Dennis McCarty1, Christina Bougatsos1, Brian Chan1, Kim A Hoffman1, Kelsey C Priest1, Sara Grusing1, Roger Chou1. 1. Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Pacific Northwest Evidence-Based Practice Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland (McCarty, Bougatsos, Chan, Grusing, Chou); Portland State University School of Public Health, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland (McCarty, Hoffman); Department of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University School of Medicine, Portland (Chan); and Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburg (Priest).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The authors conducted a scoping review to survey the evidence landscape for studies that assessed outcomes of treating patients with opioid use disorder with methadone in office-based settings. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched, and reference lists were reviewed to identify additional studies. Studies were eligible if they focused on methadone treatment in office-based settings conducted in the United States or other highly developed countries and reported outcomes (e.g., retention in care). Randomized trials and controlled observational studies were prioritized; uncontrolled and descriptive studies were included when stronger evidence was unavailable. One investigator abstracted key information, and a second verified data. A scoping review approach broadly surveyed the evidence, and therefore study quality was not rated formally. RESULTS: Eighteen studies of patients treated with office-based methadone were identified, including six trials, eight observational studies, and four additional articles discussing use of pharmacies to dispense methadone. Studies on office-based methadone treatment, including primary care-based dispensing, were limited but consistently found that stable methadone patients valued office-based care and remained in care with low rates of drug use; outcomes were similar compared with stable patients in regular care. Office-based methadone treatment was associated with higher treatment satisfaction and quality of life. Limitations included underpowered comparisons and small samples. CONCLUSIONS: Limited research suggests that office-based methadone treatment and pharmacy dispensing could enhance access to methadone treatment for patients with opioid use disorder without adversely affecting patient outcomes and, potentially, inform modifications to federal regulations. Research should assess the feasibility of office-based care for less stable patients.
OBJECTIVE: The authors conducted a scoping review to survey the evidence landscape for studies that assessed outcomes of treating patients with opioid use disorder with methadone in office-based settings. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched, and reference lists were reviewed to identify additional studies. Studies were eligible if they focused on methadone treatment in office-based settings conducted in the United States or other highly developed countries and reported outcomes (e.g., retention in care). Randomized trials and controlled observational studies were prioritized; uncontrolled and descriptive studies were included when stronger evidence was unavailable. One investigator abstracted key information, and a second verified data. A scoping review approach broadly surveyed the evidence, and therefore study quality was not rated formally. RESULTS: Eighteen studies of patients treated with office-based methadone were identified, including six trials, eight observational studies, and four additional articles discussing use of pharmacies to dispense methadone. Studies on office-based methadone treatment, including primary care-based dispensing, were limited but consistently found that stable methadone patients valued office-based care and remained in care with low rates of drug use; outcomes were similar compared with stable patients in regular care. Office-based methadone treatment was associated with higher treatment satisfaction and quality of life. Limitations included underpowered comparisons and small samples. CONCLUSIONS: Limited research suggests that office-based methadone treatment and pharmacy dispensing could enhance access to methadone treatment for patients with opioid use disorder without adversely affecting patient outcomes and, potentially, inform modifications to federal regulations. Research should assess the feasibility of office-based care for less stable patients.
Authors: Van L King; Michael S Kidorf; Kenneth B Stoller; Robert Schwartz; Kenneth Kolodner; Robert K Brooner Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2006-08-14
Authors: John W McIlveen; Kim Hoffman; Kelsey C Priest; Dongseok Choi; Phillip Todd Korthuis; Dennis McCarty Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2021 Nov-Dec 01 Impact factor: 4.647
Authors: Dennis McCarty; Brian Chan; Bradley M Buchheit; Christina Bougatsos; Sara Grusing; Roger Chou Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2022 May-Jun 01 Impact factor: 4.647
Authors: Divane de Vargas; Caroline Figueira Pereira; Rosa Jacinto Volpato; Ana Vitória Corrêa Lima; Rogério da Silva Ferreira; Sheila Ramos de Oliveira; Thiago Faustino Aguilar Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-18 Impact factor: 4.614