OBJECTIVE: Methadone maintenance programs (MMP) currently offer the best treatment for opioid-addicted patients. The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of three MMPs that offered varying levels of supplementary services. Health-related quality of life was used as a measure of effectiveness. METHODS: A 12-month follow-up study of 586 patients beginning methadone treatment in Drug Care Centers in Barcelona was performed. The Nottingham Health Profile was used to measure quality of life. Standard unit costs and total cost per patient were calculated from activity registries. Sociodemographic, health-related and toxicological data were collected through a semi-structured interview. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed through two multiple linear regressions with the same adjusting variables. RESULTS: The greater the number of supplementary services involved, the higher the costs. The adjusted models revealed a significant increase in health-related quality of life (an increase of 8% in the Nottingham Health Profile) and in costs (17%) between low- and medium-intensity programs. CONCLUSION: The medium-intensity program showed the best cost-effectiveness ratio. However, the study's limitations preclude categoric generalization of the data.
OBJECTIVE:Methadone maintenance programs (MMP) currently offer the best treatment for opioid-addictedpatients. The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of three MMPs that offered varying levels of supplementary services. Health-related quality of life was used as a measure of effectiveness. METHODS: A 12-month follow-up study of 586 patients beginning methadone treatment in Drug Care Centers in Barcelona was performed. The Nottingham Health Profile was used to measure quality of life. Standard unit costs and total cost per patient were calculated from activity registries. Sociodemographic, health-related and toxicological data were collected through a semi-structured interview. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed through two multiple linear regressions with the same adjusting variables. RESULTS: The greater the number of supplementary services involved, the higher the costs. The adjusted models revealed a significant increase in health-related quality of life (an increase of 8% in the Nottingham Health Profile) and in costs (17%) between low- and medium-intensity programs. CONCLUSION: The medium-intensity program showed the best cost-effectiveness ratio. However, the study's limitations preclude categoric generalization of the data.
Authors: Antònia Domingo-Salvany; M Teresa Brugal; Gregorio Barrio; Francisco González-Saiz; M José Bravo; Luís de la Fuente Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2010-12-01 Impact factor: 3.186