Service providers' adherence to methadone maintenance treatment protocol in China

Compulsory and voluntary drug treatment models in China: A need for improved evidence-based policy and practice to reduce the loaded burden of substance use disorders

In China, the majority of people who use drugs (PWUD) identified by authorities are admitted to compulsory isolated detoxification centers in which their treatment is administered by administrative and judicial systems that restrict their freedom. China's compulsory isolated detoxification centers have been criticized as an abuse of human rights. The two other primary models of drug treatment in China include community-based treatment and medically-oriented voluntary treatment. This article presents an overview of the three primary treatment models for PWUD currently practiced in China. The existing compulsory and voluntary treatment models predominantly operate separately from each other, and lack evidence-based guidelines. A drug treatment system that embraces social support, psychosocial interventions and well-qualified health-based workforce is currently lacking. We propose that China needs to employ a localized model that is composed of well-facilitated and evidence-based treatment methods for both compulsory and voluntary treatment for PWUD to reduce the burden of illicit drug use. The implementation of these models of care, however, need to be tailored to the country's historical background, large population of PWUD and cultural settings in order to succeed. Urgent changes in drug treatment policies and practices are needed by the Chinese governments at different levels, organizations and front-line practitioners if we are to see a reduction in the incidence and impact of harms related to substance use in China.

Perceptions of professionals regarding interventions involving family members responsible for justice-involved youth with substance use disorders in Santiago, Chile

BACKGROUND

Eliciting professionals' experiences of current drug treatment programmes can lead to improvements of these youth-centred programmes through the involvement of the concerned youths' families. We explored perceived barriers amongst professionals concerning interventions incorporating parents or guardians responsible for justice-involved youth with substance use disorders.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with fourteen female and four male professionals, each representing one of eighteen programmes under the Chilean National Drug Treatment Programme (2016-2017), who were tasked with contacting and/or intervening in the families of justice-involved youth. Subsequently, we performed traditional content analysis.

RESULTS

The professionals identified four key barriers impeding interventions: (1) parents' non-adherence to the treatment and issues relating to their role fulfilment; (2) tensions within the programme design that constrain the families' involvement in the interventions; (3) the lack of a supportive professional network offering interventions that complement drug treatment; (4) the problematic and dangerous living contexts of these families that discourage family involvement. Additionally, professionals identified intervention needs for improving treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The negative perceptions of professionals regarding the interventions as well as families and family contexts of justice-involved youth, and the lack of support from other programmes, induced feelings of hopelessness and pessimism amongst the professionals regarding the effectiveness of the Chilean National Drug Treatment Programme. It is essential to consider professionals' perspectives not only to benefit from their expertise, but also to assess whether their perspectives may hinder the implementation of changes when attempting to innovate drug treatment modalities aimed at improving their outcomes.

Treatment adherence amongst drug users attending public and private methadone maintenance clinics in a northern province of Vietnam

Background

Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) has been proven to be effective in improving health status and the quality of life of illicit drug users. Due to the quick expand of methadone program, socialization through co-payment service is a critical to the success of it. In Nam Dinh, Vietnam, MMT has been used in public clinics and one private clinic. Such effectiveness of this treatment has been found to depend largely on adherence to treatment. This study aims to explore the compliance rate and its influencing factors among drug users between public and private clinics in Nam Dinh province, Vietnam.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on 395 participants from January to September in 2018 in three MMT clinics in Nam Dinh, Vietnam. We applied the convenience sampling technique to recruit respondents. Data on socioeconomics characteristics, MMT adherence (measured by Visual Analogue Scale – VAS) and level of social/family support were collected.

Results

43.3% of participants reported complete adherence to the MMT program during the time of research. Significant factors affect MMT adherence among illicit drug users including family income, history of drug rejections, concurrence in drug usage, far distance from MMT clinics, and having only peer. Patients in MMT private clinic had higher complete adherence than that of public MMT (OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.13; 2.94). Having contacts with peer drug users associated with a higher rate of incomplete adherence (OR = 2.83, 95% CI = 1.39; 5.73).

Conclusions

The findings support the establishment of private MMT clinics alongside public ones, while further researches to determine the optimal dose and ways to reduce the impact of peer drug user’s influence are encouraged to be conducted.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This review represents one in a family of three reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity, or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 electronic bibliographic databases up to February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials with 2560 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (7/13 studies, 53%) and community (6/13 studies, 47%) settings. The rating of bias was affected by the lack of clear reporting by authors, and we rated many items as 'unclear'. In two studies (190 participants) collaborative case management in comparison to treatment as usual did not reduce drug use (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 2.12; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), reincarceration at nine months (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.57; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), and number of subsequent arrests at 12 months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.49; 1 study, 113 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study (36 participants) comparing buprenorphine to placebo showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at end of treatment (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.20) and three months (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35); very low-certainty evidence. No adverse events were reported. One study (38 participants) comparing interpersonal psychotherapy to a psychoeducational intervention did not find reduction in drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50; low-certainty evidence). One study (31 participants) comparing acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) to a waiting list showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use using the Addiction Severity Index (mean difference (MD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and abstinence from drug use at six months (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43); low-certainty evidence. One study (314 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills to a therapeutic community programme and aftercare showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.27), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03); criminal activity (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03), or drug-related crime (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.32). A significant reduction for arrested (not for parole) violations at six months follow-up was significantly in favour of cognitive behavioural skills (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.77; very low-certainty evidence). A second study with 115 participants comparing cognitive behavioural skills to an alternative substance abuse treatment showed no significant reduction in reincarceration at 12 months (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.12; low certainty-evidence. One study (44 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills and standard therapy versus treatment as usual showed no significant reduction in Addiction Severity Index (ASI) drug score at three months (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09) and six months (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.05), and incarceration at three months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.68) and six months (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.27); very low-certainty evidence. One study (171 participants) comparing a single computerised intervention versus case management showed no significant reduction in the number of days not using drugs at three months (MD -0.89, 95% CI -4.83 to 3.05; low certainty-evidence). One study (116 participants) comparing dialectic behavioural therapy and case management (DBT-CM) versus a health promotion intervention showed no significant reduction at six months follow-up in positive drug testing (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.03), number of people not using marijuana (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.59), crack (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.14), cocaine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12), heroin (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.13), methamphetamine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20), and self-reported drug use for any drug (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.56); very low-certainty evidence. One study (211 participants) comparing a therapeutic community programme versus work release showed no significant reduction in marijuana use at six months (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.19 to 5.65), nor 18 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.45), heroin use at six months (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14), nor 18 months (RR 1.92, 95% CI 0.24 to 15.37), crack use at six months (RR 2.07, 95% CI 0.41 to 10.41), nor 18 months (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.19 to 14.06), cocaine use at six months (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.50), nor 18 months (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.35). It also showed no significant reduction in incarceration for drug offences at 18 months (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.42); with overall very low- to low-certainty evidence. One study (511 participants) comparing intensive discharge planning and case management versus prison only showed no significant reduction in use of marijuana (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.16), hard drugs (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.43), crack cocaine (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.54), nor positive hair testing for marijuana (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.03); it found a significant reduction in arrests (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.87), but no significant reduction in drug charges (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.53) nor incarceration (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.39); moderate-certainty evidence. One narrative study summary (211 participants) comparing buprenorphine pre- and post-release from prison showed no significant reduction in drug use at 12 months post-release; low certainty-evidence. No adverse effects were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies showed a high degree of heterogeneity for types of comparisons, outcome measures and small samples. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required. On one outcome of arrest (no parole violations), we identified a significant reduction when cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was compared to a therapeutic community programme. But for all other outcomes, none of the interventions were effective. Larger trials are required to increase the precision of confidence about the certainty of evidence.

Meeting the challenges of opioid dependence in China: experience of opioid agonist treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the role of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinics in minimizing the harms caused by opioid dependence, as well as China's current challenges in this area. In addition, we aim to discuss the treatment strategies for opioid dependence within the international community in the current global situation of serious abuse of opioids.

RECENT FINDINGS

Like other countries facing the opioid crisis, China is actively working on revising policy, improving the addiction treatment system and promotion of MMT clinics to cope with the risks of opioid abuse. As they provide one of the most effective opioid agonist treatments for opioid dependence, MMT clinics play an extremely important role in this campaign. The MMT programme in China has had a significant beneficial effect on reduction of opioid use and the prevalence rate of HIV/AIDS.

SUMMARY

The efficacy of MMT for patients with opioid dependence in China is confirmed by the present review. However, several important challenges still need to be resolved. China's treatment experience also provides a reference for other countries facing the danger of opioid dependence.

Stigma towards people who use drugs: A case vignette study in methadone maintenance treatment clinics in China

BACKGROUND

Drug use stigma among service providers has been recognized as a barrier to improving the accessibility and outcomes of addiction treatment. This study examined the stigmatizing attitudes towards people who use drugs (PWUD) among service providers in methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinics in China and its associated factors.

METHODS

The cross-sectional study used the baseline data of a randomized intervention trial conducted in China, and the data were collected from January 2012 to August 2013. A total of 418 MMT service providers were included in the study. Stigma towards PWUD was measured via a 10-item scale embedded in two case vignettes (PWUD and non-PWUD). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed to evaluate the vignette difference for each item of the scale. The linear mixed model was used to identify the adjusted association between drug use stigma and other interested variables including demographics, professional background, and MMT knowledge of the service providers.

RESULTS

The Wilcoxon signed-rank tests showed that the participants had a higher level of stigmatizing attitudes towards PWUD than non-PWUD (p-value<0.001 for all items of the stigma scale). The linear mixed model identified that the reception of national MMT training was associated with a lower degree of drug use stigma (estimate=-1.79; 95% CI: -3.13, -0.45; p-value = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

The findings of the study provide evidence of the existence of drug use stigma among MMT providers in China. The expansion of national-level training and the development of stigma reduction interventions are needed to address this issue.