French version of the addiction severity index (5th Edition): validity and reliability among Swiss opiate-dependent patients. French validation of the Addiction Severity Index.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to validate a French adaptation of the 5th version of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) instrument in a Swiss sample of illicit drug users. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: The participants in the study were 54 French-speaking dependent patients, most of them with opiates as the drug of first choice. Procedure: Analyses of internal consistency (convergent and discriminant validity) and reliability, including measures of test-retest and inter-observer correlations, were conducted. RESULTS: Besides good applicability of the test, the results on composite scores (CSs) indicate comparable results to those obtained in a sample of American opiate-dependent patients. Across the seven dimensions of the ASI, Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.42 to 0.76, test-retest correlations coefficients ranged from 0.48 to 0.98, while for CSs, inter-observer correlations ranged from 0.76 to 0.99. CONCLUSIONS: Despite several limitations, the French version of the ASI presents acceptable criteria of applicability, validity and reliability in a sample of drug-dependent patients.

Appropriateness of methadone maintenance treatment for opiate addiction: evaluation by an expert panel.

With some 30,000 dependent persons, opiate addiction constitutes a major public health problem in Switzerland. The Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) has long played a leading role in the prevention and treatment of opiate addiction and in research on effective means of containing the epidemic of opiate addiction and its consequences. Major milestones on that path have been the successive "Methadone reports" published by that Office and providing guidance on the care of opiate addiction with substitution treatment. In view of updating the recommendations for the appropriateness of substitution treatment for opiate addiction, in particular for the prescription of methadone, the FOPH commissioned a multi-component project involving the following elements. A survey of current attitudes and practices in Switzerland related to opiate substitution treatment Review of Swiss literature on methadone substitution treatment Review of international literature on methadone substitution treatment National Methadone Substitution Conference Multidisciplinary expert panel to evaluate the appropriateness of substitution treatment. The present report documents the process and summarises the results of the latter element above. The RAND appropriateness method (RAM) was used to distil from literature-based evidence and systematically formulated expert opinion, areas where consensus exist on the appropriateness (or inappropriateness) of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) and areas where disagreement or uncertainty persist and which should be further pursued. The major areas which were addressed by this report are Initial assessment of candidates for MMT Appropriate settings for initiation of MMT (general and special cases) Appropriateness of methadone supportive therapy Co-treatments and accompanying measures Dosage schedules and pharmacokinetic testing Withdrawal from MMT Miscellaneous questions Appropriateness of other (non-methadone) substitution treatment Summary statements for each of the above categories are derived from the panel meeting and presented in the report. In the "first round", agreement was observed for 31% of the 553 theoretical scenarios evaluated. The "second round" rating, following discussion of divergent ratings, resulted in a much higher agreement among panellists, reaching 53% of the 537 scenarios. Frank disagreement was encountered for 7% of all scenarios. Overall 49% of the clinical situations (scenarios) presented were considered appropriate. The areas where at least 50% of the situations were considered appropriate were "initial assessment of candidates for MMT", the "appropriate settings for initiation of MMT", the "appropriate settings for methadone supportive treatment" and "Appropriateness of other (non-methadone) substitution treatment". The area where there was the least consensus on appropriateness concerned "appropriateness of withdrawal from MMT" (6%). The report discusses the implications and limitations of the panel results and provides recommendations for the dissemination, application, and future use of the criteria for the appropriateness of MMT. The RAND Appropriateness Method proved to be an accepted and appreciated method to assess the appropriateness of methadone maintenance treatment for opiate addicts. In the next step, the results of the expert panel process must now be combined with those of the Swiss and international literature reviews and the survey of current attitudes and practices in Switzerland, to be synthesized into formal practice guidelines. Such guidelines should be disseminated to all concerned, promoted, used and rigorously evaluated for compliance and outcome.

Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) in general practice or in specialized centers: profile of patients in the Swiss Canton of Vaud.

We studied profile of patients (n=1782) treated in specialized centers and general practice (GP) enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) programs during 2001 in the Swiss Canton of Vaud. We found that GPs treated the majority of patients (76%). Specialized centers treated a higher proportion of patients with uncontrolled intravenous use of cocaine and heroin, and prescribed neuroleptics as concomitant medication three times more frequently than GPs. Patients treated in specialized centers were more likely to undergo screening for HIV, HBV, HCV, and receive complete HBV immunization. In conclusion, specialized centers are more likely to treat severely addicted patients and patients with a poor global assessment (physical, psychiatric, and social).

Efficacy of prescribed injectable diacetylmorphine in the Andalusian trial: Bayesian analysis of responders and non-responders according to a multi domain outcome index.

BACKGROUND The objective of this research was to evaluate data from a randomized clinical trial that tested injectable diacetylmorphine (DAM) and oral methadone (MMT) for substitution treatment, using a multi-domain dichotomous index, with a Bayesian approach. METHODS Sixty two long-term, socially-excluded heroin injectors, not benefiting from available treatments were randomized to receive either DAM or MMT for 9 months in Granada, Spain. Completers were 44 and data at the end of the study period was obtained for 50. Participants were determined to be responders or non responders using a multi-domain outcome index accounting for their physical and mental health and psychosocial integration, used in a previous trial. Data was analyzed with Bayesian methods, using information from a similar study conducted in The Netherlands to select a priori distributions. On adding the data from the present study to update the a priori information, the distribution of the difference in response rates were obtained and used to build credibility intervals and relevant probability computations. RESULTS In the experimental group (n = 27), the rate of responders to treatment was 70.4% (95% CI 53.287.6), and in the control group (n = 23), it was 34.8% (95% CI 15.354.3). The probability of success in the experimental group using the a posteriori distributions was higher after a proper sensitivity analysis. Almost the whole distribution of the rates difference (the one for diacetylmorphine minus methadone) was located to the right of the zero, indicating the superiority of the experimental treatment. CONCLUSION The present analysis suggests a clinical superiority of injectable diacetylmorphine compared to oral methadone in the treatment of severely affected heroin injectors not benefiting sufficiently from the available treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52023186.

Estimating national-level syringe availability to injecting drug users and injection coverage: Switzerland, 1996-2006.

BACKGROUND: Measuring syringe availability and coverage is essential in the assessment of HIV/AIDS risk reduction policies. Estimates of syringe availability and coverage were produced for the years 1996 and 2006, based on all relevant available national-level aggregated data from published sources. METHODS: We defined availability as the total monthly number of syringes provided by harm reduction system divided by the estimated number of injecting drug users (IDU), and defined coverage as the proportion of injections performed with a new syringe, at national level (total supply over total demand). Estimates of supply of syringes were derived from the national monitoring system, including needle and syringe programmes (NSP), pharmacies, and medically prescribed heroin programmes. Estimates of syringe demand were based on the number of injections performed by IDU derived from surveys of low threshold facilities for drug users (LTF) with NSP combined with the number of IDU. This number was estimated by two methods combining estimates of heroin users (multiple estimation method) and (a) the number of IDU in methadone treatment (MT) (non-injectors) or (b) the proportion of injectors amongst LTF attendees. Central estimates and ranges were obtained for availability and coverage. RESULTS: The estimated number of IDU decreased markedly according to both methods. The MT-based method (from 14,818 to 4809) showed a much greater decrease and smaller size of the IDU population compared to the LTF-based method (from 24,510 to 12,320). Availability and coverage estimates are higher with the MT-based method. For 1996, central estimates of syringe availability were 30.5 and 18.4 per IDU per month; for 2006, they were 76.5 and 29.9. There were 4 central estimates of coverage. For 1996 they ranged from 24.3% to 43.3%, and for 2006, from 50.5% to 134.3%. CONCLUSION: Although 2006 estimates overlap 1996 estimates, the results suggest a shift to improved syringe availability and coverage over time.

Opioid antagonist detoxification under anaesthesia versus traditional clonidine detoxification combined with an additional week of psychosocial support: a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: While detoxification under anaesthesia accelerates the detoxification procedure, there is a lack of randomised clinical trials evaluating its effectiveness compared to traditional detoxification procedures, and a lack of data on long-term abstinence. METHODS: Prospective randomised clinical trial. Analysis by intention to treat and per protocol. Setting: Specialised substance abuse unit in a psychiatric teaching hospital and an intensive care unit of a general hospital. Participants: Seventy patients with opiate mono-dependence requesting detoxification: 36 randomised to RODA (treatment as allocated received by 26) and 34 randomised to classical clonidine detoxification (treatment as allocated received by 21). Main outcome measures: Successful detoxification, safety and self-reported abstinence at 3, 6 and 12 months after detoxification. RESULTS: Socio-demographics were similar in both groups at baseline. No complications were reported during or after anaesthesia. According to the intention to treat analysis, 28/36 (78%) RODA patients and 21/34 (62%) of the clonidine group successfully completed the detoxification process (p=0.14). In the intention to treat analysis, 30% of RODA patients were abstinent after 3 months compared to 14% in the clonidine group (p=0.11). No difference was found at 6 and 12 months (both groups showed less than 5% abstinence after 12 months). The per-protocol analysis showed similar results with no statistical differences either for ASI mean scores or for the SF36 questionnaire. CONCLUSION: Although the detoxification success rate and abstinence after 3 months were slightly better for the RODA procedure compared to clonidine treatment, these differences were not statistically significant and disappeared completely after 6 and 12 months.

Ultra-rapid opiate detoxification using deep sedation and prior oral buprenorphine preparation: long-term results.

BACKGROUND: New methods of ultra-rapid opiate detoxification (URD) under intravenous sedation have been criticized because of limited data on safety and long-term follow-up. Premedication with buprenorphine has been advocated to improve safety by decreasing vomiting. Prior research has not explored URD in socially impaired patients. METHOD: Sixteen patients were detoxified with URD and prospectively evaluated over at least 30 months. Data of this procedure were compared with those of our previous study without buprenorphine preparation (Drug Alcohol Depend. 52(3) (1998) 243). The 16 patients were followed up by a general practitioner (GP) before and after URD. The GPs also supervised the 7-day course of buprenorphine treatment prescribed for the 16 patients prior to URD. RESULTS: During the procedure, only one episode of vomiting occurred instead of 13 out of 20 in our previous study. Post-procedure, only two patients experienced moderate withdrawal symptoms, such as persistent nausea, abdominal cramps and vomiting lasting from 24 to 48 h, in comparison with most patients in the previous study without buprenorphine. After a period of at least 30 months (36.0+/-6.38), the 16 patients were still alive and were regularly monitored by their GP. Only two of the 16 never relapsed after URD and reported total opiate abstinence. Fourteen patients relapsed; 12 of these were prescribed a licensed methadone substitution program and two were still using heroin. CONCLUSION: In this small sample, the data indicated that URD with buprenorphine preparation was safe and that it markedly decreased post-procedure morbidity. No patient died over a minimum 30-month follow-up period. Furthermore, the procedure was employed with socially impaired patients. In the long term, a few patients were still free of opiates, while the majority opted for a methadone maintenance program, showing that URD can serve as one possible step in a long-term treatment program.

Trends in morphine prescriptions, illicit morphine use and associated harms among regular injecting drug users in Australia

This paper examines population trends in morphine prescriptions in Australia, and contrasts them with findings from annual surveys with regular injecting drug users (IDU). Data on morphine prescriptions from 1995 to 2003 were obtained from the Drug Monitoring System (DRUMS) run by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Data collected from regular IDU as part of the Australian Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS) were analysed (2001-2004). The rate of morphine prescription per person aged 15-54 years increased by 89% across Australia between 1995 and 2003 (from 46.3 to 85.9 mg per person). Almost half (46%) of IDU surveyed in 2004 reported illicit morphine use, with the highest rates in jurisdictions where heroin was less available. Recent morphine injectors were significantly more likely to be male, unemployed, out of treatment and homeless in comparison to IDU who had not injected morphine. They were also more likely to have injected other pharmaceutical drugs and to report injection related problems. Among those who had injected morphine recently, the most commonly reported injecting harms were morphine dependence (38%), difficulty finding veins into which to inject (36%) and scarring or bruising (27%). Morphine use and injection is a common practice among regular IDU in Australia. In some cases, morphine may be a substitute for illicit heroin; in others, it may be being used to treat heroin dependence where other pharmacotherapies, such as methadone and buprenorphine, are perceived as being unavailable or undesirable by IDU. Morphine injection appears to be associated with polydrug use, and with it, a range of problems related to drug injection. Further research is required to monitor and reduce morphine diversion and related harms by such polydrug injectors.

Heroin-assisted treatment as a response to the public health problem of opiate dependence

Injection drug use (involving the injection of illicit opiates) poses serious public health problems in many countries. Research has indicated that injection drug users are at higher risk for morbidity in the form of HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis B and C, and drug-related mortality, as well as increased criminal activity. Methadone maintenance treatment is the most prominent form of pharmacotherapy treatment for illicit opiate dependence in several countries, and its application varies internationally with respect to treatment regulations and delivery modes. In order to effectively treat those patients who have previously been resistant to methadone maintenance treatment, several countries have been studying and/or considering heroin-assisted treatment as a complementary form of opiate pharmacotherapy treatment. This paper provides an overview of the prevalence of injection drug use and the opiate dependence problem internationally, the current opiate dependence treatment landscape in several countries, and the status of ongoing or planned heroin-assisted treatment trials in Australia, Canada and certain European countries.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of heroin detoxification methods in the Australian National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD)

This economic evaluation was part of the Australian National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD) project. Data from four trials of heroin detoxification methods, involving 365 participants, were pooled to enable a comprehensive comparison of the cost-effectiveness of five inpatient and outpatient detoxification methods. This study took the perspective of the treatment provider in assessing resource use and costs. Two short-term outcome measures were used-achievement of an initial 7-day period of abstinence, and entry into ongoing post-detoxification treatment. The mean costs of the various detoxification methods ranged widely, from AUD $491 (buprenorphine-based outpatient); to AUD $605 for conventional outpatient; AUD $1404 for conventional inpatient; AUD $1990 for rapid detoxification under sedation; and to AUD $2689 for anaesthesia per episode. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out using conventional outpatient detoxification as the base comparator. The buprenorphine-based outpatient detoxification method was found to be the most cost-effective method overall, and rapid opioid detoxification under sedation was the most costeffective inpatient method.

Cohort trends in age of initiation to heroin use

This paper examines gender differences and trends over time in the age of initiation to heroin use. Data from two large surveys: the Sydney component of the ANAIDUS, conducted in 1989, and the ASHIDU, conducted in 1994, were used to examine this issue. Together, these studies contained information on 1,292 individuals who identified themselves as heroin users. Results indicated that, while there were no significant gender differences in age of initiation to heroin use, there was a significant (p < 0.001) time trend in the mean age at which heroin was first used. Specifically, the mean age of first heroin use among individuals born during the interval 1940-1949 was 20.5 years while among those born during 1970-1979 the mean age of first heroin use was 16.5 years. These findings were confirmed by analyses of the National Household Survey. Further analysis of the ASHIDU data indicated that younger age of initiation to heroin use was associated with polydrug use, overdose and crime after the effects of duration of heroin use had been statistically controlled. These findings suggest that there has been both an increase in the willingness of young people to experiment with heroin and an increased availability of the drug over this time. In combination with evidence that there has been an increase in the amount of heroin being imported into Australia, and an increased demand for treatment for opiate dependence, these data suggest that Australia is experiencing an increase in the use of heroin, particularly among youth.

Role of maintenance treatment in opioid dependence

Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) involves the daily administration of the oral opioid agonist methadone as a treatment for opioid dependence-a persistent disorder with a substantial risk of premature death. MMT improves health and reduces illicit heroin use, infectious-disease transmission, and overdose death. However, its effectiveness is compromised if low maintenance doses of methadone (

Is ultra-rapid opioid detoxification a viable option in the treatment of opioid dependence?

Ultra-rapid opioid detoxification (UROD) involves the acceleration of opioid withdrawal hv administering thp opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone under general anaesthesia. There is evidence from uncontrolled and a few controlled studies that UROD accelerates opioid withdrawal and that it achieves high rates of completion of acute opioid withdrawal. However, there is clear evidence that the use of a general anaesthetic is not required to accelerate withdrawal or to achieve high rates of completion of acute opioid withdrawal. These goals can be achieved by using naltrexone or naloxone to accelerate withdrawal under light sedation, a procedure known as rapid opioid detoxification under sedation (ROD). There is also evidence that use of an opioid antagonist is not required to achieve a high rate of completion of acute opioid withdrawal. The mixed agonist-antagonist buprenorphine has achieved comparable rates of completion in similarly selected patients with fewer withdrawal symptoms. There is no evidence from controlled trials that either UROD or ROD increases the rate of abstinence from opioids 6 or 12 months after withdrawal. UROD and ROD may increase the number of patients who are inducted onto naltrexone maintenance (NM) therapy but extensive experience with NM therapy suggests that it only has a limited role in selected patients. Given the lack of evidence of substantially increased rates of abstinence, and the need for anaesthetists and high dependency beds, UROD has at best a very minor role in the treatment of a handful of opioid dependent patients who are unable to complete withdraw in any other way. ROD may have more of a role as one option for opioid withdrawal in well motivated patients who want to be rapidly inducted onto NM therapy or who want to enter other types of abstinence-oriented treatment.

Recent developments for smoking cessation and treatment of nicotine dependence

Nicotine is an addictive drug like heroin, amphetamine or cocaine. Addiction to tobacco leads to significant failure rates in programmes for smoking cessation. The alpha(4)beta(2) and alpha(7) nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) and CB1 cannabinoid receptors play an important role in nicotine addiction.

Optimizing heroin-assisted treatment (HAT): Assessment of the contribution of direct ethanol metabolites in identifying hazardous and harmful alcohol use

Heavy alcohol consumption may accelerate the progression of hepatitis C-related liver disease and/or limit efforts at antiviral treatment in opioid-dependent patients receiving heroin-assisted treatment (HAT). Our study aims to assess alcohol intake among HAT patients by self-reports compared to direct ethanol metabolites.