Literature DB >> 16097397

Buprenorphine and methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence: methods and design of the COBRA study.

Hans-Ulrich Wittchen1, Sabine M Apelt, Gerhard Bühringer, Markus Gastpar, Markus Backmund, Jörg Gölz, Michael R Kraus, Felix Tretter, Jens Klotsche, Jens Siegert, David Pittrow, Michael Soyka.   

Abstract

Buprenorphine and methadone are the two established substitution drugs licensed in many countries for the treatment of opioid dependence. Little is known, however, about how these two drugs are applied and how they work in clinical practice. In this paper we present the aims, methods, design and sampling issues of a collaborative multi-stage epidemiological study (COBRA) to address these issues. Based on a nationally representative sample of substitution physicians, the study is designed as an observational, naturalistic study, consisting of three major parts. The first part was a national survey of substitution doctors (prestudy, n = 379 doctors). The second part was a cross-sectional study (n = 223 doctors), which consisted of a target-week assessment of 2,694 consecutive patients to determine (a) the severity and problem profiles and treatment targets; (b) the choice and dosage scheme of the substitution drug; (c) past and current interventions, including treatment of comorbid hepatitis C; and (d) cross-sectional differences between the two drugs with regard to comorbidity, clinical course, acceptance/compliance and social integration. The third part consists of a prospective-longitudinal cohort study of 48 methadone-treated and 48 buprenorphine-treated patients. The cohort is followed up over a period of 12 months to investigate whether course and outcome of the patients differ by type or treatment received in terms of clinical, psychosocial, pharmaco-economic and other related measures. The response rate among substitution doctors was 57.1%; that among eligible patients was 71.7%. Comparisons with the federal registers reveal that the final samples of doctors and patients may be considered nationally representative with regard to regional distribution, training, type of setting as well as the frequency of patients treated with buprenorphine or methadone. The COBRA study provides a unique comprehensive database, informing about the natural allocation and intervention processes in routine care and about the course and outcome of patients treated with buprenorphine or methadone.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16097397      PMCID: PMC6878433          DOI: 10.1002/mpr.14

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res        ISSN: 1049-8931            Impact factor:   4.035


  20 in total

1.  Prevalence and recognition of depressive syndromes in German primary care settings: poorly recognized and treated?

Authors:  H U Wittchen; M Höfler; W Meister
Journal:  Int Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.659

2.  The development of a Short Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS).

Authors:  M Gossop
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 3.913

3.  A controlled trial of buprenorphine treatment for opioid dependence.

Authors:  R E Johnson; J H Jaffe; P J Fudala
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-05-27       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The measurement of opiate dependence.

Authors:  G Sutherland; G Edwards; C Taylor; G Phillips; M Gossop; R Brady
Journal:  Br J Addict       Date:  1986-08

Review 5.  Biological correlates of methadone maintenance pharmacotherapy.

Authors:  M J Kreek
Journal:  Ann Med Interne (Paris)       Date:  1994-11

6.  Double-blind randomized trial of buprenorphine and methadone in opiate dependence.

Authors:  S Petitjean; R Stohler; J J Déglon; S Livoti; D Waldvogel; C Uehlinger; D Ladewig
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2001-03-01       Impact factor: 4.492

Review 7.  Clinical efficacy of buprenorphine: comparisons to methadone and placebo.

Authors:  Walter Ling; Donald R Wesson
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2003-05-21       Impact factor: 4.492

8.  The effects of psychosocial services in substance abuse treatment.

Authors:  A T McLellan; I O Arndt; D S Metzger; G E Woody; C P O'Brien
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-04-21       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 9.  Reliability and validity studies of the WHO--Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI): a critical review.

Authors:  H U Wittchen
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  1994 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.791

10.  Buprenorphine versus methadone maintenance therapy: a randomized double-blind trial with 405 opioid-dependent patients.

Authors:  Richard P Mattick; Robert Ali; Jason M White; Susannah O'Brien; Seija Wolk; Cath Danz
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 6.526

View more
  3 in total

1.  [Insufficient involvement of psychiatrists in substitution treatment].

Authors:  M Soyka; S M Apelt; H-U Wittchen
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 1.214

2.  Alcohol and drug treatment systems in public health perspective: mediators and moderators of population effects.

Authors:  Thomas F Babor; Kerstin Stenius; Anders Romelsjo
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.035

3.  Retention in Georgia opioid substitution therapy program and associated factors.

Authors:  Ekaterine Ruadze; Khatuna Todadze
Journal:  Harm Reduct J       Date:  2016-12-08
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.