Improved HIV and Substance Abuse Treatment Outcomes for Released HIV-Infected Prisoners: The Impact of Buprenorphine Treatment

HIV-infected prisoners fare poorly after release. Though rarely available, opioid agonist therapy (OAT) may be one way to improve HIV and substance abuse treatment outcomes after release. Of the 69 HIV-infected prisoners enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of directly administered antiretroviral therapy, 48 (70%) met DSM-IV criteria for opioid dependence. Of these, 30 (62.5%) selected OAT, either as methadone (N = 7, 14.5%) or buprenorphine/naloxone (BPN/NLX; N = 23, 48.0%). Twelve-week HIV and substance abuse treatment outcomes are reported as a sub-study for those selecting BPN/NLX. Retention was high: 21 (91%) completed BPN/NLX induction and 17 (74%) remained on BPN/NLX after 12 weeks. Compared with baseline, the proportion with a non-detectable viral load (61% vs 63% log10 copies/mL) and mean CD4 count (367 vs 344 cells/mL) was unchanged at 12 weeks. Opiate-negative urine testing remained 83% for the 21 who completed induction. Using means from 10-point Likert scales, opioid craving was reduced from 6.0 to 1.8 within 3 days of BPN/NLX induction and satisfaction remained high at 9.5 throughout the 12 weeks. Adverse events were few and mild. BPN/NLX therapy was acceptable, safe and effective for both HIV and opioid treatment outcomes among released HIV-infected prisoners. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to affirm its benefit in this highly vulnerable population

Conflict and user involvement in drug misuse treatment decision-making: a qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This paper examines client/staff conflict and user involvement in drug misuse treatment decision-making.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Seventy-nine in-depth interviews were conducted with new treatment clients in two residential and two community drug treatment agencies. Fifty-nine of these clients were interviewed again after twelve weeks. Twenty-seven interviews were also conducted with staff, who were the keyworkers for the interviewed clients.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Drug users did not expect, desire or prepare for conflict at treatment entry. They reported few actual conflicts within the treatment setting, but routinely discussed latent conflicts – that is, negative experiences and problematic aspects of current or previous treatment that could potentially escalate into overt disputes. Conflict resulted in a number of possible outcomes, including the premature termination of treatment; staff deciding on the appropriate outcome; the client appealing to the governance structure of the agency; brokered compromise; and staff skilfully eliciting client consent for staff decisions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although the implementation of user involvement in drug treatment decision-making has the potential to trigger high levels of staff-client conflict, latent conflict is more common than overt conflict and not all conflict is negative. Drug users generally want to be co-operative at treatment entry and often adopt non-confrontational forms of covert resistance to decisions about which they disagree. Staff sometimes deploy user involvement as a strategy for managing conflict and soliciting client compliance to treatment protocols. Suggestions for minimising and avoiding harmful conflict in treatment settings are given.</p

Managed care and outpatient substance abuse treatment intensity

This study examines the extent to which managed care behavioral controls are associated with treatment intensity in outpatient substance abuse treatment facilities. Data are from the 1995 National Drug Abuse Treatment System Survey, a nationally representative survey that includes over 600 provider organizations with a response rate of 86%. Treatment intensity is measured in three ways: (1) the number of months clients spend in outpatient drug treatment, (2) the number of individual treatment sessions clients receive over the course of treatment, and (3) the number of group treatment sessions clients receive over the course of treatment. After accounting for selection bias and controlling for market, organization, and client characteristics, there is no significant relationship between the scope of managed care oversight and treatment intensity. However, the stringency of managed care oversight activities is negatively associated with the number of individual and group treatment sessions received over the course of treatment.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45772/1/11414_2005_Article_BF02287231.pd