Success and failure at inpatient heroin detoxification

Outcome of inpatient opiate detoxification treatment in immigrants as compared to native Germans

Background

Immigration is a factor with effects on the course of substance abuse and treatment response, however there is little consistent data regarding outcome of inpatient opiate detoxification treatment in immigrants as compared to native patients.

Methods

Patient history and the success of current detoxification treatment were systematically documented in a multicenter study in Germany which included 10 psychiatric hospitals with specialized detoxification wards.

Results

Out of 893 patients, 240 (27%) had a migration history. We further analyzed the three main groups (German, n = 653; Turkish, n = 58; Russian origin, n = 103). There were significant differences between groups regarding sociodemographic data, drug history, treatment experience and success of current treatment. However, considering the younger age of patients with Russian origin, analysis of younger patients (< 31 years) detected only minor group differences. In multiple logistic regressions age and center showed statistically significant associations with all outcome variables (early dropout, achievement of drug-free urine screen, regular completion of detoxification treatment, and referral to further treatment), while (Russian) origin was associated only with premature termination of treatment.

Conclusion

Young men were the main problem group regardless of origin. Significant center effects raise doubts regarding results from monocenter research.

Alcohol detoxification completion, acceptance of referral to substance abuse treatment, and entry into substance abuse treatment among Alaska Native people

BACKGROUND

Little is known about factors associated with detoxification treatment completion and the transition to substance abuse treatment following detoxification among Alaska Native people. This study examined 3 critical points on the substance abuse continuum of care (alcohol detoxification completion, acceptance of referral to substance abuse treatment, entry into substance abuse treatment following detoxification).

METHODS

The retrospective cohort included 383 adult Alaska Native patients admitted to a tribally owned and managed inpatient detoxification unit. Three multiple logistic regression models estimated the adjusted associations of each outcome separately with demographic/psychosocial characteristics, clinical characteristics, use related behaviors, and health care utilization.

RESULTS

Seventy-five percent completed detoxification treatment. Higher global assessment functioning scores, longer lengths of stay, and older ages of first alcohol use were associated with completing detoxification. A secondary drug diagnosis was associated with not completing detoxification. Thirty-six percent accepted a referral to substance abuse treatment following detoxification. Men, those with legal problems, and those with a longer length of stay were more likely to accept a referral to substance abuse treatment. Fifty-eight percent had a confirmed entry into a substance abuse treatment program at discharge. Length of stay was the only variable associated with substance abuse treatment entry.

CONCLUSIONS

Services like motivational interviewing, counseling, development of therapeutic alliance, monetary incentives, and contingency management are effective in linking patients to services after detoxification. These should be considered, along with the factors associated with each point on the continuum of care when linking patients to follow-up services.

Alpha₂-adrenergic agonists for the management of opioid withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Withdrawal is a necessary step prior to drug-free treatment or as the endpoint of long-term substitution treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions involving the use of alpha2-adrenergic agonists compared with placebo, reducing doses of methadone, symptomatic medications, or an alpha2-adrenergic agonist regimen different to the experimental intervention, for the management of the acute phase of opioid withdrawal. Outcomes included the withdrawal syndrome experienced, duration of treatment, occurrence of adverse effects, and completion of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1946 to November week 2, 2015), EMBASE (January 1985 to November week 2, 2015), PsycINFO (1806 to November week 2, 2015), Web of Science, and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing alpha2-adrenergic agonists (clonidine, lofexidine, guanfacine, tizanidine) with reducing doses of methadone, symptomatic medications or placebo, or comparing different alpha2-adrenergic agonists to modify the signs and symptoms of withdrawal in participants who were opioid dependent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 randomised controlled trials involving 1728 participants. Six studies compared an alpha2-adrenergic agonist with placebo, 12 with reducing doses of methadone, four with symptomatic medications, and five compared different alpha2-adrenergic agonists. We assessed 10 studies as having a high risk of bias in at least one of the methodological domains that were considered.We found moderate-quality evidence that alpha2-adrenergic agonists were more effective than placebo in ameliorating withdrawal in terms of the likelihood of severe withdrawal (risk ratio (RR) 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 0.57; 3 studies; 148 participants). We found moderate-quality evidence that completion of treatment was significantly more likely with alpha2-adrenergic agonists compared with placebo (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.84; 3 studies; 148 participants).Peak withdrawal severity may be greater with alpha2-adrenergic agonists than with reducing doses of methadone, as measured by the likelihood of severe withdrawal (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.73; 5 studies; 340 participants; low quality), and peak withdrawal score (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.22, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.46; 2 studies; 263 participants; moderate quality), but these differences were not significant and there is no significant difference in severity when considered over the entire duration of the withdrawal episode (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.49; 3 studies; 119 participants; moderate quality). The signs and symptoms of withdrawal occurred and resolved earlier with alpha2-adrenergic agonists. The duration of treatment was significantly longer with reducing doses of methadone (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.83; 3 studies; 310 participants; low quality). Hypotensive or other adverse effects were significantly more likely with alpha2-adrenergic agonists (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.10; 6 studies; 464 participants; low quality), but there was no significant difference in rates of completion of withdrawal treatment (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.05; 9 studies; 659 participants; low quality).There were insufficient data for quantitative comparison of different alpha2-adrenergic agonists. Available data suggest that lofexidine does not reduce blood pressure to the same extent as clonidine, but is otherwise similar to clonidine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Clonidine and lofexidine are more effective than placebo for the management of withdrawal from heroin or methadone. We detected no significant difference in efficacy between treatment regimens based on clonidine or lofexidine and those based on reducing doses of methadone over a period of around 10 days, but methadone was associated with fewer adverse effects than clonidine, and lofexidine has a better safety profile than clonidine.

Predictors of dropout from inpatient opioid detoxification with buprenorphine: a chart review

Inpatient withdrawal treatment (detoxification) is common in opioid dependence, although dropout against medical advice often limits its outcome. This study aimed to assess baseline predictors of dropout from inpatient opioid detoxification with buprenorphine, including age, gender, current substance use, and type of postdetoxification planning. A retrospective hospital chart review was carried out for inpatient standard opioid detoxifications using buprenorphine taper, in a detoxification ward in Malmö, Sweden (N = 122). Thirty-four percent of patients (n = 42) dropped out against medical advice. In multivariate logistic regression, dropout was significantly associated with younger age (OR 0.93 [0.89-0.97]) and negatively predicted by inpatient postdetoxification plan (OR 0.41 [0.18-0.94]), thus favouring an inpatient plan as opposed to outpatient treatment while residing at home. Dropout was unrelated to baseline urine toxicology. In opioid detoxification, patients may benefit from a higher degree of postdetoxification planning, including transition to residential treatment, in order to increase the likelihood of a successful detoxification and treatment entry. Young opioid-dependent patients may need particular attention in the planning of detoxification.

Alpha2-adrenergic agonists for the management of opioid withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Withdrawal is a necessary step prior to drug-free treatment or as the endpoint of long-term substitution treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions involving the use of alpha2-adrenergic agonists compared with placebo, reducing doses of methadone, symptomatic medications or with comparison of different alpha2-adrenergic agonists, for the management of the acute phase of opioid withdrawal. Outcomes included the intensity of signs and symptoms and overall withdrawal syndrome experienced, duration of treatment, occurrence of adverse effects and completion of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 7, 2013), MEDLINE (1946 to July week 4, 2013), EMBASE (January 1985 to August week 1, 2013), PsycINFO (1806 to July week 5, 2013) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted manufacturers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing alpha2-adrenergic agonists (clonidine, lofexidine, guanfacine, tizanidine) with reducing doses of methadone, symptomatic medications or placebo, or comparing different alpha2-adrenergic agonists to modify the signs and symptoms of withdrawal in participants who were opioid dependent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author assessed studies for inclusion and undertook data extraction. All review authors decided on inclusion and confirmed the overall process.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 randomised controlled trials, involving 1668 participants. Five studies compared a treatment regimen based on an alpha2-adrenergic agonist with placebo, 12 with a regimen based on reducing doses of methadone, four with symptomatic medications and five compared different alpha2-adrenergic agonists.Alpha2-adrenergic agonists were more effective than placebo in ameliorating withdrawal in terms of the likelihood of severe withdrawal (risk ratio (RR) 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 0.57, 3 studies, 148 participants). Completion of treatment was significantly more likely with alpha2-adrenergic agonists compared with placebo (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.84, 3 studies, 148 participants).Alpha2-adrenergic agonists were somewhat less effective than reducing doses of methadone in ameliorating withdrawal symptoms, as measured by the likelihood of severe withdrawal (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.73, 5 studies, 340 participants), peak withdrawal score (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.22, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.46, 2 studies, 263 participants) and overall withdrawal severity (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.49, 3 studies, 119 participants). These differences were not statistically significant. The signs and symptoms of withdrawal occurred and resolved earlier with alpha2-adrenergic agonists. The duration of treatment was significantly longer with reducing doses of methadone (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.83, 3 studies, 310 participants). Hypotensive or other adverse effects were significantly more likely with alpha2-adrenergic agonists (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.10, 6 studies, 464 participants) but there was no significant difference in rates of completion of withdrawal treatment (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.05, 9 studies, 659 participants).There were insufficient data for quantitative comparison of different alpha2-adrenergic agonists. Available data suggest that lofexidine does not reduce blood pressure to the same extent as clonidine, but is otherwise similar to clonidine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Clonidine and lofexidine are more effective than placebo for the management of withdrawal from heroin or methadone. No significant difference in efficacy was detected for treatment regimens based on clonidine or lofexidine, and those based on reducing doses of methadone over a period of around 10 days but methadone is associated with fewer adverse effects than clonidine, and lofexidine has a better safety profile than clonidine.

Methadone at tapered doses for the management of opioid withdrawal

BACKGROUND

The evidence of tapered methadone's efficacy in managing opioid withdrawal has been systematically evaluated in the previous version of this review that needs to be updated

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of tapered methadone compared with other detoxification treatments and placebo in managing opioid withdrawal on completion of detoxification and relapse rate.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 4), PubMed (January 1966 to May 2012), EMBASE (January 1988 to May 2012), CINAHL (2003- December 2007), PsycINFO (January 1985 to December 2004), reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials that focused on the use of tapered methadone versus all other pharmacological detoxification treatments or placebo for the treatment of opiate withdrawal.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed the included studies. Any doubts about how to rate the studies were resolved by discussion with a third review author. Study quality was assessed according to the criteria indicated in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three trials involving 2467 people were included. Comparing methadone versus any other pharmacological treatment, we observed no clinical difference between the two treatments in terms of completion of treatment, 16 studies 1381 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.08 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.21); number of participants abstinent at follow-up, three studies, 386 participants RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.37); degree of discomfort for withdrawal symptoms and adverse events, although it was impossible to pool data for the last two outcomes. These results were confirmed also when we considered the single comparisons: methadone with: adrenergic agonists (11 studies), other opioid agonists (eight studies), anxiolytic (two studies), paiduyangsheng (one study). Comparing methadone with placebo (two studies) more severe withdrawal and more drop-outs were found in the placebo group. The results indicate that the medications used in the included studies are similar in terms of overall effectiveness, although symptoms experienced by participants differed according to the medication used and the program adopted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data from literature are hardly comparable; programs vary widely with regard to the assessment of outcome measures, impairing the application of meta-analysis. The studies included in this review confirm that slow tapering with temporary substitution of long- acting opioids, can reduce withdrawal severity. Nevertheless, the majority of patients relapsed to heroin use.

Prediction of the outcome of inpatient opiate detoxification treatment: results from a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Monocentric studies of inpatient opiate detoxification treatment show considerable variability regarding treatment success rates. This multicentric study investigates whether patient characteristics explain the different rates of regular discharge between treatment units.

METHODS

1,017 opiate-dependent patients from 12 detoxification units with similar treatment programs, funding, staffing and equipment were analyzed. Patient data and outcomes were documented by treatment staff using a standard form.

RESULTS

Controlling for center, regular discharge (range: 14-49% between centers) was significantly associated with pre-existing plans for follow-up treatment, previous completed long-term residential and detoxification treatments, fewer unsuccessful detoxification treatments, higher age, later onset of opiate use, and longer duration of use. Controlling for patient characteristics, the center variable was significantly associated with outcome in a multiple logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Regular discharge could best be predicted by patients' plans for follow-up treatment and previous treatment outcomes. Although treatment units had equivalent resources and regulations, and although patient effects were statistically controlled for, there were still considerable center effects. Setting factors as well as actual drop-out processes should be investigated more closely in the future.

Alpha2-adrenergic agonists for the management of opioid withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Withdrawal is a necessary step prior to drug-free treatment or as the end point of long-term substitution treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions involving the use of alpha2-adrenergic agonists to manage opioid withdrawal.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2008), MEDLINE (January 1966-July 2008), EMBASE (January 1985-2008 Week 31), PsycINFO (1967 to 7 August 2008) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted manufacturers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials comparing alpha2-adrenergic agonists with reducing doses of methadone, symptomatic medications or placebo, or comparing different alpha2-adrenergic agonists to modify the signs and symptoms of withdrawal in participants who were opioid dependent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author assessed studies for inclusion and undertook data extraction. Inclusion decisions and the overall process were confirmed by consultation between all authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-four studies, involving 1631 participants, were included. Twenty-one were randomised controlled trials.Thirteen studies compared a treatment regime based on an alpha2-adrenergic agonist with one based on reducing doses of methadone. Diversity in study design, assessment and reporting of outcomes limited the extent of quantitative analysis.Alpha2-adrenergic agonists are more effective than placebo in ameliorating withdrawal, and despite higher rates of adverse effects, are associated with significantly higher rates of completion of treatment.For the comparison of alpha2-adrenergic agonist regimes with reducing doses of methadone, there were insufficient data for statistical analysis, but withdrawal intensity appears similar to or marginally greater with alpha2-adrenergic agonists, while signs and symptoms of withdrawal occur and resolve earlier. Participants stay in treatment longer with methadone. No significant difference was detected in rates of completion of withdrawal with adrenergic agonists compared to reducing doses of methadone, or clonidine compared to lofexidine. Clonidine is associated with more adverse effects than reducing doses of methadone. Lofexidine does not reduce blood pressure to the same extent as clonidine, but is otherwise similar to clonidine

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Clonidine and lofexidine are more effective than placebo for the management of withdrawal from heroin or methadone. No significant difference in efficacy was detected for treatment regimes based on clonidine or lofexidine, and those based on reducing doses of methadone over a period of around 10 days but methadone is associated with fewer adverse effects than clonidine, and lofexidine has a better safety profile than clonidine.

Predictors of outcome for short-term medically supervised opioid withdrawal during a randomized, multicenter trial of buprenorphine-naloxone and clonidine in the NIDA clinical trials network drug and alcohol dependence

Few studies in community settings have evaluated predictors, mediators, and moderators of treatment success for medically supervised opioid withdrawal treatment. This report presents new findings about these factors from a study of 344 opioid-dependent men and women prospectively randomized to either buprenorphine-naloxone or clonidine in an open-label 13-day medically supervised withdrawal study. Subjects were either inpatient or outpatient in community treatment settings; however not randomized by treatment setting. Medication type (buprenorphine-naloxone versus clonidine) was the single best predictor of treatment retention and treatment success, regardless of treatment setting. Compared to the outpatient setting, the inpatient setting was associated with higher abstinence rates but similar retention rates when adjusting for medication type. Early opioid withdrawal severity mediated the relationship between medication type and treatment outcome with buprenorphine-naloxone being superior to clonidine at relieving early withdrawal symptoms. Inpatient subjects on clonidine with lower withdrawal scores at baseline did better than those with higher withdrawal scores; inpatient subjects receiving buprenorphine-naloxone did better with higher withdrawal scores at baseline than those with lower withdrawal scores. No relationship was found between treatment outcome and age, gender, race, education, employment, marital status, legal problems, baseline depression, or length/severity of drug use. Tobacco use was associated with worse opioid treatment outcomes. Severe baseline anxiety symptoms doubled treatment success. Medication type (buprenorphine-naloxone) was the most important predictor of positive outcome; however the paper also considers other clinical and policy implications of other results, including that inpatient setting predicted better outcomes and moderated medication outcomes.

Dual diagnosis in an inpatient drug-abuse detoxification unit

In Spain, detoxification in general hospitals plays an important role in the medical care of patients. We aim to provide clinicians with information on the prevalence and correlates of psychiatric co-morbidity in drug abusers in detoxification. A sample of 115 substance-abuse inpatients (mean age 31.9 +/- 6.4 years) in a Detoxification Unit of a general university hospital was studied using the Spanish version of the PRISM. Most of the patients had multiple dependence diagnoses and co-morbid axis I or axis II psychiatric disorders. Patients with dual diagnosis showed lower psychosocial functioning than patients without co-morbidity and more dependence diagnoses due to cannabis and sedatives. A total of 80% of the patients successfully completed the detoxification process. The present results enhance the value of detoxification in a general hospital as a first step of the overall treatment strategy.

Methadone at tapered doses for the management of opioid withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread use in many countries the evidence of tapered methadone's efficacy in managing opioid withdrawal has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of tapered methadone compared with other detoxification treatments and placebo in managing opioid withdrawal on completion of detoxification and relapse rate.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2005), MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2004), EMBASE (January 1988 to December 2004), PsycINFO (January 1985 to December 2004), and reference lists of articles. We also contacted manufacturers and researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials which focus on the use of tapered methadone versus all other pharmacological detoxification treatments or placebo for the treatment of opiate withdrawal.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed the included studies. Any doubt about how to rate the studies were resolved by discussion with a third reviewer. Study quality was assessed according to the criteria indicated in Cochrane Reviews Handbook 4.2. (Alderson 2004)

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen trials involving 1187 people were included. Comparing methadone versus any other pharmacological treatment we observed no clinical difference between the two treatments in terms of completion of treatment, relative risk (RR) 1.12; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.34 and results at follow-up RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.92. It was impossible to pool data for the other outcomes but the results of the studies did not show significant differences between the considered treatments. These results were confirmed also when we considered the single comparisons: methadone with: adrenergic agonists (11 studies), other opioid agonists (four studies), chlordiazepoxide (study). Comparing methadone with placebo (one study) more severe withdrawal and more drop outs were found in the placebo group. The results indicate that the medications used in the included studies are similar in terms of overall effectiveness, although symptoms experienced by participants differed according to the medication used and the program adopted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data from literature are hardly comparable; programs vary widely with regard to duration, design and treatment objectives, impairing the application of meta-analysis. The studies included in this review confirm that slow tapering with temporary substitution of long acting opioids, accompanied by medical supervision and ancillary medications can reduce withdrawal severity. Nevertheless the majority of patients relapsed to heroin use.

Diretrizes para o tratamento de pacientes com síndrome de dependência de opióides no Brasil

Existe uma prevalência relativamente baixa do uso de ópioides no Brasil, em particular envolvendo o uso não médico da codeína e de xaropes que contêm opióides. No entanto, a síndrome de dependência apresenta um significativo impacto total na mortalidade e morbidade. Nos últimos 20 anos, o avanço científico tem modificado nosso entendimento sobre a natureza da adição aos opióides e os variados tratamentos possíveis. A adição é uma doença crônica tratável se o tratamento for realizado e adaptado tendo em vista as necessidades do paciente específico. Há, de um fato, um conjunto de tratamentos que podem efetivamente reduzir o uso da droga, ajudar a gerenciar a fissura pela droga, prevenir recaídas e recuperar as pessoas para o funcionamento social produtivo. O tratamento da dependência de drogas será parte de perspectivas de longo prazo do ponto de vista médico, psicológico e social. Esta diretriz almeja fornecer um guia para os psiquiatras e outros profissionais de saúde que tratam de pacientes com Síndrome de Dependência de Opióides. Ela tece comentários sobre o tratamento somático e psicossocial que é utilizado nesses pacientes e revisa as evidências científicas e seu poder. Da mesma forma, os aspectos históricos, epidemiológicos e neurobiológicos da dependência de opióides são revisados.

Alpha2 adrenergic agonists for the management of opioid withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Withdrawal (detoxification) is necessary prior to drug-free treatment. It may also represent the end point of long-term treatment such as methadone maintenance. The availability of managed withdrawal is essential to an effective treatment system.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions involving the use of alpha2 adrenergic agonists (clonidine, lofexidine, guanfacine) to manage opioid withdrawal in terms of withdrawal signs and symptoms, completion of withdrawal and adverse effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Multiple electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Australian Medical Index, Cochrane Clinical Trials Register) were systematically searched. Reference lists of retrieved studies, reviews and conference abstracts were handsearched and relevant pharmaceutical companies contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials comparing alpha2 adrenergic agonists with reducing doses of methadone, symptomatic medications or placebo, or comparing different alpha2 adrenergic agonists to modify the signs and symptoms of withdrawal in participants who were primarily opioid dependent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer assessed studies for inclusion and undertook data extraction. Inclusion decisions and the overall process were confirmed by consultation between all four reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies, involving 1709 participants, were included. Eighteen were randomised controlled trials; for the remaining studies allocation was by participant choice in two, one used alternate allocation and in one the method of allocation was unclear. Twelve studies compared a treatment regime based on an alpha2 adrenergic agonist with one based on reducing doses of methadone. Diversity in study design, assessment and reporting of outcomes limited the extent of quantitative analysis. For the comparison of alpha2 adrenergic agonist regimes with reducing doses of methadone, there were insufficient data for statistical analysis, but withdrawal intensity appears similar to, or marginally greater with alpha2 adrenergic agonists, while signs and symptoms of withdrawal occur and resolve earlier in treatment. Participants stay in treatment longer with methadone. No significant difference was detected in rates of completion of withdrawal with adrenergic agonists compared to reducing doses of methadone, or clonidine compared to lofexidine. Clonidine is associated with more adverse effects (low blood pressure, dizziness, dry mouth, lack of energy) than reducing doses of methadone. Lofexidine does not reduce blood pressure to the same extent as clonidine, but is otherwise similar to clonidine.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference in efficacy was detected for treatment regimes based on the alpha2 adrenergic agonists clonidine and lofexidine, and those based on reducing doses of methadone over a period of around 10 days, for the management of withdrawal from heroin or methadone. Participants stay in treatment longer with methadone regimes and experience less adverse effects. The lower incidence of hypotension makes lofexidine more suited to use in outpatient settings than clonidine. There are insufficient data available to support a conclusion on the efficacy of other alpha2 adrenergic agonists.

Methadone at tapered doses for the management of opioid withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread use in many countries of tapered methadone for detoxification from opiate dependence, the evidence of efficacy to prevent relapse and promote lifestyle change has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether tapered methadone is effective to manage opioids withdrawal.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched: the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 1, 2000), MEDLINE (OVID 1966-2000), EMBASE (1980-2000); scan of reference list of relevant articles; personal communication; conference abstracts; unpublished trials from pharmaceutical industry; Internet (NIDA, Clinical Trials.org, BMJ).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials focused on tapered methadone (length of treatment max 30 days) versus all other pharmacological detoxification treatments, placebo and different modalities of methadone detoxification programs for the treatment of opiate withdrawal.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer (LA) assessed studies for inclusion and undertook data extraction. Inclusion decisions and the overall process were confirmed by consultation between reviewers. Where possible analysis was carried out according to the "intention to treat" principles.

MAIN RESULTS

20 studies were included in the review, with 1357 participants. 10 studies compared methadone with adrenergic agonists, 7 studies compared different modalities of methadone detoxification, 2 studies compared methadone with other opioid agonists, 1 study with chlordiazepoxide, 1 with placebo. The conclusions of the 10 studies that compared methadone with adrenergic agonists showed no substantial clinical difference of the two treatments in terms of retention in treatment, degree of discomfort and detoxification success rates. The conclusions of the 6 studies that compare different methadone reduction schedules, showed that different types of methadone withdrawal schedule produce different responses in terms of withdrawal symptoms and severity of them. Regarding the studies that compare methadone with other opioid agonists, methadyl acetate performed similarly to methadone on most process and outcome measures, while methadone reduced severity of withdrawal and had fewer drop-outs than did propoxyphene. Using chlordiazepoxide vs methadone, the results suggest that the two drugs had similar results in terms of overall effectiveness. Comparing methadone with placebo more severe withdrawal and more drop outs were founded in the placebo group. The results indicate that tapered methadone and other medications used in the included studies are effective in the treatment of the heroin withdrawal syndrome, although symptoms experienced by subjects differed according to the medication used and the program adopted. It seems that regardless of which medication is selected for heroin detoxification, the rates of subsequent heroin abstinence are about equal. This suggests that the medications are similar in terms of overall effectiveness. Improvements were achieved when other services such as counseling and other supporting services were offered contemporaneously with detoxification.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Data from literature are hardly comparable; programs vary widely with regard to duration, design and treatment objectives, impairing the application of meta-analysis. Results of many outcomes could not be summarised because they were presented either in graphical form or provided only statistical tests and p-values. For most studies standard deviation for continuous variables were not provided. The studies included in this review confirm that slow tapering with temporary substitution of long acting opioids, accompanied by medical supervision and ancillary medications can reduce withdrawal severity. Nevertheless the majority of patients relapsed to heroin use. However this cannot be considered a goal for a detoxification as heroin dependence is a chronic, relapsing disorder and the goal of detoxification should be to remove or reduce dependence on heroin in a controlled and human fashion and not a treatment for heroin dependence.

Gender differences in detoxification: predictors of completion and re-admission

This study examined the medical records of 2595 consecutive admissions over a 3-year period to an inpatient mixed-gender, hospital-based alcohol and drug detoxification unit. Women reported a significantly different pattern of primary drug use, a younger age, a different pattern of referral sources, and higher rates of parenting status and unemployment. In addition, females were administered prescription medication and medical evaluation tests at a significantly higher rate than males. Multiple regression analyses demonstrated that an opiate as a primary drug of choice was a significant risk factor for dropout. Risk factors for re-admission to inpatient detoxification included: alcohol as a primary drug of choice, residential instability, multiple drug use, single marital status, unemployment, an older age (> 37 years), and treatment dropout at Time 1 in the study. For both the final prediction models, gender was not a significant factor. The treatment implications of these findings are discussed.

Relationships between patient characteristics and unsuccessful substance abuse detoxification

OBJECTIVE

History and laboratory evaluations are common for patients entering substance abuse detoxification programs. We sought to identify if patient history and laboratory characteristics entering a detoxification program were associated with unsuccessful detoxification.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of 186 patients of a residential-inpatient short-term medical detoxification facility. Unsuccessful detoxification was defined as leaving for urgent medical referral or against program advice.

RESULTS

Patients were predominantly male, middle-aged, minority, unemployed, and poly-substance users. Twenty-four patients (13%) did not complete the detoxification program (4 left for urgent medical referral, 20 left against program advice). Unsuccessful detoxification was associated with nausea and/or vomiting (p = 0.032), Caucasian race (p = 0.002), and opiates as a drug of choice (p = 0.018). Laboratory abnormalities were common but none were associated with unsuccessful detoxification.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients admitted to a medically monitored detoxification facility, few patient characteristics were associated with detoxification outcome. Routine admission laboratories without clinical correlation may be unwarranted.

Predictors for completing an inpatient detoxification program among intravenous heroin users, methadone substituted and codeine substituted patients

Up to 1999 more opioid dependent patients in Germany were substituted with codeine or dihydrocodeine (summarised as codeine) than with methadone. The current retrospective study compares the differences in detoxification treatment outcome for codeine-substituted patients, methadone-substituted patients and patients injecting illicit heroin. The study is based on the medical records of 1070 patients admitted consecutively for opioid and polytox detoxification between 1991 and 1997. The main hypothesis was that injecting illicit-heroin users would complete detoxification treatment less often than codeine- or methadone- substituted patients, and that methadone-substituted patients who had received more structured treatment would complete more often than codeine-substituted patients who did not receive any structured treatment beyond the prescription of codeine. We analysed a number of demographic and drug related variables as possible predictors. Our bivariate analyses confirmed our main hypothesis: 50.4% (OR: 1.8) of the methadone-substituted patients, 45.5% (OR: 1.5) of the codeine-substituted patients and 35.9% (OR: 1 comparison group) of the injecting illicit-heroin users completed the detoxification program (P=0.006). This finding remained significant even after correcting for a number of confounders. Using stepwise multiple logistic regression analyses, we found age, education, history of imprisonment, regular contact with a counsellor, currently being on probation and reported plans for participating in an abstinence treatment program to be significant predictors of completing detoxification treatment. Although the current analysis did not rule out differences in pharmacological effects as a contributing factor, the results are consistent with an interpretation of a dose-response association between psychosocial/psychotherapeutic support and detoxification outcome. More psychosocial/psychotherapeutic support leads to better detoxification treatment response.

Inpatient opiate detoxification in Geneva: follow-up at 1 and 6 months

The aim of this study was to identify predictors of treatment success and of relapse, 1 and 6 months after inpatient opiate detoxification in an 8-bed unit in Geneva. Of all 73 patients admitted between June 1994 and June 1995, a majority (73%) successfully finished opiate detoxification. Detoxification was performed mainly with methadone tapering; the average duration of hospitalisation was 15 days. Factors associated with treatment failure were: cocaine abuse, presence of legal problems, and short duration of hospital stay. After 1 month, 65% of the patients were using drugs (half of them were dependent again, half of them had used occasionally) and 35% were completely abstinent (21% when excluding those in residential treatment). Predictors of rapid relapse were cocaine abuse and little concern with own psychological situation at baseline. After 6 months, 50% were physically dependent again, 13% had lapsed occasionally, 37% were abstinent (28% when excluding those in residential treatment). Only high benzodiazepine use at baseline was associated with medium term abstinence. Addiction severity index composite scores had considerably improved between baseline and 6 months. Prevention of relapse to opiate use after inpatient detoxification, especially for those with a concurrent cocaine abuse, should be improved.

Predictors of discharges against medical advice from a short-term hospital detoxification unit

The primary goal of this study was to identify factors associated with patients leaving a 3-day hospital detoxification unit against medical advice (AMA). Medical records of 302 patients who were admitted for alcohol or other drug withdrawal were reviewed. Variables examined were: demographics, reported history of drug use, urine toxicology at admission, medication received during the detoxification, and admission day. Data were analyzed using a case-control design. Logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors. We found that being younger, having a shorter history of cocaine abuse, being admitted on a Friday and being an opiate dependent patient treated with clonidine only during the detoxification, were significantly associated with leaving AMA. These findings may provide information that can help clinicians identify those patients who are most at risk for leaving AMA. This will in turn allow them the opportunity to initiate preventive measures to decrease unnecessary attrition and improve utilisation of treatment resources.

Monitoring patterns of substance use in drug-dependent patients

Drug-addicted patients (N = 435) admitted for treatment in different clinical settings were studied. Patients were classified according to their self-report of consumed drugs and to the results of urine screening tests. Of the patients, 77.8% were active consumers, 9.6% were included in a methadone maintenance program, and 12.6% were abstinent. In the active consumer patients, positive urine screening results surpassed by far the information provided in the self-reports. Most patients tested positive to several drugs, while only 8.7% tested negative to all screened drugs. These results indicate that the information provided by drug-dependent patients lacks reliability when an analytical screening method is used simultaneously.

Efficacy of methadone versus methadone and guanfacine in the detoxification of heroin-addicted patients

In a randomized double-blind study, the clinical efficacy of methadone vs. methadone and guanfacine was assessed in terms of evolution of opioid withdrawal symptoms during inpatient detoxification. A total of 144 patients were included and randomly allocated to three different treatment groups: methadone alone, and two combined treatment schedules (methadone plus 3 or 4 mg of guanfacine). No differences were observed among the three groups with regard to retention rate throughout the study period. Both therapies, methadone and methadone plus guanfacine, determined a slight increase in withdrawal scores when methadone was discontinued. However, guanfacine was unable to effectively control methadone-associated withdrawal symptoms. These results indicate that guanfacine does not effectively reduce the opioid withdrawal symptoms.

Methadone combined with clonidine versus clonidine alone in opiate detoxification

The availability and use of a methadone/clonidine combination versus clonidine alone in opiate detoxification were studied. In Phase I of the study, a sequential combination of methadone followed by clonidine was utilized in those patients presenting with a primary diagnosis of opiate dependence. During the Phase II of the study, only clonidine was available. Medications were administered only if the history and clinical findings indicated impending or acute opiate withdrawal syndrome. Overall, there was no difference between the Phase I and Phase II groups when the number of opiate dependent admissions, patients completing detoxification, and the patients completing a follow-up rehabilitation program were compared. However, the patients in Phase I whose clinical symptomatology warranted the use of methadone were more likely to complete the detoxification program when compared to the patients in Phase II who received clonidine only. There was no difference between the two groups in completion of a follow-up rehabilitation. Detoxification with clonidine alone was more likely to be successful if the patient has had prior detoxification experience with methadone or if there was a secondary dependence of alcohol, sedative, or tranquilizer present coexisting with the primary opiate dependence diagnosis.

Flunitrazepam consumption among heroin addicts admitted for in-patient detoxification

The use of benzodiazepines among 973 heroin addicts admitted for inpatient detoxification over a 10-year period was assessed in a cross-sectional study. A total of 780 (80.2%) patients had a history of benzodiazepine use; 666 (68.5%) were consuming benzodiazepines at the time of admission and 419 (43.1%) on an almost daily basis. Seventy-five (7.7%) patients fulfilled criteria for sedative-hypnotic abuse or dependence. Consumption of benzodiazepines began after subjects had become addicted to heroin. Flunitrazepam was ranked first by 68.4% of patients, followed by clorazepate (13%), and diazepam (12.4%). The prevalence of benzodiazepine use, in particular flunitrazepam, among heroin addicts is very high. Specific abuse liability studies are needed to determine whether pharmacologic reasons exist to explain heroin addicts' preference for this compound.

Hypercortisolism after opioid discontinuation in rapid detoxification of heroin addicts

Long-term opioid consumption can induce hypoadrenalism through impairment of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Results of the present study showed that, in heroin addicts, saliva cortisol concentrations varied according to the amount of recently consumed heroin and the time elapsed since the last self-administration. Hypercortisolism was observed either after abrupt withdrawal of heroin or the last dose of methadone. Post-detoxification hypercortisolism was still present on day 16 after the last opioid consumption, whereas it was not observed in abstinent addicts for a mean period of 4 months. During detoxification treatment, mean AUC8-24 cortisol in saliva of clonidine or guanfacine-treated patients was significantly higher than that in methadone-treated patients. It may be hypothesized that elevated cortisol levels may account for untoward effects of adrenergic agonist therapy which, in turn, may represent an added risk factor for relapse during detoxification. Further studies are necessary to correlate the severity of withdrawal symptoms to cortisol levels in opioid addicts detoxified with alpha 2-adrenergic agonist substitution.

Cocaine abuse among heroin addicts in Spain

Abuse of cocaine is becoming a major problem among heroin addicts in Spain. Between 1987 and 1988, 75% of patients admitted as inpatients for detoxification from opiate dependence had consumed cocaine during the 6 months prior to admission and 25% had abused cocaine daily or several times/week. These cocaine abusers showed more toxicologic and psychopathologic problems than opiate addicts who did not abuse cocaine. The opiate addicts who also abused cocaine had begun using illicit drugs earlier and showed a higher frequency of anti-HIV antibodies. They also had more antisocial personality disorders and persistence of depressive symptoms during opiate detoxification than heroin addicts who did not abuse cocaine. Based on these findings, we insist on the need to develop different treatments for detoxifying patients with this dual addiction.

Comparison of linear versus inverse exponential methadone reduction curves in the detoxification of opiate addicts

A linear methadone detoxification procedure is compared with an inverse exponential reduction curve in a double-blind study. The inverse exponential curve resulted in withdrawal symptomatology which was significantly greater during the acute phase of the opiate withdrawal curve and was not significantly different during the recovery phase. There was no difference between groups in the time course of the withdrawal syndrome, in peak symptom severity, nor in patient compliance. Separate analyses for high-dose and for low-dose addicts show variation in the suitability of the two curves according to dose. The implications for future research and treatment of the opiate withdrawal syndrome are discussed.

Efficacy of clonidine, guanfacine and methadone in the rapid detoxification of heroin addicts: a controlled clinical trial

The efficacy of clonidine, methadone, and guanfacine in rapid detoxification of heroin inpatients was assessed in a randomized controlled clinical trial. Signs and symptoms of abstinence and of side effects were analysed in 90 heroin addicts successfully completing a 12-day inpatient trial. All patients fit DSM-III criteria for opioid dependence, the age range being 18 to 36 years. All three drugs were effective in controlling abstinence; however, the course of abstinence was different in the methadone group as compared to the adrenergic agonists, the latter showing limitations in their ability to suppress withdrawal manifestations. While mean number of withdrawal signs and symptoms was significantly lower during days 2 to 5 in the methadone group (p less than 0.01), adrenergic agonists were slightly more effective at the end of the trial. Incidence of side effects was closely related to the dose administered. Hypotensive action of adrenergic agonists was more marked in orthostatic position. The present results suggest that methadone is superior to adrenergic agonists. Between these drugs clonidine appears to be less effective than guanfacine in controlling some withdrawal manifestations, and causes more side effects, mainly of cardiovascular nature.