Psychosocial combined with agonist maintenance treatments versus agonist maintenance treatments alone for treatment of opioid dependence.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance treatments are effective in retaining patients in treatment and suppressing heroin use. Questions remain regarding the efficacy of additional psychosocial services offered by most maintenance programs.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of any psychosocial plus any agonist maintenance treatment versus standard agonist treatment for opiate dependence in respect of retention in treatment, use of substances, health and social status. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched: Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group's Register of Trials (February 2008), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library issue 1, 2008), MEDLINE (January 1966 to February 2008), EMBASE (January 1980 to February 2008), CINAHL (January 2003-February 2008), PsycINFO (January 1985 to April 2003), reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised studies comparing any psychosocial plus any agonist with any agonist alone intervention for opiate dependence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN
RESULTS: Twenty eight trials, 2945 participants, were included. These studies considered twelve different psychosocial interventions and three pharmacological maintenance treatments. Comparing any psychosocial plus any maintenance pharmacological treatment to standard maintenance treatment, results do not show benefit for retention in treatment, 23 studies, 2193 participants, Relative Risk (RR) 1.02 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.07), use of opiate during the treatment, eight studies, 681 participants, RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.13), compliance, three studies, MD 0.43 (95% CI -0.05 to 0.92), psychiatric symptoms, four studies, MD 0.02 (-0.19 to 0.23), depression, four studies, MD -1.30 (95% CI -3.31 to 0.72) and results at follow up as number of participants still in treatment at the end of the follow-up , 289 participants, RR 0.91 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.06). In spite of results at follow up as number of participants abstinent at the end of the follow-up, five studies, 232 participants, show a benefit in favour of the associated treatment RR1.15 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.32). The remaining outcomes were analysed only in single studies considering a limited number of participants.Comparing the different psychosocial approaches, results are never statistically significant for all the comparisons and outcomes. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that adding any psychosocial support to maintenance treatments improve the number of participants abstinent at follow up; no differences for the other outcome measures. Data do not show differences between different psychosocial interventions also for contingency approaches, contrary to all expectations. Duration of the studies was too short to analyse relevant outcomes such as mortality.