| Literature DB >> 23497263 |
Fang Yang1, Peng Lin, Yan Li, Qun He, Qisui Long, Xiaobing Fu, Yulan Luo.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aims were to identify predictors of treatment retention in methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinics in Pearl River Delta, China.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23497263 PMCID: PMC3599968 DOI: 10.1186/1477-7517-10-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Harm Reduct J ISSN: 1477-7517
Characteristics of Patients’ in methadone maintenance treatment clinics and relations to treatment retention (=2728)
| Gender** | male | 2448 | 89.7 |
| | female | 280 | 10.3 |
| Age(years) * | ≤30 | 420 | 15.4 |
| | >30 | 2308 | 84.6 |
| Marital status | single | 1329 | 48.7 |
| | married | 1399 | 51.3 |
| Education years** | <6 | 2181 | 79.9 |
| | 7-12 | 481 | 17.6 |
| | >12 | 66 | 2.4 |
| Employment | no | 1495 | 54.8 |
| | yes | 1233 | 45.2 |
| Relationship with family** | bad | 2238 | 82.0 |
| | good | 490 | 18.0 |
| Living with family or friends** | no | 1435 | 52.6 |
| | yes | 1293 | 47.4 |
| Initial drug use age | ≤20 | 560 | 20.5 |
| | 21~30 | 1886 | 69.1 |
| | >30 | 282 | 10.3 |
| Re-admission | no | 1406 | 51.5 |
| | yes | 1322 | 48.5 |
| Daily drug use times pre-admission | ≤3 | 2218 | 81.3 |
| | >3 | 510 | 18.7 |
| Drug use years pre-admission* | ≤5 | 367 | 13.5 |
| | 6~10 | 816 | 29.9 |
| | >10 | 1537 | 56.3 |
| Needle sharing experience* | no | 2333 | 85.5 |
| | yes | 395 | 14.5 |
| Urban residence** | no | 1272 | 46.6 |
| | yes | 1456 | 53.4 |
| Daily dosage(mg)** | ≤30 | 688 | 25.2 |
| | 31~50 | 895 | 32.8 |
| | >50 | 1145 | 42.0 |
| History of being arrested** | no | 1406 | 51.5 |
| | yes | 1322 | 48.5 |
| Perceived Satisfaction with MMT treatment** | no | 1440 | 52.8 |
| | yes | 1288 | 47.2 |
| Considering treatment open time suitable** | no | 1458 | 53.4 |
| | yes | 1270 | 46.6 |
| Urine morphine test** | negative | 1625 | 59.6 |
| | positive | 1103 | 40.4 |
| Considering treatment cost suitable** | no | 1449 | 53.1 |
| | yes | 1279 | 46.9 |
| Drug use cost pre-MMT admission | ≤300 | 2122 | 77.8 |
| | >300 | 606 | 22.2 |
| Duration of MMT treatment(years) ** | ≤1 | 1616 | 59.2 |
| | 1 <&≤2 | 545 | 20.0 |
| | >2 | 567 | 20.8 |
| MMT treatment outcome | retained | 607 | 22.3 |
| Drop-out | 2121 | 77.7 |
Note: (*) For statistically significant differences to MMT retention p<0.05; (**) For statistically significant differences to MMT retention p<0.01.
Cox’s proportional hazards model analyses on factors associated with MMT retention duration
| Age group(year)( ≤30=0) | | | | | |
| >30 | 1 | 0.69** | 0.62~0. 77 | 0.78** | 0.69~0.88 |
| Residence(urban=0) | | | | | |
| rural | 1 | 1.25** | 1.20~1.30 | 1.12* | 1.01~1.25 |
| income(others=0) | | | | | |
| family or friends | 1 | 0.19** | 0.17~0.21 | 0.40** | 0.31~0.52 |
| fixed income | 2 | 0.21** | 0.18~0.24 | 0.40** | 0.30~0.54 |
| temporary income | 3 | 0.20** | 0.18~0.22 | 0.43** | 0.33~0.55 |
| social welfare | 4 | 0.17** | 0.11~0.26 | 0.41** | 0.23~0.72 |
| Living with family or friends(yes=0) | | | | | |
| other | 1 | 5.50** | 4.84~6.23 | | |
| Relationship with family(bad=0) | | | | | |
| good | 1 | 0.31** | 0.29~0.34 | 0.68** | 0.58~0.80 |
| Drug use years pre-admission(years) (>10=0) | | | | | |
| ≤5 | 1 | 1.14* | 1.02~1.28 | | |
| 6~10 | 2 | 1.13** | 1.04~1.23 | | |
| Sharing needles(no=0) | | | | | |
| yes | 1 | 1.25** | 1.12~1.39 | 1.23* | 1.08~1.40 |
| Considering treatment cost suitable(no=0) | | | | | |
| yes | 1 | 0.35** | 0.32~0.38 | 0.71** | 0.60~0.84 |
| Considering treatment operation time suitable(no=0) | | | | | |
| yes | 1 | 0.27** | 0.25~0.30 | 0.73** | 0.62~0.87 |
| Daily expense for drug (RMB¥)prior to MMT(>300=0) | | | | | |
| ≤300 | 1 | 1.21** | 1.10~1.33 | 0. 80** | 0.71~0.90 |
| Re-enrolled(no=0) | | | | | |
| yes | 1 | 1.49** | 1.42~1.56 | 1.41** | 1.34~1.49 |
| History of being arrested(no=0) | | | | | |
| yes | | 5.43** | 4.96~5.96 | 1.35** | 1.08~1.69 |
| Daily treatment dosage(mg)(>50=0) | | | | | |
| ≤30 | 1 | 1.25** | 1.14~1.38 | 1.44** | 1.29~1.61 |
| 31~50 | 2 | 1. 27** | 1.17~1.39 | 1.33** | 1.21~1.48 |
| Communication with former drug taking peers last month(yes=0) | | | | | |
| no | 1 | 0.60** | 0.57~0.63 | 0.90** | 0.84~0.98 |
| Satisfaction with MMT service(no=0) | | | | | |
| yes | 1 | 0.23** | 0.20~0.25 | ||
Note:MMT outcome assignment: Retention =0,drop-out=1.
* Statistically significant (p<0.05).
** Statistically significant (p<0.01).
Figure 1MMT retention rate and retention durance in Pearl River Delta, Guangdong, 2006.1-2010.9.