No abstract

Therapeutic outcomes for patients who self-select office-based treatment with buprenorphine are essentially comparable to those seen in patients treated with methadone programs. There are few absolute contraindications to the use of buprenorphine, although the experience and skill levels of treating physicians can vary considerably, as can access to the resources needed to treat comorbid medical or psychiatric conditions--all of which affect outcomes. It is important to conduct a targeted assessment of every patient to confirm that the provider has resources available to meet the patient's needs. Patients should be assessed for a broad array of biopsychosocial needs in addition to opioid use and addiction, and should be treated, referred, or both for help in meeting all their care needs, including medical care, psychiatric care, and social assistance. Current literature demonstrates promising efficacy of buprenorphine, though further research will continue to demonstrate its effectiveness for special populations, such as adolescents, pregnant women, and other vulnerable populations. Since the time of this review, several new studies have provided new data to continue to improve our understanding of the safety and efficacy of buprenorphine for special patient populations.

Over the past two decades, there has been a significant increase in the prescribing of opioids, with associated increases in opioid addiction and overdose deaths. This article reviews the evidence for the effectiveness and risk of developing an opioid use disorder (OUD) in those patients treated with chronic opioid therapy (COT) for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Rates of development of OUD range from 0-50 %, and aberrant drug related behaviors (ADRBs) are reported to be 20 %. Health care providers must properly assess, screen, and carefully monitor patients on COT utilizing evidence-based tools.

Careful management of methadone induction and stabilization, coupled with patient education and increased clinical vigilance, can save lives in this vulnerable patient population.

Buprenorphine is an efficacious treatment for opioid dependence recently approved for office-based medical practice. The purpose of the study was to describe the background characteristics, treatment process, outcomes and correlates of outcomes for patients receiving buprenorphine maintenance in "real world" office-based settings in New York City, without employing the many patient exclusion criteria characterizing clinical research studies of buprenorphine, including absence of co-occurring psychiatric and non-opioid substance use disorders. A convenience sample of six physicians completed anonymous chart abstraction forms for all patients who began buprenorphine induction or who transferred to these practices during 2003-2005 (N = 86). The endpoint was the patient's current status or status at discharge from the index practice, presented in an intent-to-treat analysis. The results were: male (74%); median age (38 yrs); White, non-Hispanic (82%); employed full-time, (58%); HCV+ (15%); substance use at intake: prescription opioids (50%), heroin (35%), non-opioids (49%); median length of treatment (8 months); median maintenance dose (15 mg/day); prescribed psychiatric medication (63%). The most frequent psychiatric disorders were: major depression, obsessive-compulsive and other anxiety, bipolar. At the endpoint: retained in the index practice (55%); transferred to other buprenorphine practice (6%); transferred to other treatment (7%); lost to contact or out of any treatment (32%). Outcomes were positive, in that 2/3 of patients remained in the index practice or transferred to other treatment. Patients living in their own home or misusing prescription opioids (rather than heroin) were more likely, and those employed part-time were less likely, to be retained in the index practice. At the endpoint, 24% of patients were misusing drugs or alcohol. Co-occurring psychiatric disorders and polysubstance abuse at intake were common, but received clinical attention, which may explain why their effect on outcomes was minimal.

Carefully selected methadone maintenance patients in medical maintenance have a high retention rate and a low incidence of substance abuse and lost medication. Voluntary withdrawal from methadone maintenance after one or two decades is possible. The authors believe that medical maintenance should be made available to appropriate patients in other localities.

Methadone medical maintenance is the treatment of stable methadone-maintained patients in primary care physicians' offices under an exemption from federal methadone regulations. Reports from seven such programs in six states show high retention and low frequencies of illicit drug use. Patients and physicians indicate high levels of satisfaction. Although methadone maintenance has a long history of safety and efficacy, most methadone medical maintenance programs are no longer operating or accepting new patients. Federal regulations for standard methadone clinics allow some features of methadone medical maintenance, and advocacy for state approval of these changes is strongly recommended.

No abstract