Methadone-Buprenorphine Transfers Using Low Dosing of Buprenorphine: An Open-Label, Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

IF 4.2 3区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Chris Tremonti, James Blogg, Nazila Jamshidi, Ricky Harjanto, Nicholas Miles, Charlotte Ismay, Robert Page, Llew Mills, Nicholas Buckley, Varan Perananthan, Nicholas Lintzeris, Paul Haber
{"title":"Methadone-Buprenorphine Transfers Using Low Dosing of Buprenorphine: An Open-Label, Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Chris Tremonti, James Blogg, Nazila Jamshidi, Ricky Harjanto, Nicholas Miles, Charlotte Ismay, Robert Page, Llew Mills, Nicholas Buckley, Varan Perananthan, Nicholas Lintzeris, Paul Haber","doi":"10.1097/ADM.0000000000001379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare a low-dosing protocol to standard practice for methadone-buprenorphine transfers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook a nonrandomized open-label clinical trial across 8 sites from NSW, Australia. Participants prescribed methadone wishing to transfer to buprenorphine could either choose or be randomized to a low-dose transfer or standard care transfer as per NSW health guidelines. The low-dose protocol started at 0.2 mg BD and increased to 16 mg on day 6, with flexible dosing thereafter. The primary outcome was continuation of buprenorphine 1 week post-transfer. Binary logistic regression was used to access the primary outcome with demographic differences between the groups included as covariates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 117 participants who commenced the study, 101 in the low-dose arm and 16 in standard care. Mean methadone dose was 82 mg in the low-dose arm and 46 mg in standard care. The primary outcome was met by 81 participants in the low-dose arm (80%) and 13 participants in standard care (81%). There was no significant between-arm difference in the odds of the primary outcome (OR = 2.22; 95% CI: 0.45-10.91; P = 0.327). Four participants (4%) in the low-dose arm experienced precipitated withdrawal against 1 (6%) in standard care. Higher methadone dose decreased the odds of successful transfer by 20% (OR = 0.8 per 10 mg methadone; 95% CI: 0.7-0.99; P = 0.04). Withdrawal scores between the 2 arms were similar.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We were unable to detect a difference between low dosing and standard care for methadone to buprenorphine transfers. Increasing methadone dose was a predictor of success; setting (ambulatory or inpatient) was not.</p>","PeriodicalId":14744,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Addiction Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Addiction Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000001379","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To compare a low-dosing protocol to standard practice for methadone-buprenorphine transfers.

Methods: We undertook a nonrandomized open-label clinical trial across 8 sites from NSW, Australia. Participants prescribed methadone wishing to transfer to buprenorphine could either choose or be randomized to a low-dose transfer or standard care transfer as per NSW health guidelines. The low-dose protocol started at 0.2 mg BD and increased to 16 mg on day 6, with flexible dosing thereafter. The primary outcome was continuation of buprenorphine 1 week post-transfer. Binary logistic regression was used to access the primary outcome with demographic differences between the groups included as covariates.

Results: There were 117 participants who commenced the study, 101 in the low-dose arm and 16 in standard care. Mean methadone dose was 82 mg in the low-dose arm and 46 mg in standard care. The primary outcome was met by 81 participants in the low-dose arm (80%) and 13 participants in standard care (81%). There was no significant between-arm difference in the odds of the primary outcome (OR = 2.22; 95% CI: 0.45-10.91; P = 0.327). Four participants (4%) in the low-dose arm experienced precipitated withdrawal against 1 (6%) in standard care. Higher methadone dose decreased the odds of successful transfer by 20% (OR = 0.8 per 10 mg methadone; 95% CI: 0.7-0.99; P = 0.04). Withdrawal scores between the 2 arms were similar.

Conclusions: We were unable to detect a difference between low dosing and standard care for methadone to buprenorphine transfers. Increasing methadone dose was a predictor of success; setting (ambulatory or inpatient) was not.

使用低剂量丁丙诺啡转移美沙酮-丁丙诺啡:一项开放标签、非随机临床试验。
目的:比较低剂量方案与标准做法的美沙酮-丁丙诺啡转移。方法:我们在澳大利亚新南威尔士州的8个地点进行了一项非随机开放标签临床试验。根据新南威尔士州的健康指南,希望将美沙酮转移到丁丙诺啡的参与者可以选择或随机选择低剂量转移或标准护理转移。低剂量方案从0.2 mg BD开始,在第6天增加到16 mg,此后灵活给药。主要终点是转移后1周继续使用丁丙诺啡。使用二元逻辑回归来获得主要结果,并将组间人口统计学差异作为协变量。结果:有117名参与者开始研究,101名在低剂量组,16名在标准治疗组。低剂量组的平均美沙酮剂量为82毫克,标准治疗组为46毫克。低剂量组有81名参与者(80%)和标准治疗组有13名参与者(81%)达到主要结局。主要结局的机率在两组间无显著差异(OR = 2.22;95% ci: 0.45-10.91;P = 0.327)。低剂量组4名参与者(4%)经历了沉淀性停药,而标准组1名参与者(6%)经历了沉淀性停药。较高的美沙酮剂量使转移成功率降低20% (OR = 0.8 / 10mg美沙酮;95% ci: 0.7-0.99;P = 0.04)。两组的戒断评分相似。结论:我们无法发现美沙酮到丁丙诺啡转移的低剂量和标准护理之间的差异。增加美沙酮剂量是成功的预测因子;设置(门诊或住院)则没有。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Addiction Medicine
Journal of Addiction Medicine 医学-药物滥用
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
260
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of Journal of Addiction Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, is to promote excellence in the practice of addiction medicine and in clinical research as well as to support Addiction Medicine as a mainstream medical sub-specialty. Under the guidance of an esteemed Editorial Board, peer-reviewed articles published in the Journal focus on developments in addiction medicine as well as on treatment innovations and ethical, economic, forensic, and social topics including: •addiction and substance use in pregnancy •adolescent addiction and at-risk use •the drug-exposed neonate •pharmacology •all psychoactive substances relevant to addiction, including alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, marijuana, opioids, stimulants and other prescription and illicit substances •diagnosis •neuroimaging techniques •treatment of special populations •treatment, early intervention and prevention of alcohol and drug use disorders •methodological issues in addiction research •pain and addiction, prescription drug use disorder •co-occurring addiction, medical and psychiatric disorders •pathological gambling disorder, sexual and other behavioral addictions •pathophysiology of addiction •behavioral and pharmacological treatments •issues in graduate medical education •recovery •health services delivery •ethical, legal and liability issues in addiction medicine practice •drug testing •self- and mutual-help.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信