接受丁丙诺啡、美沙酮和其他精神活性药物治疗的阿片类药物依赖患者的认知功能:稳定性和相关性。

Pekka Rapeli, Carola Fabritius, Hely Kalska, Hannu Alho
{"title":"接受丁丙诺啡、美沙酮和其他精神活性药物治疗的阿片类药物依赖患者的认知功能:稳定性和相关性。","authors":"Pekka Rapeli, Carola Fabritius, Hely Kalska, Hannu Alho","doi":"10.1186/1472-6904-11-13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In many but not in all neuropsychological studies buprenorphine-treated opioid-dependent patients have shown fewer cognitive deficits than patients treated with methadone. In order to examine if hypothesized cognitive advantage of buprenorphine in relation to methadone is seen in clinical patients we did a neuropsychological follow-up study in unselected sample of buprenorphine- vs. methadone-treated patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In part I of the study fourteen buprenorphine-treated and 12 methadone-treated patients were tested by cognitive tests within two months (T1), 6-9 months (T2), and 12-17 months (T3) from the start of opioid substitution treatment. Fourteen healthy controls were examined at similar intervals. Benzodiazepine and other psychoactive comedications were common among the patients. Test results were analyzed with repeated measures analysis of variance and planned contrasts. In part II of the study the patient sample was extended to include 36 patients at T2 and T3. Correlations between cognitive functioning and medication, substance abuse, or demographic variables were then analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In part I methadone patients were inferior to healthy controls tests in all tests measuring attention, working memory, or verbal memory. Buprenorphine patients were inferior to healthy controls in the first working memory task, the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task and verbal memory. In the second working memory task, the Letter-Number Sequencing, their performance improved between T2 and T3. In part II only group membership (buprenorphine vs. methadone) correlated significantly with attention performance and improvement in the Letter-Number Sequencing. High frequency of substance abuse in the past month was associated with poor performance in the Letter-Number Sequencing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results underline the differences between non-randomized and randomized studies comparing cognitive performance in opioid substitution treated patients (fewer deficits in buprenorphine patients vs. no difference between buprenorphine and methadone patients, respectively). Possible reasons for this are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":9196,"journal":{"name":"BMC Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"11 ","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3176473/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive functioning in opioid-dependent patients treated with buprenorphine, methadone, and other psychoactive medications: stability and correlates.\",\"authors\":\"Pekka Rapeli, Carola Fabritius, Hely Kalska, Hannu Alho\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/1472-6904-11-13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In many but not in all neuropsychological studies buprenorphine-treated opioid-dependent patients have shown fewer cognitive deficits than patients treated with methadone. In order to examine if hypothesized cognitive advantage of buprenorphine in relation to methadone is seen in clinical patients we did a neuropsychological follow-up study in unselected sample of buprenorphine- vs. methadone-treated patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In part I of the study fourteen buprenorphine-treated and 12 methadone-treated patients were tested by cognitive tests within two months (T1), 6-9 months (T2), and 12-17 months (T3) from the start of opioid substitution treatment. Fourteen healthy controls were examined at similar intervals. Benzodiazepine and other psychoactive comedications were common among the patients. Test results were analyzed with repeated measures analysis of variance and planned contrasts. In part II of the study the patient sample was extended to include 36 patients at T2 and T3. Correlations between cognitive functioning and medication, substance abuse, or demographic variables were then analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In part I methadone patients were inferior to healthy controls tests in all tests measuring attention, working memory, or verbal memory. Buprenorphine patients were inferior to healthy controls in the first working memory task, the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task and verbal memory. In the second working memory task, the Letter-Number Sequencing, their performance improved between T2 and T3. In part II only group membership (buprenorphine vs. methadone) correlated significantly with attention performance and improvement in the Letter-Number Sequencing. High frequency of substance abuse in the past month was associated with poor performance in the Letter-Number Sequencing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results underline the differences between non-randomized and randomized studies comparing cognitive performance in opioid substitution treated patients (fewer deficits in buprenorphine patients vs. no difference between buprenorphine and methadone patients, respectively). Possible reasons for this are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9196,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3176473/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6904-11-13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6904-11-13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在许多但并非所有的神经心理学研究中,丁丙诺啡治疗的阿片类药物依赖患者比美沙酮治疗的患者表现出更少的认知缺陷。为了检验丁丙诺啡相对于美沙酮的假定认知优势是否在临床患者中出现,我们对丁丙诺酮与美沙酮治疗患者的未选择样本进行了神经心理学随访研究。方法:在研究的第一部分中,14名丁丙诺啡治疗的患者和12名美沙酮治疗的患者在阿片类药物替代治疗开始后两个月(T1)、6-9个月(T2)和12-17个月(T3)内接受认知测试。14名健康对照以相似的时间间隔进行检查。苯二氮卓类药物和其他精神药物在患者中很常见。通过重复测量方差分析和计划对比分析测试结果。在研究的第二部分中,患者样本被扩展到包括36名T2和T3的患者。然后分析认知功能与药物、药物滥用或人口统计学变量之间的相关性。结果:在第一部分中,美沙酮患者在所有测量注意力、工作记忆或言语记忆的测试中都不如健康对照组。丁丙诺啡患者在第一次工作记忆任务、起搏听觉序列加法任务和言语记忆方面不如健康对照组。在第二个工作记忆任务“字母数字排序”中,它们的性能在T2和T3之间有所提高。在第二部分中,只有小组成员资格(丁丙诺啡与美沙酮)与注意力表现和字母数字排序的改善显著相关。过去一个月药物滥用频率高与字母数字排序表现不佳有关。结论:研究结果强调了比较阿片类药物替代治疗患者认知表现的非随机和随机研究之间的差异(丁丙诺啡患者的缺陷较少,而丁丙诺酮和美沙酮患者没有差异)。对此可能的原因进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Cognitive functioning in opioid-dependent patients treated with buprenorphine, methadone, and other psychoactive medications: stability and correlates.

Background: In many but not in all neuropsychological studies buprenorphine-treated opioid-dependent patients have shown fewer cognitive deficits than patients treated with methadone. In order to examine if hypothesized cognitive advantage of buprenorphine in relation to methadone is seen in clinical patients we did a neuropsychological follow-up study in unselected sample of buprenorphine- vs. methadone-treated patients.

Methods: In part I of the study fourteen buprenorphine-treated and 12 methadone-treated patients were tested by cognitive tests within two months (T1), 6-9 months (T2), and 12-17 months (T3) from the start of opioid substitution treatment. Fourteen healthy controls were examined at similar intervals. Benzodiazepine and other psychoactive comedications were common among the patients. Test results were analyzed with repeated measures analysis of variance and planned contrasts. In part II of the study the patient sample was extended to include 36 patients at T2 and T3. Correlations between cognitive functioning and medication, substance abuse, or demographic variables were then analyzed.

Results: In part I methadone patients were inferior to healthy controls tests in all tests measuring attention, working memory, or verbal memory. Buprenorphine patients were inferior to healthy controls in the first working memory task, the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task and verbal memory. In the second working memory task, the Letter-Number Sequencing, their performance improved between T2 and T3. In part II only group membership (buprenorphine vs. methadone) correlated significantly with attention performance and improvement in the Letter-Number Sequencing. High frequency of substance abuse in the past month was associated with poor performance in the Letter-Number Sequencing.

Conclusions: The results underline the differences between non-randomized and randomized studies comparing cognitive performance in opioid substitution treated patients (fewer deficits in buprenorphine patients vs. no difference between buprenorphine and methadone patients, respectively). Possible reasons for this are discussed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Statin therapy in critical illness: an international survey of intensive care physicians' opinions, attitudes and practice. Correction: Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy (ARVs): incidence, type and risk factors in Nigeria Data for drugs available through low-cost prescription drug programs are available through pharmacy benefit manager and claims data. Population prevalence of high dose paracetamol in dispensed paracetamol/opioid prescription combinations: an observational study. Adherence to medication for the treatment of psychosis: rates and risk factors in an Ethiopian population.
×
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