| Literature DB >> 35329387 |
Ting-Gang Chang1,2, Ting-Ting Yen3,4, Wen-Yu Hsu5,6,7, Shan-Mei Chang8,9.
Abstract
Methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) is a well-established and effective treatment for heroin use disorders. Whether frontal lobe function and demoralization serve as suitable prognostic and outcome assessment factors remains unknown. A quasi-experimental study was conducted with a single-group repeated-measures design at a medical center and mental hospital in Taiwan. We enrolled 70 participants (39 completed treatments and 31 dropped out). Frontal lobe function, demoralization, depression, and craving at three time points were analyzed. There were differences between patients who completed the treatment (n = 39) and those who did not (n = 31). Thirty-nine patients completed the treatment (average age, 45.5 years; 89.7% men; average duration of heroin use, 27.21 years; MMT, 38.18 mg/day). Post-MMT (6 months), frontal lobe function, demoralization, depression, and craving significantly improved. Dropouts had higher frontal lobe function, lower demoralization, higher craving, younger age, and earlier onset age than patients who completed the pretest treatment. Clinicians should be aware of the severity of demoralization. Clinicians may select suitable patients for MMT by assessing frontal lobe function, demoralization, craving, age, and onset age. A 6-month course of MMT improved demoralization, frontal lobe function, depression, and addiction. Six months of treatment was more effective than 3 months. Suitable patient identification and continuous treatment are important in MMT.Entities:
Keywords: craving; demoralization; depression; frontal assessment battery; methadone
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35329387 PMCID: PMC8954515 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063703
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Descriptive characteristics of all participants, full attendance group, and dropout group.
| Variable | All Participants n = 70 | Full Attendance Group | Dropout Group n = 31 |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Items | Number of People | % | Number of People | % | Number of People | % | ||
| gender | male | 62 | 88.6 | 35 | 89.7 | 27 | 87.1 | 0.51 |
| female | 8 | 11.4 | 4 | 10.3 | 4 | 12.9 | ||
| education | primary school | 6 | 8.6 | 4 | 10.3 | 2 | 6.5 | 0.67 |
| junior high school | 39 | 55.7 | 23 | 59.0 | 16 | 51.6 | ||
| senior high school | 22 | 31.4 | 10 | 25.6 | 12 | 38.7 | ||
| university/college | 3 | 4.3 | 2 | 5.1 | 1 | 3.2 | ||
| marital status | single | 27 | 28.6 | 14 | 35.9 | 13 | 41.9 | 0.46 |
| married | 21 | 30.0 | 12 | 30.8 | 9 | 29 | ||
| divorced | 18 | 25.7 | 9 | 23.1 | 9 | 29 | ||
| deceased | 1 | 1.4 | 1 | 2.6 | 0 | 0 | ||
| cohabiting | 3 | 4.3 | 3 | 7.7 | 0 | 0 | ||
| job | unemployed | 21 | 30.0 | 8 | 20.5 | 13 | 41.9 | 0.14 |
| employed | 42 | 60.0 | 26 | 66.7 | 16 | 51.6 | ||
| underemployed | 7 | 10.0 | 5 | 12.8 | 2 | 6.5 | ||
| HIV | + | 10 | 14.3 | 5 | 12.8 | 5 | 16.1 | 0.47 |
| - | 60 | 85.7 | 34 | 87.2 | 26 | 83.9 | ||
| current cigarette smoking | + | 70 | 100 | 39 | 100 | 31 | 100 | 1.00 |
| - | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Risky alcohol use | + | 19 | 27.1 | 11 | 28.2 | 8 | 25.8 | 0.52 |
| - | 51 | 72.9 | 28 | 71.8 | 23 | 74.2 | ||
| past illicit drug use | + | 68 | 97.1 | 37 | 94.9 | 31 | 100 | 0.31 |
| - | 2 | 2.9 | 2 | 5.1 | 0 | 0 | ||
| attendance rate | 100% | 10 | 14.28 | 8 | 20.5 | 2 | 6.5 | 0.01 * |
| 90–99% | 28 | 40 | 20 | 51.3 | 8 | 25.8 | ||
| 70–89% | 17 | 24.29 | 6 | 15.4 | 11 | 35.5 | ||
| less than 70% | 15 | 21.4 | 5 | 12.8 | 10 | 32.3 | ||
* p < 0.05.
Pretest in the intervention group and dropout group.
| Variable | All Participants | Full Attendance Group n = 39 | Dropout Group |
| Kolmogorov Smirnov | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | S | K |
| |||
| age | 43.79 | 8.23 | 45.46 | 8.01 | 41.68 | 8.15 | (−2.49) | 0.013 * | 0.86 | 0.18 | 0.014 * |
| onset age | 25.49 | 9.33 | 27.21 | 9.61 | 23.32 | 8.63 | (−2.17) | 0.030 * | 1.54 | 3.53 | <0.001 *** |
| The average dose of methadone (mg/day) | 38.18 | 9.33 | 41.28 | 24.96 | 34.29 | 20.13 | 1.27 | 0.210 | 0.87 | 1.62 | 0.200 |
| 1st TFAB | 38.92 | 11.91 | 36.21 | 12.42 | 42.61 | 10.29 | (−2.03) | 0.043 * | −0.39 | −0.67 | 0.007 ** |
| 1st DS-MV | 39.73 | 14.35 | 36.49 | 14.19 | 43.81 | 13.69 | −2.18 | 0.033 * | −0.27 | −0.30 | 0.200 |
| 1st PHQ-9 total scores | 9.86 | 6.86 | 8.62 | 6.97 | 11.42 | 6.50 | −1.72 | 0.090 | 0.82 | 0.29 | 0.073 |
| 1st CS total scores | 11.09 | 6.81 | 9.79 | 6.89 | 12.71 | 6.45 | (−2.09) | 0.037 * | 0.72 | −0.86 | <0.001 *** |
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; SD = standard deviation; S = skewness; K = kurtosis; w = Wilcoxon test.
Fully attended group repeated-measures ANOVA (n = 39).
| M | SD | Mauchly’ w | F | Effect Size | Pairwise Comparisons | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st TFAB | 36.21 | 12.4 | 0.951 | 7.662 ** | 0.172 | 1st TFAB = 2nd TFAB |
| 2nd TFAB | 35.97 | 12.00 | ||||
| 3rd TFAB | 39.92 | 10.94 | ||||
| 1st DS-MV | 36.49 | 14.19 | 0.860 | 3.435 * | 0.083 | 1st DS-MV = 2nd DS-MV |
| 2nd DS-MV | 32.69 | 17.06 | ||||
| 3rd DS-MV | 29.72 | 15.13 | ||||
| 1st PHQ-9 | 8.62 | 6.97 | 0.725 ** | a 10.166 ** | 0.211 | 1st PHQ-9 > 2nd PHQ-9 * |
| 2nd PHQ-9 | 5.97 | 5.92 | ||||
| 3rd PHQ-9 | 4.28 | 4.26 | ||||
| 1st CS | 9.79 | 6.89 | 0.777 ** | a 9.509 ** | 0.200 | 1st CS > 2nd CS * |
| 2nd CS | 6.13 | 7.52 | ||||
| 3rd CS | 4.54 | 5.53 |
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01. a Mauchly’s w test was used to test the homogeneity of variances. The Mauchly’s w values of the PHQ-9 and CS were significant. In addition, we used lower-bound corrections when the assumption of sphericity was violated.