A meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of buprenorphine and methadone

Steven L West , Keri K O'Neal , Carolyn W Graham
{"title":"A meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of buprenorphine and methadone","authors":"Steven L West ,&nbsp;Keri K O'Neal ,&nbsp;Carolyn W Graham","doi":"10.1016/S0899-3289(01)00054-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Increases in the use of illicit opiates have refocused attention on these drugs. One outgrowth of this attention has been the increased consideration of pharmacotherapies to provide alternatives to methadone maintenance. Buprenorphine is one new tool used in the attenuation of illicit opiate use. Like methadone, buprenorphine produces cross-tolerance to other opiates. However, it may have advantages over methadone including a longer duration, limited withdrawal syndrome, and increased safety. Buprenorphine's ability to serve as a replacement drug for illicit opiate use is well documented, and efforts have recently been made to compare the drug with methadone. The purpose of this study was to provide a meta-analysis of all available research reporting a controlled comparison of buprenorphine and methadone. This analysis provided a rating of the comparative efficacy of each drug, thus giving clinicians an additional guide when selecting an appropriate course of treatment. Findings suggest a relative equality in the efficacy of buprenorphine and methadone, although patients receiving methadone were less likely to test positive for illicit opiate use. Past experience with methadone maintenance acted as a moderating variable, however, such that those receiving buprenorphine were more likely to stay drug-free in studies that included patients with prior methadone experience.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73959,"journal":{"name":"Journal of substance abuse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0899-3289(01)00054-2","citationCount":"104","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of substance abuse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899328901000542","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 104

Abstract

Increases in the use of illicit opiates have refocused attention on these drugs. One outgrowth of this attention has been the increased consideration of pharmacotherapies to provide alternatives to methadone maintenance. Buprenorphine is one new tool used in the attenuation of illicit opiate use. Like methadone, buprenorphine produces cross-tolerance to other opiates. However, it may have advantages over methadone including a longer duration, limited withdrawal syndrome, and increased safety. Buprenorphine's ability to serve as a replacement drug for illicit opiate use is well documented, and efforts have recently been made to compare the drug with methadone. The purpose of this study was to provide a meta-analysis of all available research reporting a controlled comparison of buprenorphine and methadone. This analysis provided a rating of the comparative efficacy of each drug, thus giving clinicians an additional guide when selecting an appropriate course of treatment. Findings suggest a relative equality in the efficacy of buprenorphine and methadone, although patients receiving methadone were less likely to test positive for illicit opiate use. Past experience with methadone maintenance acted as a moderating variable, however, such that those receiving buprenorphine were more likely to stay drug-free in studies that included patients with prior methadone experience.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较丁丙诺啡和美沙酮疗效的荟萃分析
非法阿片类药物使用的增加使人们重新关注这些药物。这种关注的一个结果是增加了对药物治疗的考虑,以提供美沙酮维持的替代品。丁丙诺啡是一种用于减少非法阿片类药物使用的新工具。像美沙酮一样,丁丙诺啡对其他鸦片产生交叉耐受性。然而,与美沙酮相比,它可能有一些优点,包括持续时间更长,戒断综合征有限,安全性更高。丁丙诺啡作为非法阿片类药物的替代药物的能力是有据可查的,最近有人努力将这种药物与美沙酮进行比较。本研究的目的是对所有报告丁丙诺啡和美沙酮对照比较的现有研究进行荟萃分析。该分析提供了每种药物比较疗效的评级,从而为临床医生选择适当的治疗过程提供了额外的指导。研究结果表明,丁丙诺啡和美沙酮的疗效相对平等,尽管接受美沙酮治疗的患者不太可能检测出非法使用阿片类药物的阳性。然而,过去美沙酮维持的经验充当了一个调节变量,例如,在包括先前美沙酮经历的患者的研究中,接受丁丙诺啡的患者更有可能保持无药物状态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Childhood emotional abuse and depression: The mediating roles of emotion regulation and resilience From night owl to angry bird: Investigating the association between chronotype and aggression ‘You never cared about me’: An analysis of ethnic minority men’s coping mechanisms and risk factors after a relationship breakdown Change in psychosocial functioning and social relations among women in residential substance abuse treatment Prediction of DISC substance abuse and dependency for ethnically diverse adolescents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1