Zev Schuman-Olivier1, M Claire Greene2, Brandon G Bergman3, John F Kelly3. 1. Harvard Medical School, Department of Psychiatry, United States; Massachusetts General Hospital, United States; Cambridge Health Alliance, United States. Electronic address: zschuman@cha.harvard.edu. 2. Massachusetts General Hospital, United States. 3. Harvard Medical School, Department of Psychiatry, United States; Massachusetts General Hospital, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Opioid misuse and dependence rates among emerging adults have increased substantially. While office-based opioid treatments (e.g., buprenorphine/naloxone) have shown overall efficacy, discontinuation rates among emerging adults are high. Abstinence-based residential treatment may serve as a viable alternative, but has seldom been investigated in this age group. METHODS: Emerging adults attending 12-step-oriented residential treatment (N=292; 18-24 years, 74% male, 95% White) were classified into opioid dependent (OD; 25%), opioid misuse (OM; 20%), and no opiate use (NO; 55%) groups. Paired t-tests and ANOVAs tested baseline differences and whether groups differed in their during-treatment response. Longitudinal multilevel models tested whether groups differed on substance use outcomes and treatment utilization during the year following the index treatment episode. RESULTS: Despite a more severe clinical profile at baseline among OD, all groups experienced similar during-treatment increases on therapeutic targets (e.g., abstinence self-efficacy), while OD showed a greater decline in psychiatric symptoms. During follow-up relative to OM, both NO and OD had significantly greater Percent Days Abstinent, and significantly less cannabis use. OD attended significantly more outpatient treatment sessions than OM or NO; 29% of OD was completely abstinent at 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Findings here suggest that residential treatment may be helpful for emerging adults with opioid dependence. This benefit may be less prominent, though, among non-dependent opioid misusers. Randomized trials are needed to compare more directly the relative benefits of outpatient agonist-based treatment to abstinence-based, residential care in this vulnerable age-group, and to examine the feasibility of an integrated model.
BACKGROUND: Opioid misuse and dependence rates among emerging adults have increased substantially. While office-based opioid treatments (e.g., buprenorphine/naloxone) have shown overall efficacy, discontinuation rates among emerging adults are high. Abstinence-based residential treatment may serve as a viable alternative, but has seldom been investigated in this age group. METHODS: Emerging adults attending 12-step-oriented residential treatment (N=292; 18-24 years, 74% male, 95% White) were classified into opioid dependent (OD; 25%), opioid misuse (OM; 20%), and no opiate use (NO; 55%) groups. Paired t-tests and ANOVAs tested baseline differences and whether groups differed in their during-treatment response. Longitudinal multilevel models tested whether groups differed on substance use outcomes and treatment utilization during the year following the index treatment episode. RESULTS: Despite a more severe clinical profile at baseline among OD, all groups experienced similar during-treatment increases on therapeutic targets (e.g., abstinence self-efficacy), while OD showed a greater decline in psychiatric symptoms. During follow-up relative to OM, both NO and OD had significantly greater Percent Days Abstinent, and significantly less cannabis use. OD attended significantly more outpatient treatment sessions than OM or NO; 29% of OD was completely abstinent at 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Findings here suggest that residential treatment may be helpful for emerging adults with opioid dependence. This benefit may be less prominent, though, among non-dependent opioid misusers. Randomized trials are needed to compare more directly the relative benefits of outpatient agonist-based treatment to abstinence-based, residential care in this vulnerable age-group, and to examine the feasibility of an integrated model.
Authors: Lisa A Marsch; Mary Ann Chutuape Stephens; Timothy Mudric; Eric C Strain; George E Bigelow; Rolley E Johnson Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Jessica A Dreifuss; Margaret L Griffin; Katherine Frost; Garrett M Fitzmaurice; Jennifer Sharpe Potter; David A Fiellin; Jeffrey Selzer; Mary Hatch-Maillette; Susan C Sonne; Roger D Weiss Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Marina Davoli; Anna M Bargagli; Carlo A Perucci; Patrizia Schifano; Valeria Belleudi; Matthew Hickman; Giuseppe Salamina; Roberto Diecidue; Federica Vigna-Taglianti; Fabrizio Faggiano Journal: Addiction Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Cameron M Yi; Andrew S Huhn; J Gregory Hobelmann; John Finnerty; Bernadette Solounias; Kelly E Dunn Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 4.647