This is "how" Nurses divert drugs for their own use.

Nurses General Nursing

Published

This is the "how" Nurses divert drugs for their own use.

The extent to which this goes on depends on availability. In the hospital setting, Nurses who are in advanced stages of addiction pick work settings where availability is certain, frequent, and a sure thing every shift they work. Oncology is the most desired setting for obvious reasons, but when needing narcotics, any setting where they are given is good enough.

The addicted Nurse receives his/her assignment, even "bartars" with his/her peers to "switch" patients so that she receives the ones who have orders for narcotics. She/he starts his/her shift by "reviewing" his/her patients med sheets to identify sources of obtaining addictive drugs. This Nurse looks in particular for poly-pharmaceutical orders so he/she can "bait and switch" at his/her own behest. The Nurse then "assesses" the condition of the patients and determines which ones are "confused", which ones are deeply sedated, which ones would be the least likely to know meds were being played with.

The Nurse then takes the narcotic, signs it out, and intends to use it for himself or herself. If the same patient has some other drug like Benadryl, Vistaril, Ativan, that is what is given in lieu of the narcotic. If a patient is on a Morphine or Demerol infusion the Nurse goes to the room, removes the 50cc syringe, having already emptied out a 30cc vial of 0.9normal saline for injection bottle, withdraws the drug, injects it into the empty saline bottle and replaces the 50cc syringe volume with the withdrawn 30cc of saline so the volume remains the same. The same technique is used with 50cc bags of narcotic infusions.

Nurses who are "stockpiling" narcotics for their own use come to work wearing a Lab coat, smock, or longsleeved, deep-pocketed smock. Morphine, Demerol, and Dilaudid carpujets are easily hidden in clothing, under the arch of the foot in the shoe, or in any body orifice that will accommodate them.

The Nurse often "forgets" to document the narcotics supposedly given, on the patient's med sheet in the chart. The Nurse who is an advanced stage of addiction diverts narcotics and uses them while on duty. They are injected in the thigh muscles on a trip to the bathroom at break times or anytime that's convenient. A bandaid or two over the injection site assures no blood leakage onto the pants uniform.

Pill forms of addictive drugs: Vicodin, Valium, Ativan, Xanax, Librium, Oxycontin, Oxycodone, MS Contin, are easily "palmed" and dropped into the pocket and taken later on that break to the bathroom.......or stockpiled, and hidden at home later.

Clothing with pockets also serves as a hiding place for needles, syringes, tourniquets, vials, carpujets, if needed at home or on the bathroom break. On a busy, shortstaffed, highly stressful unit, all of these things are easy to come by, and easily hidden.

In late stages of addictive disease the Nurse is NOT thinking about his/her illustrious career, the consequences that are inevitable, let alone how it will affect family, career, - or the patient and the people with whom they work. This Nurse needs that "high" and will go to any length to get it. The addicted Nurse is NOT necessarily the "most suspicious" looking one of all, but is more likely to be the most admired, most excellent Nurse on the Unit, and in fact is the least likely Nurse expected.

Addiction is no respector of person, position, race, color, creed.

There are few, if any, State Boards of Nursing that do not offer a diversion/rehabilitation program for such Nurses. However, if it is discovered that the Nurse is diverting for the purpose of sale and distribution solely, or along with personal use, that Nurse is NOT eligible for these programs according to the law.

Bonnie Creighton,RN, Minnesota

Agnus: Have you tried looking up the DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) under the govt heading in the phone book or on the internet? I would think they would have an interest in this (particularly at the pharmacy level) or just contact the narcotics unit of your local police dept. Just an idea.

Agnus: Of course, before you say or write a word, ask if they will honor your anonymity, otherwise, you may never work as a nurse again for the black listing.

I also disagree with the person who made the statement about condemning someone to he**. I have had personal contact with an addict whose mother was an alcoholic, as his father, and his brother committed suicide. Environment? What about genetics? We need to use some of the things brought out in these fancy "educations" we get. Why not do some research yourself? I researched the internet and that's how I learned about "serotonin syndrome". Knew somebody who came very close to dying b/c of "serotonin syndrome". Education hurts no one.

As for testing, random or otherwise, I do not trust the process. It was widely known while I was in the military, that when they started testing for HIV (along with their "random" drug testing) that the testing process was as F****d up as possible. They would label the samples with the wrong soldier's identifying data! So should I believe that the civilian process can not also be tainted or incompetent?

Specializes in OB.

I think one of the biggest problems in dealing with drug addicted/diverting nurses is administration's refusal to acknowlege it even whe presented with written complaints and observations from multiple coworkers. I've been in this situation, and when I persisted in my concerns was threatened with being written up as insubordinate when I refused to hold narcotics keys to a cabinet this nurse had equal access to. Signs were classic and unmistakeable, in both the employee and in patient's who were being deprived of their supposedly given narcotic, both subjectively and objectively. After going all the way up the nursing chain of command with no result, other than threats, it became necessary to take it outside the nursing chain to the medical ladder and that provider had to go all the way to the top administrator with paperwork for a report to the BON before action was taken.

Sadly, the individual was "encouraged" to simply quit, not offered any diversion program and lost her license permanently at her next job for narcotics diversion. Who knows if a last chance may have been missed?

i realize this thread ended about 6 years ago, but at the same time it is a timeless thread on a timeless subject, which is finding ways to alter one's consciousness (whether it be by riding a roller coaster, or vegging out in front of a movie, or by doing drugs).

here are some of my observations, in no particular order:

1) random tests might involve nurse managers or administrators who might, themselves, be using. They may not be diverting, but they may be using. Consequently, they are not very interested random drug testing, which may call attention to their own using. I have seen this for myself. It's like the situation in countries where law enforcement officers are corrupt - once the higher-ups are involved, it's very hard to root out corruption.

2) it can be a very difficult and lonely chore to take on drug diversion. criticism and judgments will come aplenty, often from users who disguise their defensive tactics as "high road" arguments. One such argument is saying "now that they are randomly drug testing, what's next? DNA scans?" A lot of this comes down to laziness on the part of the higher-ups. thye are pulling a good check - why rock the boat?

3) Certainly, random testing for pot across all levels all the way to the top would potentially show using on all levels. Even if the testing was confined to just the nursing staff, what administrator will want to lose a lot of good nurses because of having tested positive for pot? I have seen this happen. New owners came into a facility where I was working. They wanted to do drug testing. They were made to understand that if they drug tested, they'd lose a large percentage of their staff. They backed off.

One nurse who used was talked with by the administrator. the nurse said, "Go ahead and test me, but I will then show you prescriptions for everything I am positive for." (Incidentally, the place she worked for had little opportunity for diversion.)

So, if one is an administrator thinking of testing the nurses, one will have to contend with the fact that the testing will not root out all of the users, and will likely chase away some of the best personnel.

This concept is not often spoken about: The best personnel can be drug users.

4) Is there not a simple chemical test that can be randomly performed on liquid controlled substances to determine if these substances have been watered down? Like, take one drop, put it on a test strip and read the results? I would think that if the pharmacist announced that drugs were being watered down, and that there would be greatly increased scrutiny of the the drug movement int he med carts, that would certainly scare away a healthy percentage of the diverters. Certainly, liquid meds can be analyzed for purity. Maybe it is very expensive to do so. if expensive, then certainly having it be known that infrequent but certain tests will be performed randomly on the liquid drug stock could have a deterrent effect to a significant extent.

Countermeasures to drug diversion is a percentage game. a countermeasure is effective if it cuts down a few percentage points form drug diversion activity. Some will say that such-and-such a countermeasure "isn't going to work, If someone wants to divert badly enough, they find a way around it." True, but partially effective countermeasures separate the men from the boys, or the women from the girls. It shakes out the one's who aren't as motivated to use.

+ Add a Comment