Subjective effects of prisoners using buprenorphine for detoxification

Johnstone, Alexander; Duffy, Timothy; Martin, Colin R.

doi:10.1108/17449201111256907

Cited by 2 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All the studies conducted either semistructured or open-ended interviews, focus groups or observation to collect data. Six studies assessed methadone and/or buprenorphine detoxification and/or maintenance programmes (Larney et al, 2017, Rubinstein et al, 2017, Perkins and Sprang, 2013, Johnstone et al, 2011, Stöver et al, 2006, Asher, 2013, while the remaining studies reviewed methadone maintenance programmes alone. Only four studies were conducted in LMIC countries (Kyrgyzstan, Indonesia and Iran) (Rhodes et al, 2019, Culbert et al, 2015, Moradi et al, 2015, Zamani et al, 2010.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Studies Included In The Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, prisoners progressed from inhalation to injection in prisons to deal with their consequent increased tolerance for heroin (i.e. the need for a larger quantity of drug to achieve the same subjective effects) (Asher, 2013, Johnstone et al, 2011, Zamani et al, 2010.…”

Section: Availability Of Illicit Drugsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies in the US, UK, EU, Iran, Kyrgyzstan and Indonesia all found that concerns relating to the perceived side-effects of methadone deterred participation. Both prisoners and their families viewed methadone withdrawal as worse than heroin withdrawal, and even as lethal (Rhodes et al, 2019, Johnstone et al, 2011, Zamani et al, 2010, Stöver et al, 2006, Carlin, 2005. Qualitative data made the strength of these fears clear:…”

Section: The Lack Of Understanding Of the Effects And Function Of Methadonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of the comments reported around methadone did not reflect a straightforward rejection of OAT programmes, but rather a preference for the use of buprenorphine over methadone by staff and prisoners (Asher, 2013). Prisoners often reported more positive experiences in reducing withdrawal and craving from opioids with these drugs (Larney et al, 2017, Johnstone et al, 2011, Awgu et al, 2010 but their availability is limited in prisons (Larney et al, 2017, Brinkley-Rubinstein et al, 2017, Johnstone et al, 2011, Awgu et al, 2010.…”

Section: The Lack Of Understanding Of the Effects And Function Of Methadonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, a few studies found that prison staff held less stigmatising attitudes towards prisoners receiving methadone as compared to heroin users when they had a better understanding of prisoners' backgrounds (Moradi et al, 2015, Johnstone et al, 2011, Carlin, 2005. Sometimes such understandings drew upon a family history of addiction (Perkins and Sprang, 2013).…”

Section: Fear Of Stigmatisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of qualitative evidence on barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) programmes in prisons

Komalasari

Wilson

Haw

2021

International Journal of Drug Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Opioid Agonist Treatment (OAT) programmes are regarded as a gold standard treatment for people living with Opioid Use Disorders (OUDs). However, OAT programmes are often unavailable or poorly implemented in prisons, in spite of the large numbers of people living with OUDs and the high risk of HIV transmission in prison settings. Unusually, this systematic review synthesizes qualitative evidence relating to barriers to, and facilitators of, the implementation of OAT programmes in prisons in high-and low/middle-income countries (LMICs) to provide more nuanced, contextualised understandings of how prison stakeholders perceive and/or experience OAT programmes within different prison settings. Methods: We systematically reviewed six electronic databases for studies published between January 2005 and December 2019 involving prison stakeholders: policy-makers, governors, healthcare staff, prison officers, and prisoners. The search identified 8091 studies, of which only 16 incorporated qualitative methods (including qualitative elements of mixed methods) and met our quality criteria. Four of these studies were conducted in LMICs (Kyrgyzstan, Iran (2) and Indonesia). Results: Findings were organized under three broad themes: (1) perceived benefits of OAT programmes; (2) barriers to the implementation and development of OAT programmes; and (3) treatment processes. Discussion: A lack of a clear understanding of the roles of OAT programmes and doubts regarding their effectiveness for people living with OUDs in prisons are critical barriers to prisoner participation in both high-and LMIC countries. Prison systems, particularly in LMICs, often lack the resources to mitigate problems with implementation. This review highlights an urgent need to develop further qualitative studies into prison OAT programmes, employing varied methods to explore such contexts in greater depth and minimize the impact of harms relating to OUDs in prisons.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of the Studies Included In The Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Availability Of Illicit Drugsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Lack Of Understanding Of the Effects And Function Of Methadonementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Lack Of Understanding Of the Effects And Function Of Methadonementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fear Of Stigmatisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of qualitative evidence on barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) programmes in prisons

Komalasari

Wilson

Haw

2021

International Journal of Drug Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Management of withdrawal from alcohol and other drugs

Lintzeris¹,

Sunjic²,

Demirkol³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review on management of withdrawal from alcohol and other drugs aimed to identify: the most effective practices; which withdrawal strategies are most effective in improving treatment outcomes for special population groups; and the differential effects of withdrawal management approaches by setting. The review identified the importance of a ‘package of care’ which includes psychosocial, physical and pharmacological interventions, and these should be incorporated into all withdrawal services. The challenge is to ensure that effective services are available, patient-centred, evidence-based and efficient. The review suggests that a re- examination of the NSW approach is needed with more emphasis on ambulatory withdrawal services. The review also highlights a need for more research into interventions for special populations including older people.

show abstract

Subjective effects of prisoners using buprenorphine for detoxification

Cited by 2 publications

References 35 publications

A systematic review of qualitative evidence on barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) programmes in prisons

A systematic review of qualitative evidence on barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) programmes in prisons

Management of withdrawal from alcohol and other drugs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About