Cost-effectiveness of full and partial opioid agonists for opioid use disorder in outpatient settings: United States healthcare sector perspective

INTRODUCTION

Studies show that medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduce illicit opioid use, emergency healthcare services, opioid-related overdose, and death. However, few studies have investigated the long-term cost-effectiveness of MOUD in office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) and opioid treatment program (OTP) settings. We aimed to estimate the cost, utility, quality-adjusted life years gained (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of three MOUD compared to each other and counseling without medication from a US healthcare sector perspective.

METHODS

Our study developed a Markov model to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of counseling and three MOUD in the OBOT and OTP settings: sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (BUPNX), buprenorphine extended-release (XR-BUP) injection, and oral methadone. The model included five health states representing combinations of receiving or off treatment while either using or not actively using illicit opioids, and death. The cycle length was one month; the time-horizon was ten years. The study obtained model inputs from systematic reviews of published literature and public data. A 3 % annual discount rate was applied to cost and utility calculation. The primary outcomes included total costs, life-years (LYs), QALYs, and ICERs. We also conducted a scenario analysis using a hypothetical OBOT outpatient setting with methadone.

RESULTS

In the base-case OBOT setting, the total costs and QALYs, respectively, were counseling $22,848, 5.60; BUPNX $29,875, 5.82; and XR-BUP $63,936, 5.87. ICERs were $32,345/QALY (BUPNX vs. counseling) and $625,858/QALY (XR-BUP vs BUPNX). In the OTP setting, the total costs of counseling, methadone, BUPNX, and XR-BUP were $20,124, $27,000, $33,500, and $75,272, respectively. QALYs of methadone were 5.86. QALYs of counseling, BUPNX, and XR-BUP remained the same as in the OBOT setting. Incremental ICERs were $26,714/QALY (methadone vs counseling) and $3,337,623/QALY (XR-BUP vs methadone). BUPNX was dominated by methadone. In the scenario analysis, BUPNX was also dominated by methadone.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient MOUD resulted in important gains in quality of life and life expectancy. In both OBOT and OTP settings, XR-BUP was not cost-effective. BUPNX was cost-effective in the OBOT setting, while it was dominated by methadone in the OTP setting. The cost-effectiveness of BUPNX and XR-BUP could be enhanced if the costs of these medications were reduced.

The Impact of Suboxone's Market Exclusivity on Cost of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine-naloxone is an essential part of the response to opioid poisoning rates in North America. Manipulating market exclusivity is a strategy manufacturers use to increase profitability, as evidenced by Suboxone in the USA.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate excess costs of buprenorphine-naloxone due to unmerited market exclusivity (no legal patent or data protection) in Canada.

METHODS

Using controlled interrupted time-series, this study examined changes in the cost of buprenorphine-naloxone before and after the first generics were listed on public formularies. Methadone cost was the control. Public data from the Canadian Institute of Health Information in British Columbia, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan were used. All buprenorphine-naloxone and methadone claims (2010-2019) accepted for payment by the provincial drug plan/programme were collected. Primary outcome was mean cost per mg of buprenorphine-naloxone after the first listing of generics.

RESULTS

Mean cost per mg of buprenorphine-naloxone before the first listing of generics was $1.21 CAD in British Columbia, $1.27 CAD in Manitoba, and $0.85 CAD in Saskatchewan. Following the introduction of generics, the cost per mg decreased by $0.22 CAD (95% CI - 0.33 to - 0.10; p = 0.0014) in British Columbia, $0.36 CAD (95% CI - 0.58 to - 0.13; p = 0.004) in Manitoba, and $0.27 CAD (95% CI - 0.50 to - 0.05; p = 0.03) in Saskatchewan. Mean cost per mg decreased by $0.26 CAD (95% CI - 0.38 to - 0.13; p = 0.0004) after a third generic was introduced in British Columbia. Excess costs to public formularies during the 4- to 5-year period prior to the listing of generics were $1,992,558 CAD in British Columbia, $80,876 CAD in Manitoba, and $4130 CAD in Saskatchewan. If buprenorphine-naloxone cost $0.61 CAD (mean cost after the third generic entered) instead of $1.21 CAD per mg during the pre-generics period, public payers in British Columbia could have saved $5,016,220 CAD between 2011 and 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

Unmerited 6 years of market exclusivity for brand-name buprenorphine-naloxone in Canada resulted in substantial excess costs. There is an urgent need to implement policies that can help reduce costs for high-priority drugs in Canada.

Variation in Initiation, Engagement, and Retention on Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Based on Health Insurance Plan Design

BACKGROUND

The association between cost-sharing and receipt of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is unknown.

METHODS

We constructed a cohort of 10,513 commercially insured individuals with a new diagnosis of opioid use disorder and information on insurance cost-sharing in a large national deidentified claims database. We examined 4 cost-sharing measures: (1) pharmacy deductible; (2) medical service deductible; (3) pharmacy medication copay; and (4) medical office copay. We measured MOUD (naltrexone, buprenorphine, or methadone) initiation (within 14 d of diagnosis), engagement (second receipt within 34 d of first), and 6-month retention (continuous receipt without 14-d gap). We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between cost-sharing and MOUD initiation, engagement, and retention. We calculated total out-of-pocket costs in the 30 days following MOUD initiation for each type of MOUD.

RESULTS

Of 10,513 individuals with incident opioid use disorder, 1202 (11%) initiated MOUD, 742 (7%) engaged, and 253 (2%) were retained in MOUD at 6 months. A high ($1000+) medical deductible was associated with a lower odds of initiation compared with no deductible (odds ratio: 0.85, 95% confidence interval: 0.74-0.98). We found no significant associations between other cost-sharing measures for initiation, engagement, or retention. Median initial 30-day out-of-pocket costs ranged from $100 for methadone to $710 for extended-release naltrexone.

CONCLUSIONS

Among insurance plan cost-sharing measures, only medical services deductible showed an association with decreased MOUD initiation. Policy and benefit design should consider ways to reduce cost barriers to initiation and retention in MOUD.

Economic Evaluation in Opioid Modeling: Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The rapid increase in opioid overdose and opioid use disorder (OUD) over the past 20 years is a complex problem associated with significant economic costs for healthcare systems and society. Simulation models have been developed to capture and identify ways to manage this complexity and to evaluate the potential costs of different strategies to reduce overdoses and OUD. A review of simulation-based economic evaluations is warranted to fully characterize this set of literature.

METHODS

A systematic review of simulation-based economic evaluation (SBEE) studies in opioid research was initiated by searches in PubMed, EMBASE, and EbscoHOST. Extraction of a predefined set of items and a quality assessment were performed for each study.

RESULTS

The screening process resulted in 23 SBEE studies ranging by year of publication from 1999 to 2019. Methodological quality of the cost analyses was moderately high. The most frequently evaluated strategies were methadone and buprenorphine maintenance treatments; the only harm reduction strategy explored was naloxone distribution. These strategies were consistently found to be cost-effective, especially naloxone distribution and methadone maintenance. Prevention strategies were limited to abuse-deterrent opioid formulations. Less than half (39%) of analyses adopted a societal perspective in their estimation of costs and effects from an opioid-related intervention. Prevention strategies and studies' accounting for patient and physician preference, changing costs, or result stratification were largely ignored in these SBEEs.

CONCLUSION

The review shows consistently favorable cost analysis findings for naloxone distribution strategies and opioid agonist treatments and identifies major gaps for future research.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of interim methadone treatment and patient navigation initiated in jail

BACKGROUND

Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are released from pre-trial detention in jail have a high risk of opioid relapse. While several interventions for OUD initiated during incarceration have been studied, few have had an economic evaluation. As part of a three-group randomized trial, we estimated the cost and cost-effectiveness of a negative urine opioid test. Detainees were assigned to interim methadone (IM) in jail with continued methadone treatment post-release with and without 3 months of post-release patient navigation (PN) compared to an enhanced treatment-as-usual group.

METHODS

We implemented a micro-costing approach from the provider's perspective to estimate the cost per participant in jail and over the 12 months post-release from jail. Economic data included jail-based and community-based service utilization, self-reported healthcare utilization and justice system involvement, and administrative arrest records. Our outcome measure is the number of participants with a negative opioid urine test at their 12-month follow-up. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for intervention costs only and costs from a societal perspective.

RESULTS

The average cost of providing patient navigation services per individual beginning in jail and continuing in the community was $283. We find that IM is dominated by ETAU and IM + PN. Per additional participant with a negative opioid urine test, the ICER for IM + PN including intervention costs only is $91 and $305 including societal costs.

CONCLUSIONS

IM + PN is almost certainly the cost-effective choice from both an intervention provider and societal perspective.

Slow release oral morphine versus methadone for opioid use disorder in the fentanyl era (pRESTO): Protocol for a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

North America is facing an unprecedented public health crisis of opioid-related morbidity and mortality, increasingly as a result of the introduction of illicitly manufactured fentanyl into the street drug market. Although the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is a key element in the response to the opioid overdose epidemic, currently available pharmacotherapies (e.g., methadone, buprenorphine) may not be acceptable to or effective in all patients. Available evidence suggests that slow-release oral morphine (SROM) has similar efficacy rates as methadone with respect to promoting abstinence, and with improvements in a number of patient-reported outcomes among persons using heroin. However, little is known about the relative effectiveness and acceptability of SROM compared to methadone in the context of fentanyl use. This study aims to address this research gap.

METHODS

pRESTO is a 24-week, open-label, two arm, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial comparing SROM versus methadone for the treatment of OUD. Participants will be 298 clinically stable, non-pregnant adults with OUD, recruited from outpatient clinics in Vancouver, Canada, where the majority of the illicit opioids are contaminated with fentanyl. The primary outcome is suppression of illicit opioid use, measured by bi-weekly urine drug screens. Secondary outcomes include: treatment retention, medication safety, overdose events, treatment satisfaction, psychological functioning, changes in drug-related problems, changes in quality of life, opioid cravings, other substance use, and cost-effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

pRESTO will be among the first studies to evaluate treatment options for individuals primarily using synthetic street opioids, providing important evidence to guide treatment strategies for this population.

Responses among substance abuse treatment providers to the opioid epidemic in the USA: Variations in buprenorphine and methadone treatment by geography, operational, and payment characteristics, 2007-16

Objective

To identify the geographic, organisational, and payment correlates of buprenorphine and methadone treatment among substance abuse treatment (SAT) providers.

Methods

Secondary analyses of the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (NSSATS) from 2007–16 were conducted. We provide bivariate descriptive statistics regarding substance abuse treatment services which offered buprenorphine and methadone treatment from 2007–16. Using multiple logistic regression, we regressed geographic, organisational, and payment correlates on buprenorphine and methadone treatment.

Results

Buprenorphine is increasingly offered at SAT facilities though uptake remains comparatively low outside of the northeast. SAT facilities run by tribal governments or Indian Health Service which offer buprenorphine remain low compared to privately operated SAT facilities (AOR = 0.528). The odds of offering buprenorphine among facilities offering free or no charge treatment (AOR = 0.838) or a sliding fee scale (AOR = 0.464) was lower. SAT facilities accepting Medicaid payments showed higher odds of offering methadone treatment (AOR = 2.035).

Conclusions

Greater attention towards the disparities in provision of opioid agonist therapies is warranted, especially towards the reasons why uptake has been moderate among civilian providers. Additionally, the care needs of Native Americans facing opioid-related use disorders bears further scrutiny.

Healthcare utilization and costs associated with treatment for opioid dependence

OBJECTIVE

Opioid use disorder (OUD) can be managed with medication assisted therapy (MAT) (methadone [MET], buprenorphine [BUP], or extended-release naltrexone [XR-NTX]) or counseling alone (non-pharmacological therapy [NPT]). The objective of this study was to evaluate healthcare resource utilization and costs associated with XR-NTX compared with alternative treatments for opioid dependence.

METHODS

Adults with a diagnosis of opioid dependence who initiated treatment with XR-NTX, BUP, MET, or NPT between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2014 were identified in the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial administrative claims database. Healthcare resource utilization, costs (inpatient [IP], emergency department [ED], outpatient [OP], and pharmacy) and adherence were evaluated for each cohort during 12-month baseline and follow-up periods.

RESULTS

A total of 29,235 patients were included in the analysis; 1,041, 20,566, 745, and 6,883 received XR-NTX, BUP, MET, and NPT, respectively. Patients in the XR-NTX cohort were significantly younger and had more comorbidities compared with the other cohorts. Patients in the XR-NTX group had the largest percentage decrease in IP and ED utilization and costs from baseline to follow-up. OP and pharmacy costs increased significantly from baseline to follow-up for all cohorts. Overall, there was no significant change in total healthcare costs for the XR-NTX group, whereas the costs increased significantly for other groups (BUP = +43%, MET = +47.7%, NPT = +38.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare resource utilization and costs increased from baseline to follow-up in BUP, MET, and NPT patients, whereas patients receiving XR-NTX experienced no such increase. This analysis suggests there may be economic value in the use of XR-NTX for OUD.

Use of opioid substitution therapies in the treatment of opioid use disorder: results of a UK cost-effectiveness modelling study

AIMS

This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) and methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) vs no opioid substitution therapy (OST) for the treatment of opioid use disorder, from the UK National Health Service (NHS)/personal social services (PSS) and societal perspectives over 1 year.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness of OST vs no OST was evaluated by first replicating and then expanding an existing UK health technology assessment model. The expanded model included the impact of OST on infection rates of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

RESULTS

Versus no OST, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for BMT and MMT were £13,923 and £14,206 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively, from a NHS/PSS perspective. When total costs (NHS/PSS and societal) are considered, there are substantial savings associated with adopting OST; these savings are in excess of £14,032 for BMT vs no OST and £17,174 for MMT vs no OST over 1 year. This is primarily driven by a reduction in victim costs. OST treatment also impacted other aspects of criminality and healthcare resource use.

LIMITATIONS

The model's 1-year timeframe means long-term costs and benefits, and the influence of changes over time are not captured.

CONCLUSIONS

OST can be considered cost-effective vs no OST from the UK NHS/PSS perspective, with a cost per QALY well below the UK's willingness-to-pay threshold. There were only small differences between BMT and MMT. The availability of two or more cost-effective options is beneficial to retaining patients in OST programs. From a societal perspective, OST is estimated to save over £14,032 and £17,174 per year for BMT and MMT vs no OST, respectively, due to savings in victim costs. Further work is required to fully quantify the clinical and health economic impacts of different OST formulations and their societal impact over the long-term.

Office-Based Buprenorphine Versus Clinic-Based Methadone: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

The objective of this analysis was to compare the cost-effectiveness of clinic-based methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) and office-based buprenorphine maintenance therapy (BMT) from the perspective of third-party payers in the United States. The authors used a Markov cost-effectiveness model. A hypothetical cohort of 1000 adult, opioid-dependent patients was modeled over a 1-year time horizon. Patients were allowed to transition between the health states of in opioid dependence treatment and either abusing or not abusing opioids, or to have dropped out of treatment. Probabilities were derived from randomized clinical trials comparing methadone and buprenorphine. Costs included drug and administration, clinic visits, and therapy sessions. Effectiveness outcomes examined were (1) retention in the treatment program and (2) opioid abuse-free weeks. For retention in treatment at 1 year, MMT was more costly ($4,613 vs. $4,155) and more effective (20.3% vs. 15.9%) than BMT, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $10,437 per additional patient retained in treatment. MMT was also more effective than BMT in terms of opioid abuse-free weeks (9.2 vs. 9.1 weeks), resulting in an ICER of $8,515 per opioid abuse-free week gained. One-way sensitivity analyses found costs per week of MMT to have the largest impact on the retention-in-treatment outcome, whereas the probability of dropping out with MMT had the greatest impact on opioid abuse-free weeks. The authors conclude that MMT is cost-effective compared with BMT for the treatment of patients with opioid dependence. However, the treatment of substance abuse is complex, and decision makers should also consider individual patient characteristics when making coverage decisions.

Can 28-day prescription prevent unintentional medication surplus with 30-day prescription?

no abstract

Multiple imputation strategies for zero-inflated cost data in economic evaluations: which method works best?

Cost and effect data often have missing data because economic evaluations are frequently added onto clinical studies where cost data are rarely the primary outcome. The objective of this article was to investigate which multiple imputation strategy is most appropriate to use for missing cost-effectiveness data in a randomized controlled trial. Three incomplete data sets were generated from a complete reference data set with 17, 35 and 50 % missing data in effects and costs. The strategies evaluated included complete case analysis (CCA), multiple imputation with predictive mean matching (MI-PMM), MI-PMM on log-transformed costs (log MI-PMM), and a two-step MI. Mean cost and effect estimates, standard errors and incremental net benefits were compared with the results of the analyses on the complete reference data set. The CCA, MI-PMM, and the two-step MI strategy diverged from the results for the reference data set when the amount of missing data increased. In contrast, the estimates of the Log MI-PMM strategy remained stable irrespective of the amount of missing data. MI provided better estimates than CCA in all scenarios. With low amounts of missing data the MI strategies appeared equivalent but we recommend using the log MI-PMM with missing data greater than 35 %.

Economic Evaluations of Opioid Use Disorder Interventions

BACKGROUND

The economic costs associated with opioid misuse are immense. Effective interventions for opioid use disorders are available; however, given the scarce resources faced by substance use treatment providers and payers of all kinds, evidence of effectiveness is not always sufficient to encourage adoption of a given therapy-nor should it be. Economic evaluations can provide evidence that will help stakeholders efficiently allocate their resources.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to review the literature on economic evaluations of opioid use disorder interventions.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the major electronic databases from inception until August 2015. A sensitive approach was used to ensure a comprehensive list of relevant articles. Given the quality of the existing reviews, we narrowed our search to studies published since 2007. The Drummond checklist was used to evaluate and categorize economic evaluation studies according to their quality.

RESULTS

A total of 98 articles were identified as potentially relevant to the current study. Of these 98 articles, half (n = 49) were included in this study. Six of the included articles were reviews. The remaining 43 articles reported economic evaluation studies of interventions for opioid use disorders. In general, the evidence on methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) supports previous findings that MMT is an economically advantageous opioid use disorder therapy. The economic literature comparing MMT with other opioid use disorder pharmacotherapies is limited, as is the literature on other forms of therapy.

CONCLUSION

With the possible exception of MMT, additional high-quality economic evaluations are needed in order to assess the relative value of existing opioid use disorder interventions.

Risk Factors for Relapse and Higher Costs Among Medicaid Members with Opioid Dependence or Abuse: Opioid Agonists, Comorbidities, and Treatment History

Clinical trials show that opioid agonist therapy (OAT) with methadone or buprenorphine is more effective than behavioral treatments, but state policymakers remain ambivalent about covering OAT for long periods. We used Medicaid claims for 52,278 Massachusetts Medicaid beneficiaries with a diagnosis of opioid abuse or dependence between 2004 and 2010 to study associations between use of methadone, buprenorphine or other behavioral health treatment without OAT, and time to relapse and total healthcare expenditures. Cox Proportional Hazards ratios for patients treated with either methadone or buprenorphine showed approximately 50% lower risk of relapse than behavioral treatment without OAT. Expenditures per month were from $153 to $233 lower for OAT episodes compared to other behavioral treatment. Co-occurring alcohol abuse/dependence quadrupled the risk of relapse, other non-opioid abuse/dependence doubled the relapse risk and severe mental illness added 80% greater risk compared to those without each of those disorders. Longer current treatment episodes were associated with lower risk of relapse. Relapse risk increased as prior treatment exposure increased but prior treatment was associated with slightly lower total healthcare expenditures. These findings suggest that the effectiveness of OAT that has been demonstrated in clinical trials persists at the population level in a less controlled setting and that OAT is associated with lower total healthcare expenditures compared to other forms of behavioral treatment for patients with opioid addiction. Co-occurring other substance use and mental illness exert strong influences on cost and risk of relapse, suggesting that individuals with these conditions need more comprehensive treatment.

Management of opioid-dependent patients: comparison of the cost associated with use of buprenorphine/naloxone or methadone, and their interactions with concomitant treatments for infectious or psychiatric comorbidities

The objective was to estimate the annual interaction management cost of agonist opioid treatment (AOT) for opioid-dependent (OD) patients with buprenorphine-naloxone (Suboxone®) (B/N) or methadone associated with concomitant treatments for infectious (HIV) or psychiatric comorbidities. A costs analysis model was developed to calculate the associated cost of AOT and interaction management. The AOT cost included pharmaceutical costs, drug preparation, distribution and dispensing, based on intake regimen (healthcare center or take-home) and type and frequency of dispensing (healthcare center or pharmacy), and medical visits. The cost of methadone also included single-dose bottles, monthly costs of custody at pharmacy, urine toxicology drug screenings and nursing visits. Potential interactions between AOT and concomitant treatments (antivirals, antibacterials/antifungals, antipsychotics, anxiolytics, antidepressant and anticonvulsants), were identified to determine the additional use of healthcare resources for each interaction management. The annual cost per patient of AOT was €1,525.97 for B/N and €1,467.29 for methadone. The average annual cost per patient of interaction management was €257.07 (infectious comorbidities), €114.03 (psychiatric comorbidities) and €185.55 (double comorbidity) with methadone and €7.90 with B/N in psychiatric comorbidities. Total annual costs of B/N were €1,525.97, €1,533.87 and €1,533.87 compared to €1,724.35, €1,581.32 and €1,652.84 for methadone per patient with infectious, psychiatric or double comorbidity respectively.Compared to methadone, the total cost per patient with OD was lower with B/N (€47.45-€198.38 per year). This is due to the differences in interaction management costs associated with the concomitant treatment of infectious and/or psychiatric comorbidities.

Cost-Effectiveness of Injectable Extended-Release Naltrexone Compared With Methadone Maintenance and Buprenorphine Maintenance Treatment for Opioid Dependence

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of injectable extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) compared with methadone maintenance and buprenorphine maintenance treatment (MMT and BMT, respectively) for adult males enrolled in treatment for opioid dependence in the United States from the perspective of state-level addiction treatment payers.

METHODS

A Markov model with daily time cycles was used to estimate the incremental cost per opioid-free day in a simulated cohort of adult males aged 18-65 over a 6-month period from the state health program perspective.

RESULTS

XR-NTX is predicted to be more effective and more costly than methadone or buprenorphine in our target population, with an incremental cost per opioid-free day gained relative to the next-most effective treatment (MMT) of $72. The cost-effectiveness of XR-NTX relative to MMT was driven by its effectiveness in deterring opioid use while receiving treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

XR-NTX is a cost-effective medication for treating opioid dependence if state addiction treatment payers are willing to pay at least $72 per opioid-free day.

The reductions in monetary cost and gains in productivity with methadone maintenance treatment: one year follow-up

While methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) is beneficial for heroin dependence, there is little information regarding the reductions in monetary cost and gains in productivity following MMT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in the monetary cost of heroin addiction and productivity after one year of MMT. Twenty-nine participants from an MMT clinic were included. The monetary cost, productivity, quality of life (QOL) and mental health status were assessed at both baseline and one year follow-up. The average annual total cost was approximately US$26,485 (1.43 GDP per capita in 2010) at baseline, and decreased by 59.3% to US$10,784 (0.58 GDP) at follow-up. The mean number of months of unemployment dropped from 6.03 to 2.79, the mean income increased to exceed the basic salary, but only reached 45.3% of the national average monthly earnings. The participants׳ mental health improved, but their QOL scores did not increase significantly. After one year of MMT, the monetary cost of heroin addiction fell, both the productivity and mental health of the participants׳ improved, but limited gains were seen with regard to their QOL.

Public opinion of drug treatment policy: exploring the public's attitudes, knowledge, experience and willingness to pay for drug treatment strategies

BACKGROUND

Research evidence is strong for opiate replacement treatment (ORT). However, public opinion (attitudes) can be at odds with evidence. This study explored the relationships between, attitudes, knowledge of drugs and a range of socio-demographic variables that potentially influence attitude. This is relevant in the current policy arena in which a major shift from harm reduction to, rehabilitation is underway.

METHODS

A cross sectional postal questionnaire survey in Scotland was conducted where the drug, treatment strategy has changed from harm-reduction to recovery-based. A random sample (N=3000), of the general public, >18 years, and on the electoral register was used. The questionnaire was largely structured with tick box format but included two open questions for qualitative responses. Valuation was measured using the economic willingness-to-pay (WTP) method.

RESULTS

The response rate was 38.1% (1067/2803). Less than 10% had personal experience of drug, misuse but 16.7% had experience of drug misuse via a friend/acquaintance. Regression modelling revealed more positive attitudes towards drug users in those with personal experience of drug misuse, (p<0.001), better knowledge of drugs (p=0.001) and higher income (those earning >£50,000 per, annum compared to <£15K; p=0.01). Over half of respondents were not willing to pay anything for drug treatment indicating they did not value these treatments at all. Respondents were willing-to-pay most for community rehabilitation and least for methadone maintenance treatment. Qualitative analysis of open responses indicated many strong negative attitudes, doubts over the efficacy of methadone and consideration of addiction as self-inflicted. There was ambivalence with respondents weighing up negative feelings towards treatment against societal benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a gap between public attitudes and evidence regarding drug treatment. Findings suggest a way forward might be to develop and evaluate treatment that integrates ORT with a community rehabilitative approach. Evaluation of public engagement/education to improve knowledge of drug treatment effectiveness is recommended.

[Health economic evaluation for the extension clinics of methadone maintenance treatment]

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the cost, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility of the extension methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinics and provide the evidences of the strategy of scaling up the extension MMT clinics.

METHODS

A study was conducted in Dehong prefecture, Yunnan province, including Mang, Ruili city, Longchuan, Yingjiang, Lianghe county. 117 newly enrolling heroin addict patients in 17 extension MMT clinics were recruited as subjects from December 2010 to February 2011. An interview was conducted by the trained interviewers for the quality of life score of patients, and the cost of drug use was calculated. Table of outpatient costs of methadone maintenance treatment clinic of Dehong prefecture in Yunnan was used for collecting and calculating the fixed cost, operating cost of the clinics, and the unit cost and incremental cost of the patients from 2008 to 2010. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the extension clinics were analyzed by using the Markov model.

RESULTS

The total spending of extension clinics for 2008, 2009, and 2010 on average was ¥57 294, ¥80 752 and ¥74 739 respectively, or about ¥4379 annually per patient. The cost of averting one HIV infection was ¥316 509; the cost of averting one acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients was ¥508 676; and the cost of averting one death was ¥152 330. The cost of obtaining one life year (LY) was ¥3696 and the cost of obtaining one quality adjusted life year (QALY) was ¥9014. Comparing with drug users, the incremental cost utility ratio (ICUR) of the patients of the extension MMT clinics were -7074 yuan/QALY and -7162 yuan/LY.

CONCLUSION

The extension MMT clinic service is lower in cost, and better in cost-effectiveness and cost-utility.

[Costs-analysis of methadone program in the autonomous community La Rioja, Spain]

BACKGROUND

Methadone programs have been organized in each Spanish region in a specific way. In spite of the regional interests to manage those programs in a more efficient way, so far the costs of the programs are unknown. As a previous step, it would be desirable to understand the activities related to these programs as well as their respective costs. This article aims to calculate the cost of the Methadone program in the autonomous community of La Rioja, and to understand those parameters which generate a greater cost to this programme.

METHODS

The study followed a similar structure as the research recently applied to the region of Murcia. The reference year for the study of the annual costs of the Methadone program was 2010. Data were obtained from different registries of several institutions involved in the regional program. Costs were classified according to different stages and dispensation centres which participated in this programme.

RESULTS

Data analysis, for a concentration of 2 mg/ml of methadone, showed an approximate annual cost of 165.759 euros. Taking the total number of patients into consideration the individual cost was 412,34 euros.

CONCLUSIONS

Dispensation is the stage which caused the largest cost to the programme, the highest per patient cost corresponded to the centre with less patients due to the fact that fixed costs are shared by a smaller group of persons; the biggest global cost of the programme came from Logroño's center but its average cost is lower.

[Reimbursement of opiate substitution drugs to militaries in 2007]

INTRODUCTION

The use of psychoactive drugs by militaries is not compatible with the analytical skills and self-control required by their jobs. Military physicians take this problem into consideration by organising systematic drugs screening in the French forces. However, for technical reasons, opiates are not concerned by this screening with the agreement of the people concerned. The estimated number of militaries who use an opiate substitute may be an approach of heroin consumption in the French forces. This study describes buprenorphine and methadone reimbursements made during 2007 by the national military healthcare centre to French militaries.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Each French soldier is affiliated to a special health insurance. The national military healthcare centre has in its information system, all the data concerning drug reimbursement made to French military personnel. This is a retrospective study of buprenorphine and methadone reimbursements made during 2007 by the military healthcare centre, to militaries from the three sectors of the French forces, and from the gendarmerie and joint forces. Only one reimbursement of one of these two drugs during this period allowed the patient to be included in our study. Daily drug dose and treatment steadiness profile have been calculated according to the criteria of the French monitoring centre for drugs and drug addiction. The criteria of the National guidelines against frauds have been used to identify misuse of these drugs. Doctors' shopping behaviour has also been studied. Finally, the nature of the prescriber and the consumption of other drugs in combination with opiate substitute have been analysed.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-one military consumers of opiate substitute drugs (167 men and 14 women) participated. This sample included people from the three sectors of the French forces as well as from the gendarmerie and from the joint forces. The average age of the consumers was 26.6 years (20-42 years). The average length of service was 6.1 years (maximum 22 years service). One hundred and fifty-nine militaries had been delivered buprenorphine, 15 had been delivered methadone and seven had been delivered both. The prevalence of opiate substitute drug consumption by the militaries (52 per 100,000) is lower than in general population. According to the criteria of the National Healthcare Insurance, this population is not affected by abuse or fraud behaviour. Doctors' shopping behaviour is unusual. Opiate substitutes are prescribed by general physicians in 88% of issues. Only one prescriber was a military physician. An analysis of reimbursement of some drugs associated with opiate substitute has been made. The sampled military consume more psychoactive drugs (anxiolytics, antidepressants, hypnotics) than the French population under opiate substitution.

CONCLUSION

In our observation, the military physician is almost always excluded the process of substitution. His/her different responsibilities of care, but also in determining the working aptitude, lead to dissimulation behaviour by the militaries. The difficulty for military physicians is to identify such consumption. They have to evaluate the capacity to work through a physical and psychological examination.

Cost-effectiveness of methadone maintenance therapy as HIV prevention in an Indonesian high-prevalence setting: a mathematical modeling study

BACKGROUND

Indonesia faces an HIV epidemic that is in rapid transition. Injecting drug users (IDUs) are among the most heavily affected risk populations, with estimated prevalence of HIV reaching 50% or more in most parts of the country. Although Indonesia started opening methadone clinics in 2003, coverage remains low.

METHODS

We used the Asian Epidemic Model and Resource Needs Model to evaluate the long-term population-level preventive impact of expanding Methadone Maintenance Therapy (MMT) in West Java (43 million people). We compared intervention costs and the number of incident HIV cases in the intervention scenario with current practice to establish the cost per infection averted by expanding MMT. An extensive sensitivity analysis was performed on costs and epidemiological input, as well as on the cost-effectiveness calculation itself.

RESULTS

Our analysis shows that expanding MMT from 5% coverage now to 40% coverage in 2019 would avert approximately 2400 HIV infections, at a cost of approximately US$7000 per HIV infection averted. Sensitivity analyses demonstrate that the use of alternative assumptions does not change the study conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Our analyses suggest that expanding MMT is cost-effective, and support government policies to make MMT widely available as an integrated component of HIV/AIDS control in West Java.

Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of expanding harm reduction and antiretroviral therapy in a mixed HIV epidemic: a modeling analysis for Ukraine

BACKGROUND

Injection drug use (IDU) and heterosexual virus transmission both contribute to the growing mixed HIV epidemics in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. In Ukraine-chosen in this study as a representative country-IDU-related risk behaviors cause half of new infections, but few injection drug users (IDUs) receive methadone substitution therapy. Only 10% of eligible individuals receive antiretroviral therapy (ART). The appropriate resource allocation between these programs has not been studied. We estimated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies for expanding methadone substitution therapy programs and ART in mixed HIV epidemics, using Ukraine as a case study.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We developed a dynamic compartmental model of the HIV epidemic in a population of non-IDUs, IDUs using opiates, and IDUs on methadone substitution therapy, stratified by HIV status, and populated it with data from the Ukraine. We considered interventions expanding methadone substitution therapy, increasing access to ART, or both. We measured health care costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), HIV prevalence, infections averted, and incremental cost-effectiveness. Without incremental interventions, HIV prevalence reached 67.2% (IDUs) and 0.88% (non-IDUs) after 20 years. Offering methadone substitution therapy to 25% of IDUs reduced prevalence most effectively (to 53.1% IDUs, 0.80% non-IDUs), and was most cost-effective, averting 4,700 infections and adding 76,000 QALYs compared with no intervention at US$530/QALY gained. Expanding both ART (80% coverage of those eligible for ART according to WHO criteria) and methadone substitution therapy (25% coverage) was the next most cost-effective strategy, adding 105,000 QALYs at US$1,120/QALY gained versus the methadone substitution therapy-only strategy and averting 8,300 infections versus no intervention. Expanding only ART (80% coverage) added 38,000 QALYs at US$2,240/QALY gained versus the methadone substitution therapy-only strategy, and averted 4,080 infections versus no intervention. Offering ART to 80% of non-IDUs eligible for treatment by WHO criteria, but only 10% of IDUs, averted only 1,800 infections versus no intervention and was not cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Methadone substitution therapy is a highly cost-effective option for the growing mixed HIV epidemic in Ukraine. A strategy that expands both methadone substitution therapy and ART to high levels is the most effective intervention, and is very cost effective by WHO criteria. When expanding ART, access to methadone substitution therapy provides additional benefit in infections averted. Our findings are potentially relevant to other settings with mixed HIV epidemics. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Cost-utility analysis of methadone maintenance treatment in Lithuania

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluations in health care involve the identification, measurement, valuation, and then comparison of the costs (inputs) and outcomes of treatments or preventive activities. The aim was to analyze the cost-utility of six-month methadone maintenance treatment program in a Lithuanian primary health care setting.

METHODS

A prospective study design was used. All the information was obtained through the validated questionnaires at the baseline and 3- and 6-month follow-ups. WHOQOL-BREF was used to assess the quality of life; the costs were assessed using the DATCAP methodology from the perspective of a patient and outpatient clinic during follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 102 opioid-dependent patients were recruited in the study; 512 follow-up patient-months were obtained. The methadone maintenance treatment has significantly improved physical, psychological, and environmental components of quality of life during follow-up. Total program costs were 61 288.87 EUR. Cost paid by a patient comprised about 31% of total program costs. Cost per quality-adjusted life-month (QALM) for physical domain was 2227.55 EUR; for psychological domain, 1879.50 EUR; for social domain, 5467.64 EUR; and for environmental domain, 4626.47 EUR. Costs per QALM and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for total quality of life in the maintenance program were 2864.00 EUR and 34 368.00 EUR, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that 6-month methadone maintenance program was effective in the terms of quality-of-life improvement. Methadone maintenance treatment program was less effective in terms of cost per QALY.

A critical appraisal of the Australian comparative trial of methadone and buprenorphine maintenance

While there are serious problems with the analyses and reports, the Australian comparative trial of methadone and buprenorphine maintenance has generated very useful data. Contrary to the triallists' conclusions, their study provides good evidence that methadone is better than buprenorphine at retaining addicts in programmes where clinicians can adjust their patients' daily doses. The trial also provides the first evidence that methadone is significantly cheaper than buprenorphine maintenance. The savings from less frequent clinic attendance were more than offset by the extra time spent dispensing buprenorphine and the greater cost of the buprenorphine itself. In cost-effectiveness terms, the trial's results show methadone 'dominates' buprenorphine as an opioid maintenance drug because it is not only more effective but also cheaper.

The costs and consequences of three policy options for reducing heroin dependency

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

This study compares the costs and consequences of three interventions for reducing heroin dependency: pharmacotherapy maintenance, residential rehabilitation and prison.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Using Australian data, the interventions' cost - consequence ratio was estimated, taking into consideration reduction in heroin use during the intervention; the length of intervention; and post-intervention effects (as measured by abstinence rates). Sensitivity analyses were conducted, including varying the magnitude and duration of treatment effects, and ascribing positive outcomes only to treatment completers. A hybrid model that combined pharmacotherapy maintenance with a prison term was also considered.

RESULTS

If the post-programme abstinence rates are sustained for 2 years, then for an average heroin user the cost of averting a year of heroin use is approximately AUD$5000 for pharmacotherapy maintenance, AUD$11,000 for residential rehabilitation and AUD$52 000 for prison. Varying the parameters does not change the ranking of the programmes. If the completion rate in pharmacotherapy maintenance was raised above 95% (by the threat of prison for non-completers), the combined model of treatment plus prison may become the most cost-effective option.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Relative performance in terms of costs and consequences is an important consideration in the policy decision-making process, and quantitative data such as those reported herein can provide insights pertinent to evidence-based policy.

Hopping on the methadone bus

This paper investigates the impact of a 'free drug program' on the market equilibrium of drugs. We introduce a screening model of the hard drug market in which dealers use payment and punishment options to screen between high and low risk users. We show that, if a free drug program selects sufficiently many high-risk drug users, the pure-strategy separating market equilibrium ceases to exist and a symmetric mixed-strategy equilibrium results, in which drug users derive a higher expected utility. This encourages new drug users to enter the market. The novelty of the paper is the transmission mechanism for this effect, which is via the influence on market price.

The effect of alternative staff time data collection methods on drug treatment service cost estimates

Although a limited number of service cost estimates exist, no study has evaluated how differences in the method used to collect the staff time allocation across treatment services contribute to differences in service cost estimates. Three alternative data collection methods for estimating service-level costs in methadone treatment programs were evaluated: key informants, staff surveys, and staff diaries. We analyzed data from 25 methadone clinics across the United States. Results indicate that for the three primary services offered at methadone clinics-individual counseling, group counseling, and methadone dosing-no statistically significant differences exist in the mean estimates of costs per session across programs. Of the other five services analyzed, we found no statistically significant differences in two of the mean costs per session and a small but statistically significant difference in another service. We found large and statistically significant differences in mean costs for two services, initial patient assessment and initial medical services. Although there is no gold standard available to judge which method is the best to use, we concluded that the key informant method yields more reliable cost estimates compared with the staff methods and is less burdensome to both the treatment programs and to researchers. Our findings suggest that the key informant method is the preferred method for costing substance abuse treatment services.

Behavioral economic analysis of drug preference using multiple choice procedure data

The multiple choice procedure has been used to evaluate preference for psychoactive drugs, relative to money amounts (price), in human subjects. The present re-analysis shows that MCP data are compatible with behavioral economic analysis of drug choices. Demand curves were constructed from studies with intravenous fentanyl, intramuscular hydromorphone and oral methadone in opioid-dependent individuals; oral d-amphetamine, oral MDMA alone and during fluoxetine treatment, and smoked marijuana alone or following naltrexone pretreatment in recreational drug users. For each participant and dose, the MCP crossover point was converted into unit price (UP) by dividing the money value ($) by the drug dose (mg/70kg). At the crossover value, the dose ceases to function as a reinforcer, so "0" was entered for this and higher UPs to reflect lack of drug choice. At lower UPs, the dose functions as a reinforcer and "1" was entered to reflect drug choice. Data for UP vs. average percent choice were plotted in log-log space to generate demand functions. Rank of order of opioid inelasticity (slope of non-linear regression) was: fentanyl>hydromorphone (continuing heroin users)>methadone>hydromorphone (heroin abstainers). Rank order of psychostimulant inelasticity was d-amphetamine>MDMA>MDMA+fluoxetine. Smoked marijuana was more inelastic with high-dose naltrexone. These findings show this method translates individuals' drug preferences into estimates of population demand, which has the potential to yield insights into pharmacotherapy efficacy, abuse liability assessment, and individual differences in susceptibility to drug abuse.

Economic cost of the therapeutic workplace intervention added to methadone maintenance

Therapeutic workplace is a novel intervention that uses access to paid training and employment to reinforce drug abstinence within the context of standard methadone maintenance. We used the Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program as a standard method of estimating the economic costs of this intervention. In a 1-year period, the therapeutic workplace served 122 methadone maintenance clients who had a median length of stay of 22 weeks. The workplace maintained a mean daily census of 48 clients. The combined cost of methadone maintenance and the therapeutic workplace was estimated at US$362 per week. This cost is less than that of other treatments that might be used to promote abstinence in individuals who continue to use drugs during methadone treatment. Given prior evidence of effectiveness, these cost data may be useful to policy makers, social service agencies, and researchers interested in using or further developing the therapeutic workplace intervention.

Methadone in end-of-life pain management

-

Methadone and buprenorphine for the management of opioid dependence: a systematic review and economic evaluation

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine maintenance therapy (BMT) and methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) for the management of opioid-dependent individuals.

DATA SOURCES

Major electronic databases were searched from inception to August 2005. Industry submissions to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence were accessed.

REVIEW METHODS

The assessment of clinical effectiveness was based on a review of existing reviews plus an updated search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A decision tree with Monte Carlo simulation model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of BMT and MMT. Retention in treatment and opiate abuse parameters were sourced from the meta-analysis of RCTs directly comparing flexible MMT with flexible dose BMT. Utilities were derived from a panel representing a societal perspective.

RESULTS

Most of the included systematic reviews and RCTs were of moderate to good quality, and focused on short-term (up to 1-year follow-up) outcomes of retention in treatment and the level of opiate use (self-report or urinalysis). Most studies employed a trial design that compared a fixed-dose strategy (i.e. all individuals received a standard dose) of MMT or BMT and were conducted in predominantly young men who fulfilled criteria as opiate-dependent or heroin-dependent users, without significant co-morbidities. RCT meta-analyses have shown that a fixed dose of MMT or BMT has superior levels of retention in treatment and opiate use than placebo or no treatment, with higher fixed doses being more effective than lower fixed doses. There was evidence, primarily from non-randomised observational studies, that fixed-dose MMT reduces mortality, HIV risk behaviour and levels of crime compared with no therapy and one small RCT has shown the level of mortality with fixed-dose BMT to be significantly less than with placebo. Flexible dosing (i.e. individualised doses) of MMT and BMT is more reflective of real-world practice. Retention in treatment was superior for flexible MMT than flexible BMT dosing but there was no significant difference in opiate use. Indirect comparison of data from population cross-sectional studies suggests that mortality with BMT may be lower than that with MMT. A pooled RCT analysis showed no significant difference in serious adverse events with MMT compared with BMT. Although treatment modifier evidence was limited, adjunct psychosocial and contingency interventions (e.g. financial incentives for opiate-free urine samples) appeared to enhance the effects of both MMT and BMT. Also, MMT and BMT appear to be similarly effective whether delivered in a primary care or outpatient clinic setting. Although most of the included economic evaluations were considered to be of high quality, none used all of the appropriate parameters, effectiveness data, perspective and comparators required to make their results generalisable to the NHS context. One company (Schering-Plough) submitted cost-effectiveness evidence based on an economic model that had a 1-year time horizon and sourced data from a single RCT of flexible-dose MMT compared with flexible-dose BMT and utility values obtained from the literature; the results showed that for MMT vs no drug therapy, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was pound 12,584/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), for BMT versus no drug therapy, the ICER was pound 30,048/QALY and in a direct comparison, MMT was found to be slightly more effective and less costly than BMT. The assessment group model found for MMT versus no drug therapy that the ICER was pound 13,697/QALY, for BMT versus no drug therapy that the ICER was pound 26,429/QALY and, as with the industry model, in direct comparison, MMT was slightly more effective and less costly than BMT. When considering social costs, both MMT and BMT gave more health gain and were less costly than no drug treatment. These findings were robust to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Both flexible-dose MMT and BMT are more clinically effective and more cost-effective than no drug therapy in dependent opiate users. In direct comparison, a flexible dosing strategy with MMT was found be somewhat more effective in maintaining individuals in treatment than flexible-dose BMT and therefore associated with a slightly higher health gain and lower costs. However, this needs to be balanced by the more recent experience of clinicians in the use of buprenorphine, the possible risk of higher mortality of MMT and individual opiate-dependent users' preferences. Future research should be directed towards the safety and effectiveness of MMT and BMT; potential safety concerns regarding methadone and buprenorphine, specifically mortality and key drug interactions; efficacy of substitution medications (in particular patient subgroups, such as within the criminal justice system, or within young people); and uncertainties in cost-effectiveness identified by current economic models.

What do we get for our money? Cost-effectiveness of adding contingency management

AIMS

To assess the relative cost-effectiveness of lower versus higher cost prize-based contingency management (CM) treatments for cocaine abuse.

DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analyses based on resource utilization, unit costs and outcomes from a previous CM efficacy trial.

SETTING

Two community-based treatment centers.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (n = 120) enrolled in out-patient treatment for cocaine abuse.

INTERVENTION

Random assignment to one of three 12-week treatment conditions: standard treatment (STD) alone or two variants of STD combined with prize based CM. In CM, drawing for prizes was available to those submitting drug-free urine samples and completing goal-related activities. There were two levels of pay-out (referred to as $80 versus $240) based on the potential value of prizes won.

MEASUREMENTS

Costs per participant associated with counseling utilization, urine and breathalyzer testing, and operation of the prize-drawing procedure were derived from a survey conducted at 16 clinics that had participated in CM studies. The three measures of effectiveness were: (1) longest duration of consecutive abstinence; (2) percentage completing treatment; and (3) percentage of samples drug-free.

FINDINGS

The higher magnitude CM produced outcomes at a lower per unit cost than did the lower magnitude prize CM treatment. This was the case for all three outcome measures examined and held across various assumptions in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Cost-effectiveness analyses can inform policy decisions regarding selection of one treatment model over another. Decisions on adoption of new evidence-based treatments would be aided by more information on society's willingness to pay for incremental gains in effectiveness.

Socioeconomic determinants of planned methadone treatment

OBJECTIVES

To examine socioeconomic characteristics associated with planned methadone maintenance treatment (MMT).

METHODS

We performed multiple logistic regressions using data from the 1998 Treatment Episode Data Set, which tracks admissions for substance abuse treatment.

RESULTS

MMT was more prevalent among heroin users than nonheroin users. Among heroin users, females, Hispanics, Southerners, the employed, and those who are not homeless or in jail are more likely to be planned to receive MMT. Among nonheroin users, females were less likely to be planned for MMT.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater effort may be necessary to extend MMT to vulnerable populations.

Clinic-based treatment for opioid dependence: a qualitative inquiry

OBJECTIVES

To identify barriers and facilitators to treatment of opioid dependence in primary care clinics.

METHODS

In-depth interviews with 27 New York State clinic directors.

RESULTS

Stigmatizing attitudes emerged as a major barrier. Respondents often viewed opioid-dependent persons as manipulative, demanding, and disruptive. Commonly cited facilitators were physician training, increased office staffing, and greater mental health, social services, and addictions support.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals attitudinal barriers to address and supportive factors to promote in order to increase the limited availability of office-based treatment of opioid dependence in the United States compared with other countries.

Linking opioid-dependent hospital patients to drug treatment: Health care use and costs 6 months after randomization

AIMS

To conduct an economic evaluation of the first 6 months' trial of treatment vouchers and case management for opioid-dependent hospital patients.

DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial and evaluation of administrative data.

SETTING

Emergency department, wound clinic, in-patient units and methadone clinic in a large urban public hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The study randomized 126 opioid-dependent drug users seeking medical care.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized among four groups. These received vouchers for 6 months of methadone treatment, 6 months of case management, both these interventions, or usual care.

FINDINGS

During the first 6 months of this study, 90% of those randomized to vouchers alone enrolled in methadone maintenance, significantly more than the 44% enrollment in those randomized to case management without vouchers (P < 0.001). The direct costs of substance abuse treatment, including case management, was 4040 dollars for those who received vouchers, 4177 dollars for those assigned to case management and 5277 dollars for those who received the combination of both interventions. After 3 months, the vouchers alone group used less heroin than the case management alone group. The difference was not significant at 6 months. There were no significant differences in other health care costs in the 6 months following randomization.

CONCLUSION

Vouchers were slightly more effective but no more costly than case management during the initial 6 months of the study. Vouchers were as effective and less costly than the combination of case management and vouchers. The finding that vouchers dominate is tempered by the possibility that case management may lower medical care costs.

On-site medical care in methadone maintenance: associations with health care use and expenditures

To evaluate whether long-term drug treatment with on-site medical care is associated with diminished inpatient and outpatient service use and expenditures, we linked prospective interview data to concurrent Medicaid claims of drug users in a methadone program with comprehensive medical services. Patient care was classified as follows: long-term (>/=6 months) drug treatment with on-site usual source of medical care (linked care), long-term drug treatment only, or neither. Multivariate analyses adjusted for visit clustering within patients (n = 423, with 1,161 person-years of observation). After adjustment, linked care participants had more outpatient visits (p < .001), fewer emergency department (ED) visits (24% vs. 33%, p = .02) and fewer hospitalizations (27% vs. 40%, p = .002) than the "neither" group. Ambulatory care expenditures in the linked group were increased, whereas expenditures for other services were similar or reduced. Long-term drug treatment with on-site medical care was associated with increased ambulatory care, less ED and inpatient care, and no net increase in expenditures.

Value for money in drug treatment: economic evaluation of prison methadone

BACKGROUND

Although methadone maintenance treatment in community settings is known to reduce heroin use, HIV infection and mortality among injecting drug users (IDU), little is known about prison methadone programs. One reason for this is the complexity of undertaking evaluations in the prison setting. This paper estimates the cost-effectiveness of the New South Wales (NSW) prison methadone program.

METHODS

Information from the NSW prison methadone program was used to construct a model of the costs of the program. The information was combined with data from a randomised controlled trial of provision of prison methadone in NSW. The total program cost was estimated from the perspective of the treatment provider/funder. The cost per heroin free day, compared with no prison methadone, was estimated. Assumptions regarding resource use were tested through sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

The annual cost of providing prison methadone in NSW was estimated to be 2.9 million Australian dollars (or 3,234 Australian dollars per inmate per year). The incremental cost effectiveness ratio is 38 Australian dollars per additional heroin free day.

CONCLUSIONS

From a treatment perspective, prison methadone is no more costly than community methadone, and provides benefits in terms of reduced heroin use in prisons, with associated reduction in morbidity and mortality.

Pharmaco-economics of community maintenance for opiate dependence: a review of evidence and methodology

This literature review synthesizes and appraises evidence on the pharmaco-economic value of community maintenance for opiate dependence. Included studies enrolled opiate-dependent subjects aged 18 years or over participating in a community maintenance programme. Cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analyses provided some evidence supporting the value of methadone maintenance in combination with psychosocial services and of heroin co-prescription. Evidence on the pharmaco-economic profile of maintenance with buprenorphine as compared with methadone is mixed. Few studies carried out an economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial and studies adopting a modelling approach suffered from problems with the quality and validity of parameter estimates. Studies were also limited in the range of costs and consequences considered. The cost-benefit literature showed positive net benefits from community maintenance programmes. A longer length of stay of subjects in methadone maintenance was associated with greater reductions in criminal activity. However, measurement of benefits was limited to savings from reduced crime rates. Health benefits were rarely considered. Cost-benefit studies based on a before-and-after comparison were not able to consider the impact of treatment on mortality of opiate-dependent subjects. There is a need for better-designed economic evaluations that examine whether treatment benefits exceed costs, in terms of both financial benefits and health gain.

Elimination of methadone benefits in the Oregon Health Plan and its effects on patients

OBJECTIVES

This prospective study assessed the impacts of a policy change to Oregon's Medicaid program (Oregon Health Plan; OHP) that eliminated methadone benefits for 60 percent of active methadone patients. Recipients of OHP Standard (expanded Medicaid benefits, which were discontinued after the policy change) self-selected into two groups: those who paid for methadone after the policy change and those who terminated treatment. OHP Plus beneficiaries (traditional Medicaid) did not lose benefits.

METHODS

A total of 149 patients participated in the study, and interviews were conducted at baseline (time of policy change) and one, three, and 12 months after the policy change. Patients were assessed with the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), Timeline Follow Back assessment, and chart review.

RESULTS

Patients who left treatment because they were unable to pay for methadone services showed significant elevations in ASI composite scores for drug and legal problems at baseline and at two and three months after the policy change. The patients who attempted to self-pay experienced significantly more employment problems than the other two groups. The OHP Standard recipients who paid for their methadone treatment over the year were more likely to have additional resources to pay for methadone, be employed, and have stable housing.

CONCLUSIONS

The elimination of methadone treatment benefits in the OHP had substantial negative impacts for patients with the greatest indicators of need.

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 dollars(buprenorphine-based outpatient); to AUD 605 dollars for conventional outpatient; AUD 1404 dollars for conventional inpatient; AUD 1990 dollars for rapid detoxification under sedation; and to AUD 2689 dollars 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 cost-effective inpatient method.

Cost-utility analysis of methadone maintenance treatment: a methodological approach

Economic considerations influence the substance user treatment system. These considerations influence who gets treatment and for how long, as well as determining what services they receive and in what setting. Current medical literature argues that maintenance treatment reduces risk-taking behavior, such as injection drug use and needle sharing. Treatment also reduces the mortality associated with abuse of opiates by injection and can cause decreases in costs incurred by the criminal justice system and social services agencies. This suggests the need for complex economic evaluations of a maintenance treatment to find out the optimum treatment program. This paper describes methods of economic evaluation in health care and reviews the methodology of cost-utility analysis in economic evaluations of methadone maintenance treatment.

Benefits and costs of methadone treatment: results from a lifetime simulation model

Several studies have examined the benefits and costs of drug treatment; however, they have typically focused on the benefits and costs of a single treatment episode. Although beneficial for certain analyses, the results are limited because they implicitly treat drug abuse as an acute problem that can be treated in one episode. We developed a Monte Carlo simulation model that incorporates the chronic nature of drug abuse. Our model represents the progression of individuals from the general population aged 18-60 with respect to their heroin use, treatment for heroin use, criminal behavior, employment, and health care use. We also present three model scenarios representing an increase in the probability of going to treatment, an increase in the treatment length of stay, and a scenario in which drug treatment is not available to evaluate how changes in treatment parameters affect model results. We find that the benefit-cost ratio of treatment from our lifetime model (37.72) exceeds the benefit-cost ratio from a static model (4.86). The model provides a rich characterization of the dynamics of heroin use and captures the notion of heroin use as a chronic recurring condition. Similar models can be developed for other chronic diseases, such as diabetes, mental illness, or cardiovascular disease.

Cost utility analysis of co-prescribed heroin compared with methadone maintenance treatment in heroin addicts in two randomised trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost utility of medical co-prescription of heroin compared with methadone maintenance treatment for chronic, treatment resistant heroin addicts.

DESIGN

Cost utility analysis of two pooled open label randomised controlled trials.

SETTING

Methadone maintenance programmes in six cities in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

430 heroin addicts.

INTERVENTIONS

Inhalable or injectable heroin prescribed over 12 months. Methadone (maximum 150 mg a day) plus heroin (maximum 1000 mg a day) compared with methadone alone (maximum 150 mg a day). Psychosocial treatment was offered throughout.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

One year costs estimated from a societal perspective. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) based on responses to the EuroQol EQ-5D at baseline and during the treatment period.

RESULTS

Co-prescription of heroin was associated with 0.058 more QALYs per patient per year (95% confidence interval 0.016 to 0.099) and a mean saving of 12,793 euros (8793 pounds sterling, 16,122 dollars) (1083 to 25,229 euros) per patient per year. The higher programme costs (16 222 euros; lower 95% confidence limit 15,084 euros) were compensated for by lower costs of law enforcement (- 4129 euros; upper 95% confidence limit - 486 euros) and damage to victims of crime (- 25,374 euros; upper 95% confidence limit - 16,625 euros). The results were robust for the use of national EQ-5D tariffs and for the exclusion of the initial implementation costs of heroin treatment. Completion of treatment is essential; having participated in any abstinence treatment in the past is not.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-prescription of heroin is cost effective compared with treatment with methadone alone for chronic, treatment resistant heroin addicts.

Methadone treatment for pain states

Methadone is a synthetic opioid with potent analgesic effects. Although it is associated commonly with the treatment of opioid addiction, it may be prescribed by licensed family physicians for analgesia. Methadone's unique pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics make it a valuable option in the management of cancer pain and other chronic pain, including neuropathic pain states. It may be an appropriate replacement for opioids when side effects have limited further dosage escalation. Metabolism of and response to methadone varies with each patient. Transition to methadone and dosage titration should be completed slowly and with frequent monitoring. Conversion should be based on the current daily oral morphine equivalent dosage. After starting methadone therapy or increasing the dosage, systemic toxicity may not become apparent for several days. Some medications alter the absorption or metabolism of methadone, and their concurrent use may require dosing adjustments. Methadone is less expensive than other sustained-release opioid formulations.

A randomised trial of the cost effectiveness of buprenorphine as an alternative to methadone maintenance treatment for heroin dependence in a primary care setting

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Buprenorphine offers an alternative to methadone in the treatment of heroin dependence, and has the advantage of allowing alternate-day dosing. This study is the first to examine the cost effectiveness of buprenorphine as maintenance treatment for heroin dependence in a primary care setting using economic and clinical data collected within a randomised trial.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The study was a randomised, open-label, 12-month trial of 139 heroin-dependent patients in a community setting receiving individualised treatment regimens of buprenorphine or methadone. Those who were currently on a methadone program (n = 57; continuing therapy subgroup) were analysed separately from new treatment recipients (n = 82; initial therapy subgroup). The study took a broad societal perspective and included health, crime and personal costs. Data on resource use and outcomes were a combination of clinical records and self report at interview. The main outcomes were incremental cost per additional day free of heroin use and per QALY. An analysis of uncertainty calculated the likelihood of net benefits for a range of acceptable money values of outcomes. All costs were in 1999 Australian dollars (DollarA).

RESULTS

The estimated mean number of heroin-free days did not differ significantly between those randomised to methadone (225 [95% CI 91, 266]), or buprenorphine (222 [95% CI 194, 250]) over the year of the trial. Buprenorphine was associated with an average 0.03 greater QALYs over 52 weeks (not significant). The total cost was DollarA 17,736 (95% CI -DollarA 2981, DollarA 38,364) with methadone and DollarA 11,916 (95% CI DollarA 7697, DollarA 16,135) with buprenorphine; costs excluding crime were DollarA 4513 (95% CI DollarA 3495, DollarA 5531) and DollarA 5651 (95% CI DollarA 4202, DollarA 7100). With additional heroin-free days as the outcome, and crime costs included buprenorphine has a lower cost but less heroin-free days. If crime costs are excluded buprenorphine has a higher cost and worse outcome than methadone. With additional QALYs as the outcome, the cost effectiveness of buprenorphine is DollarA 39,404 if crime is excluded, but buprenorphine is dominant if crime is included.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial found no significant differences in costs or outcomes between methadone and buprenorphine maintenance in this particular setting. Although some of the results suggest that methadone may have a cost advantage, it is difficult to infer from the trial data that offering buprenorphine as an alternative would have a significant effect on total costs or outcomes. The point estimates of costs and outcomes suggest that buprenorphine may have an advantage in those initiating therapy. The confidence intervals were wide, however, and the likelihood of net benefits from substituting one treatment for another was close to 50%.