support was limited, and her romantic relationships did not last long because of alcohol-associated behaviors. Ms Grant had her second child at the age of 20 while in a verbally and physically abusive relationship. Child protective services were involved. When she was 26, her two children were taken away and placed under a cousin’s care; the relationship ended as well.

Her treatment course included striking, intense episodes of intoxication with agitation and suicidality. One involved being verbally aggressive towards employees and customers while intoxicated at a gas station. In the emergency department, declarations of suicidal ideations, a blood alcohol level > 300 mg/dl and a history of complicated withdrawals led to inpatient hospitalization. She was discharged back to outpatient care, having consistently denied suicidality when no longer intoxicated, and declined transfer to a rehabilitation program at the time.

The second incident involved being caught stealing a wallet from another patient in the clinic. Ms Grant denied the theft despite confrontation, so police were called. The police asked to search Ms Grant’s backpack, but she escalated, cursed, and swung at the officers. This led to a physical scuffle in the psychiatrist’s office, that ultimately culminated in Ms Grant sustaining scratches and bruises. She was handcuffed, brought into police custody for refusing to comply with the search, and subsequently charged and incarcerated for a week.

The psychiatrist felt ongoing empathy for the patient struggling with anxiety and alcohol use disorder who had no one else for support. At the same time, it was a difficult decision on whether to continue treatment following the 

. Despite a strong desire to maintain a working relationship that had lasted for years, there was a sense of disappointment, and even anger, towards the dishonest and illegal behaviors that directly affected other patients. There were concerns about the potential for further covert theft or altercations if she were to continue treatment in the clinic. In addition, the psychiatrist had vivid, uncomfortable memories of the office scuffle.

Yet, Ms Grant, just like many with co-occurring disorders, was at very high risk of acute decompensation with perceived abandonment, which cessation of treatment would have been to her. The psychiatrist considered evaluating the decision-making process from a harm-reduction approach. If Ms Grant were to no longer receive treatment in the clinic, she would likely decompensate, with possible increases in aggressive, antisocial behaviors, and substance use. The psychiatrist felt sharing and processing this case with other colleagues was helpful, especially regarding countertransference.

Another consideration was that Ms Grant, as a woman, faced unique challenges to obtaining substance use treatment. 

Women are less likely to seek treatment for AUD

, and multiple barriers have been identified among women compared to men, including gender stereotype roles and societal expectations, even though women are more predisposed to medical complications from alcohol use.

 Women face gaps in employment, economic challenges, and more parental responsibilities compared to men.

 Along with logistic barriers to treatment including transportation issues, limited childcare resources and insurance, and fear of losing children to child protective services, women are more likely than men to attribute alcohol use disorder to character flaws rather than to genetic disposition.

 With these pressures and beliefs, the fact that women have lower rates of substance use treatment compared to men is unsurprising.

Fortunately, recent research indicates that the gender gap of AUD has been narrowing,

 with studies indicating higher satisfaction in women-only treatment programs. Ongoing challenges include limited access to these types of programs and the necessity of further research to identify the effects on engagement and response to treatment.

A Love Letter to the Patient-Physician Relationship

Roberto D. Sanchez, DO; Benjamin Li, MD; Nidal Moukaddam, MD, PhD

Ultimately, considering all these factors, the psychiatrist decided to allow Ms Grant to continue clinic treatment, despite reservations from the clinical staff. They worked through these feelings of anger towards Ms Grant, which was helpful not only for a sense of closure for the psychiatrist and to help promote setting treatment boundaries, but also to help Ms Grant identify the consequences of her actions through behavioral chain analysis. It also helped to visualize that despite all that had happened, Ms Grant was doing “the best that she could,” relying on her limited coping skills, unfortunately stunted by 

. This step is essential to avoid judging the patient from a moral standpoint, where maladaptive or disruptive behaviors are viewed as entirely volitional. With this approach, work was able to resume, with her goals largely revolving around maintaining employment to regain custody of her children, and maintaining her current relationship.

The treatment team and Ms Grant’s deeper understanding of her own motivations and 

 served as a catalyst towards treatment adherence and sobriety. She had chronic difficulty trusting and building new relationships, including those with mental health providers. This issue could be compounded by the concept that patients with substance use disorder (SUD) and personality disorders have often encountered judgmental stances and behaviors, even if subtle or unconscious, from healthcare providers. Bias against patients with SUD, legal histories, and personality disorders can occur easily, especially when the patient is perceived to be “behaving badly.”

Organizationally, clinics are rarely set up with enough support to manage severe personality pathology and navigate psychosocial stressors stemming from complex addiction histories. As the development of AUD is complex and multifactorial, treatment is variable and has to incorporate multiple contributing factors including psychological factors, genetics, personality traits, traumatic events, and family dynamics.

 Research indicates some benefits of regular attendance of Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, but this may not be a treatment that works for everyone.

 Project MATCH, sponsored by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism compared 3 different types of therapies and found some positive results with each therapy modality, implying that multiple therapeutic approaches can be utilized in addition to medications.

Support for treating physicians and therapists is essential, as patient relapses and failed treatment trials can contribute to feelings of helplessness, anger, and frustration for both patient and treatment provider

 Identifying this in our own self, as well as any subconscious biases, may provide the space to combat the reactions that come with our countertransference and redirect attention towards meeting the patient’s needs

On a biological level, typologies and classifications have been developed to further classify the development and presentations of 

. Ms Grant’s family history, early onset of alcohol use, and history of legal problems correspond with Cloninger type II alcoholism, which has increased genetic predisposition compared to type I.

Cloninger type I alcoholism is typically associated with adult-onset and harm-avoidance behaviors. Differences in personality traits may underscore drinking motivation; type I alcoholism associates alcohol use with anxiety reduction, while type II corresponds to sensation-seeking behaviors. Neurobiological differences between alcoholism subtypes (serotonin levels, monoamine oxidase activities) are also known. However, the type II subset, under the Stockholm study, was found more commonly in men compared to women, whereas type I affects both genders equally. Identifying topology helps clinicians conceptualize a patient’s presentation, anticipate treatment needs, and may help guide medication selection. For example, off-label use of ondansetron works better for early-onset.

 Patients treated with sertraline may respond better if they have less severe AUD.

Personalized treatment plans work best and should include medication in conjunction with psychotherapy. Naltrexone has the benefit of different routes of administration; intramuscular formulation leads to improved compliance/better outcomes compared to oral. Acamprosate, a hepatically safe option, can help increase time to relapse; however, 3 times daily administration may deter adherence. Disulfiram, an example of aversive therapy, can provide physical discomfort to curb drinking, but effectiveness is limited by poor compliance and risk of induced hepatitis/psychosis. Of note, Ms Grant had already tried all of the FDA-approved options for AUD treatment with little success or tolerability.

Thus, off-label medication was considered. Off-label medications for AUD mirror our understanding of the neurobiology of alcohol use. Varenicline (effects on nicotinic acetylcholine receptor), baclofen (GABA receptors), and ondansetron (serotonin 5-HT

 receptor antagonist), are just a few of the many suggested potential treatments given the complex effect of alcohol on the neural pathways.

 Ms Grant was eventually started on topiramate as further studies report improvement of drinking outcomes and quality of life with adjunct therapy with topiramate compared to placebo.

 The addition of topiramate, with an off-label indication, helped reduce Ms Grant’s cravings and days of heavy drinking. The risks of inadequate treatment of AUD, including frequent rehospitalizations, emergency room visits, and further hepatic injury from drinking, were considered much more dire than off-label potential side effects.

The efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for cravings has been sparse, and use for AUD does not follow American Psychiatric Association guidelines; however, studies have also indicated that patients with mental health conditions are more vulnerable to substance use. It is not uncommon to have a comorbid mental health disorder and substance use. Depressive and anxiety symptoms can also stem from alcohol use.

In addition, research indicates that the chronic use of alcohol, repeat periods of abstinence, and withdrawal results in changes in the prefrontal–striatal–limbic (PSL) circuit, which plays a significant role in emotion regulation, decision making, and modulating reward and stress.

 Therefore, the role of antidepressants on serotonin may have potential effects on obsessional thoughts and impulsivity with chronic alcohol use.

 Open discussions with patients regarding current availability of medications and setting realistic expectations of the effects of medications may mitigate the frustrations arising from continued cravings, a common complaint in SUD patients, and counteract the belief that medications alone lead to remission.

When a patient walks out of the office, one question lingers, 

? This may especially be the case in AUD treatment. AUD is complex, multifactorial, and treatment includes taking into consideration biological, psychological, and socioenvironmental factors. We must gently process and elicit the details of one’s life that they might be the most shameful of, in order to address the deeper underlying issues. Identifying our own defenses and countertransference can potentially improve the therapeutic alliance. The presence of personality disorders can also provide an additional challenge while balancing limited resources and constraints a patient may also have that prevent them from utilizing these options. Thankfully, in addition to off-label options, there are 3 FDA approved medications to treat AUD, though they remain woefully underused. 

There are many patients with stories like Ms Grant; however, with prodding, patience, and exploration, positive outcomes can be achieved. Lastly, systemic and organizational structures ought to take into account the complex treatment needs for SUD, and thoughtfully target resources.

Three years after the office scuffle, the outlook has been much brighter; Ms Grant has found stable and supportive housing and has been in remission from alcohol use for the past 2 years. She lives with her husband and cat and attends online 12-step groups. She clearly recalls the struggles she went through during treatment and uses that to prevent her from drinking again. While her past struggles may have been a reason to abandon hope, she is grateful that neither she, nor her psychiatrist, gave up. Her psychiatrist also realizes that while complex cases can be challenging, they also include the most meaningful work and lead to the most personal growth and satisfaction.

psychiatry resident at the Baylor College of Medicine.

is an associate professor and addiction-boarded faculty at Harris Health System in the Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Baylor College of Medicine.

1. Agabio R, Pisanu C, Luigi Gessa G, Franconi F. 

Sex difference in alcoholism: who is at a greater risk for development of alcoholic complication?

3. Epstein EE, Menges D. Women and addiction. In: McCrady BS, Epstein EE (eds). 

4. Lale R, Sklar M, Wooldridge J, Sarkin A. 

Gender congruence moderates beliefs about the causes of alcohol dependence and major depression.

Treatment interventions for women with alcohol use disorder.

Psychodynamic psychiatry in Clinical Practice

7. Cloninger CR, Sigvardsson S, Bohman M. 

Type I and type II alcoholism: an update.

8. Johnson BA, Roache JD, Javors MA, et al. 

Ondansetron for reduction of drinking among biologically predisposed alcoholic patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Sertraline in the treatment of co‐occurring alcohol dependence and posttraumatic stress disorder. 

Anticraving therapy for alcohol use disorder: a clinical review.

11. Johnson BA, Ait-Daoud N, Akhtar FZ, Ma JZ. 

Oral topiramate reduces the consequences of drinking and improves the quality of life of alcohol-dependent individuals: a randomized controlled trial.

Neuroplasticity and predictors of alcohol recovery.

Treating patients who may be perceived as “unlikeable” can be difficult. 

To Treat or Not to Treat? The Conundrum of Likeability

Tales From the Clinic: The Art of Psychiatry,

 we cover an intriguing case of dual substance use super-imposed on mood, anxiety, and trauma clinical picture. A significant challenge for this group of patients is the need for patient, methodical, consistent care to unravel the complex multifaceted triggers and perpetuating factors for continued maladaptive behaviors. The case description spans years of treatment and, while the details may seem sensational, they reflect the reality of what the addiction treatment clinic team encounters. In addition, there is much difficulty in hearing and processing patient accounts of trauma, which could lead to physician burnout.

“Ms Martin” is a 45-year-old female with bipolar disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and suspected borderline personality disorder. She was transferred to the substance use disorders clinic by another psychiatrist after a diagnosis of opioid use disorder was obvious. At the time of her transfer, she was involved in prostitution to finance her roughly 25 tablets of acetaminophen and hydrocodone daily. Her opioid use disorder history had a protracted course, with her first exposure to prescription opioids at the age of 16 following a significant injury requiring surgical intervention. Her longest lifetime period of sobriety was 2 years.

Her immediate environment was not conducive to recovery, as she lived in a trailer with a male roommate who had mutual acquaintances that provided pain pills. In addition, Ms Martin engaged in sexual activity with the roommate in exchange for opioids. As time progressed, the relationship became physically abusive; she left after her roommate tried to hit her with a vacuum cleaner when she “didn’t do a good job cleaning the trailer.” At the time, she had been in treatment for 1 year, was started in medication-assisted therapy (MAT), and had been prescribed buprenorphine. She moved into an apartment with her mother, which greatly reduced access to opioids. She responded very well to MAT, with an absence of significant relapses as evidenced by the drug screenings during her monthly visits.

Three years into treatment, Ms Martin met a new boyfriend. Her urine drug screen (UDS) resulted positive for amphetamine. He provided her with substances that boosted her energy and aided in weight loss. She was not fully aware of what she was taking, but she thought it might have been amphetamine since it came in a “large jar with many capsules.” Testing verified the presence of methamphetamine.

These results were shared with Ms Martin, to her genuine surprise, and she expressed earnest motivation to stop methamphetamine use. Unfortunately, over the next year, she eventually met criteria for stimulant (methamphetamine) use disorder. This paralleled toxic developments in her relationship. She described a continued strong sexual attachment to her partner, and she remained intimate with him despite knowledge that he was simultaneously sexually active with her mother. She later bashfully admitted engaging in group intercourse with her partner and mother. During intercourse she described her partner’s derogatory and sadistic tendencies, which she felt she “deserved.”

Eventually, she developed disgust toward him. This resulted in an internal conflict because while she described feeling revolted by him, she simultaneously experienced severe loneliness and feelings of abandonment when he did not give her attention. This fueled further methamphetamine use as she wanted to be “skinny and pretty.”

The ongoing sexual relationship between her partner and mother resulted in significant tension within the apartment they all shared. On multiple occasions, Ms Martin described anxiety that her partner and mother were colluding against her. Methamphetamine use may have intensified these feelings. Although at times she expressed a desire to leave, she felt she had nowhere to go. Her partner contributed to paying bills, which further complicated her situation.

For the next year, Ms Martin continued to express significant ambivalence about her relationship. She recognized how the situation placed a strain on her relationship with her mother, yet she simultaneously feared the rejection, abandonment, and loneliness that would result from a breakup. She described symptoms of anxiety and sadness when away from her partner, and he was using methamphetamine pills as a tool to control her. She compared her “love-hate” relationship with her significant other with that of her relationship with the methamphetamine pills.

In addition to work in building Ms Martin’s feelings of self-worth and autonomy, a motivational interviewing style was utilized to help her resolve some of her ambivalence toward the relationship. Although she voiced much more change talk to end the relationship, compared to sustain talk, she had difficulty committing to ending the relationship.

Due to the alarming rate of opioid overdoses secondary to fentanyl, clinicians and those struggling with substance use are becoming aware that the product purchased is not always as marketed. Anecdotal reports of increasing concomitant opioid and amphetamine use abound, but the condition is not well understood, nor systematically studied. In the case of this patient, confirmatory test showed methamphetamine, whereas she believed she was getting amphetamine or methylphenidate; she may have inadvertently gained access to a supply of methamphetamine.

Currently, there are no US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments for methamphetamine use disorder. Some studies suggest the use of bupropion, naltrexone, and mirtazapine may have some limited efficacy in 

 In addition to treating Ms Martin’s SUD, the team addressed co-occurring mood and anxiety symptoms (she had witnessed her brother injured in a car accident). Her initial regimen included duloxetine and aripiprazole for depression, anxiety, and mood stabilization. Bupropion was not tried due to her concern of its risk of exacerbating her anxiety, and she declined mirtazapine due to its risk of weight gain because she already struggled with her body image. After Ms Martin expressed concerns that aripiprazole may be contributing to her weight gain, she was switched to cariprazine with the perceived potential benefit of weight-neutrality, since a desire for weight loss was a contributing factor to continued methamphetamine use. Another potential benefit of cariprazine includes preliminary interest in the D3 receptor affecting addictive behaviors.

Methylphenidate and lisdexamfetamine were other pharmacological therapies considered for treatment, given that Ms Martin has shown good response to replacement therapy such as buprenorphine. However, agonist substitution, while an excellent harm reduction approach, still faces stigma and resistance in clinical practice, especially for stimulant use.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, 40.4% of adults using methamphetamine within the last year also misused prescription opioids, and 16.9% used heroin between 2015 and 2018. In the United States there has been an increase in overdose deaths and hospital admissions involving 

 After limited availability of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine due to regulations, synthesis returned partially back to using phenyl-2-propanone (P2P).

 Due to increased purity and potency, there is concern that the P2P formulation may be contributing to addiction.

 This is something to keep in mind when treating a patient diagnosed with both opioid and stimulant use disorders. Unfortunately, there is no guideline as to whether MAT should be discontinued if a co-occurring substance use is still ongoing.

Ms Martin maintained abstinence from opioids while on MAT, but continued to use methamphetamine pills. The treatment team wondered if she was truly benefiting from the current level of care, and considered tapering off buprenorphine and referring her to a residential treatment program or a methadone clinic. However, Ms Martin did not have the financial resources for the latter and, in regards to the former, expressed anxiety and fear about being separated from her dog as well as the feeling of “being locked up.” Thus, her treatment team sought to maximize psychosocial support and psychotherapy interventions, but she had stopped going to group therapy and declined virtual therapy sessions.

With continued work, despite ongoing significant trauma, interpersonal conflict, financial instability, and continued methamphetamine use, Ms Martin increased engagement in treatment and is adherent with all medication management visits. The treatment team ultimately decided not to taper off the buprenorphine, given her gradual progress toward treatment goals was a product of a harm-reduction approach. She could have benefited from inpatient rehabilitation. However, reluctance to go into rehabilitation is common in patients with SUD. Additionally, most states do not allow involuntary inpatient SUD treatment as they do for involuntary psychiatric care, so patients have to suffer legal repercussion to be forced to attend court-ordered rehabilitation. Finally, many residential treatment programs may not be able to accommodate patients on MAT, as some are not yet comfortable with a harm-reduction approach or medical model of addictions treatment.

This case highlights several clinical and psychotherapeutic challenges that may arise in the treatment of substance use disorders. First, it is important to look for the presence of significant trauma in a patient with several barriers to care preventing access to psychotherapy, as there is a known link between a history of trauma and the development of 

 In this case, Ms Martin was a victim of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. Unfortunately, there are limited standardized or manualized approaches to addressing trauma in patients with substance use disorders. When trauma informed therapy is available, access is often limited.

Similarly, another significant factor contributing to Ms Martin’s ambivalence about leaving the relationship was the codependency that existed with her partner.

Medication management visits typical to community psychiatry practice are likely not of sufficient length to address complex issues involving psychopharmacology and psychotherapy. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the development of telepsychiatry, many patients do not have the technological means to make these visits and may not have private and safe living spaces where they can share sensitive information.

Additionally, drug use is perpetuated by perceived benefits, and cessation of use does not happen unless the patient appreciates the negative impact of substance use on their lives. When Ms Martin finally understood she was taking methamphetamine, it created an opportunity to see its use as a problem instead of an agent for cognitive enhancement/weight loss.

Methamphetamine is commonly used to improve sexual function. In fact, 

 has described methamphetamine as increasing sexual desire, pleasure, reducing the refractory period between intercourse, exacerbating impulsiveness, and impacting behavioral inhibition.

 In this case, it would be worth further exploring that idea, as the patient’s partner was supplying methamphetamine and requesting particular sexual demands.

A major challenge in the field continues to be the lack of available effective pharmacologic treatments for stimulant use disorders. Contingency management in combination with community reinforcement is a proven effective behavioral treatment for stimulant use disorders, as confirmed by 

 However, there are considerable barriers to implementing contingency management at this time, including public stigma and limited Medicaid support.

Lastly, in the context of treatment, it is often easy to feel patients are to blame for maladaptive, promiscuous, or risky behaviors. Countertransference feelings or bias may hinder patients getting expanded treatment options, especially if they display anger and hostility upon exploration of sensitive topics in session.

However, despite significant barriers to care, the presence of trauma, and ongoing struggles with stimulant use, patients demonstrate resilience and often continue to express desire for full recovery. Cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, mindfulness, and psychodynamic therapies are all useful in treatment, but the level of complexity of patients with SUD often means a prolonged course of treatment with multiple modalities needed.

is a PGY-4 general psychiatry resident in the Menninger Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences at Baylor College of Medicine. He plans to pursue a fellowship in Addiction Psychiatry after graduation.

is an associate professor and addiction-boarded faculty at Harris Health System in the Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Baylor College of Medicine. 

 is associate professor, Menninger Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, and Ben Taub Adult Outpatient Services director, medical director, Stabilization, Treatment & Rehabilitation (STAR) Program for Psychosis. She also serves on

1. Colfax GN, Santos GM, Das M, et al Mirtazapine to reduce methamphetamine use: a randomized controlled trial. 

2. Elkashef AM, Rawson RA, Anderson AL, et al. Bupropion for the treatment of methamphetamine dependence. 

3. Trivedi MH, Walker R, Ling W, et al. Bupropion and naltrexone in methamphetamine use disorder. 

4. Jones CM, Underwood N, Compton W. Increases in methamphetamine use among heroin treatment admissions in the United States, 2008-2017. 

5. Maxwell JC, Brecht M-L. Methamphetamine: Here we go again? 

6. Dolatshahi B, Farhoudian A, Falahatdoost M, et al. A qualitative study of the relationship between methamphetamine abuse and sexual dysfunction in male substance abusers. 

7. Wiechelt SA, Straussner SLA. Introduction to the special issue: Examining the relationship between trauma and addiction. 

8. Colfax G, Shoptaw S. The methamphetamine epidemic: Implications for HIV prevention and treatment. 

9. De Crescenzo F, Ciabattini M, D’Alò GL, et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial interventions for individuals with cocaine and amphetamine addiction: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. 

10. McMahan VM, Kingston S, Newman A, et al. Interest in reducing methamphetamine and opioid use among syringe services program participants in Washington State. 

A patient presents with multiple substance use disorders super-imposed on mood and anxiety disorders. Where does a clinician even begin?

Benjamin Li, MD

Articles

My Patient Overdosed and Now I Feel Guilty…

To Treat or Not to Treat? The Conundrum of Likeability

I Had to Use