4.4 Article

Factors predicting retention in treatment: 10-year experience of a methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinic in Israel

Journal

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
Volume 82, Issue 3, Pages 211-217

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.09.004

Keywords

methadone maintenance treatment; Kaplan Meier survival analyses; retention; predictors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aims were to identify predictors of treatment retention in an Israeli methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinic, and to compare the findings to other international Settings. We prospectively studied 492 patients admitted since 1993 through 10 years to an Israeli MMT clinic associated with a university-affiliated tertiary care medical center. Analyses (Kaplan Meier and Cox regression) included methadone dose and urinalysis results (for methadone, cocaine, opiates, benzodiazepines, THC, amphetamines) of each patient in the first month and after 1 year in treatment (or during the last month if the stay was > 3 months and < 1 year) and patients' characteristics (modified ASI). The 1-year retention rate was 74.4%; 65.8% stopped opiate abuse after 1 year in treatment. On admission, 13.6% of patients had used cocaine: there was a net decrease of 61.6% after 1 year. Factors predicting prolonged retention in MMT treatment (Cox regression) were daily methadone dose of 100 mg or greater, negative urine for opiates after 1 year, and being a parent on admission. We conclude that our good outcome results (high rate of retention after 1 year (74.4%), high proportion of opiate abuse cessation (65.8%), and net reduction in cocaine abuse, similar to normal standards in other MMT clinics elsewhere in the world, justify the expansion of the MMT clinic network in Israel in order to make treatment available to all those who need it. A protocol favoring higher methadone dosage as appropriate is recommended. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available