Thomas Clausen1, Katinka Anchersen, Helge Waal. 1. University of Oslo, Medical Faculty, Institute of Psychiatry, SERAF - National Centre for Addiction Research, Oslo, Norway. thomas.clausen@medisin.uio.no
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) is generally considered to reduce mortality in opiate dependents. However, the level of mortality reduction is still uncertain. This study investigates mortality reductions in an "intention-to-treat" perspective including all dropouts. The mortality reducing effects of OMT are examined both within treatment and post-treatment. The study separates overdose and total mortality reductions. METHODS: The study is a prospective cross-registry study with up to 7 years follow-up. All opiate dependents in Norway who applied for OMT (a total of 3789 subjects) were cross-linked with data from the death registry from Statistics Norway. Date and cause of death were crossed with dates for initiation and termination of OMT, and subjects' age and gender. A baseline was established from the waiting list mortality rate. Intention-to-treat was investigated by analysing mortality among the entire population that started OMT. RESULTS: Mortality in treatment was reduced to RR 0.5 (relative risk) compared with pre-treatment. In the "intention-to-treat" perspective, the mortality risk was reduced to RR 0.6 compared with pre-treatment. The patients who left the treatment programme showed a high-mortality rate, particularly males. CONCLUSIONS: OMT significantly reduces risk of mortality also when examined in an intention-to-treat perspective. Studies that evaluate effects of OMT only in patients retained in treatment tend to overestimate benefits. Levels of overdose mortality will influence the risk reduction. Cross-registry studies as the current one are an important supplement to other observational designs in this field.
BACKGROUND: Opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) is generally considered to reduce mortality in opiate dependents. However, the level of mortality reduction is still uncertain. This study investigates mortality reductions in an "intention-to-treat" perspective including all dropouts. The mortality reducing effects of OMT are examined both within treatment and post-treatment. The study separates overdose and total mortality reductions. METHODS: The study is a prospective cross-registry study with up to 7 years follow-up. All opiate dependents in Norway who applied for OMT (a total of 3789 subjects) were cross-linked with data from the death registry from Statistics Norway. Date and cause of death were crossed with dates for initiation and termination of OMT, and subjects' age and gender. A baseline was established from the waiting list mortality rate. Intention-to-treat was investigated by analysing mortality among the entire population that started OMT. RESULTS: Mortality in treatment was reduced to RR 0.5 (relative risk) compared with pre-treatment. In the "intention-to-treat" perspective, the mortality risk was reduced to RR 0.6 compared with pre-treatment. The patients who left the treatment programme showed a high-mortality rate, particularly males. CONCLUSIONS:OMT significantly reduces risk of mortality also when examined in an intention-to-treat perspective. Studies that evaluate effects of OMT only in patients retained in treatment tend to overestimate benefits. Levels of overdose mortality will influence the risk reduction. Cross-registry studies as the current one are an important supplement to other observational designs in this field.
Authors: Adam J Gordon; David A Fiellin; Peter D Friedmann; Marc N Gourevitch; Kevin L Kraemer; Julia H Arnsten; Richard Saitz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-10-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Noa Krawczyk; Ramin Mojtabai; Elizabeth A Stuart; Michael Fingerhood; Deborah Agus; B Casey Lyons; Jonathan P Weiner; Brendan Saloner Journal: Addiction Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: George E Woody; Sabrina A Poole; Geetha Subramaniam; Karen Dugosh; Michael Bogenschutz; Patrick Abbott; Ashwin Patkar; Mark Publicker; Karen McCain; Jennifer Sharpe Potter; Robert Forman; Victoria Vetter; Laura McNicholas; Jack Blaine; Kevin G Lynch; Paul Fudala Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-11-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nickolas D Zaller; Alexander R Bazazi; Lavinia Velazquez; Josiah D Rich Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2009-02-23 Impact factor: 3.390