Predicting complete loss to follow-up after a health-education program: number of absences and face-to-face contact with a researcher

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Research on health-education programs requires longitudinal data. Loss to follow-up can lead to imprecision and bias, and <it>complete </it>loss to follow-up is particularly damaging. If that loss is predictable, then efforts to prevent it can be focused on those program participants who are at the highest risk. We identified predictors of complete loss to follow-up in a longitudinal cohort study.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were collected over 1 year in a study of adults with chronic illnesses who were in a program to learn self-management skills. Following baseline measurements, the program had one group-discussion session each week for six weeks. Follow-up questionnaires were sent 3, 6, and 12 months after the baseline measurement. A person was classified as completely lost to follow-up if none of those three follow-up questionnaires had been returned by two months after the last one was sent.</p> <p>We tested two hypotheses: that complete loss to follow-up was directly associated with the number of absences from the program sessions, and that it was less common among people who had had face-to-face contact with one of the researchers. We also tested predictors of data loss identified previously and examined associations with specific diagnoses.</p> <p>Using the unpaired t-test, the U test, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression, we identified good predictors of complete loss to follow-up.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The prevalence of complete loss to follow-up was 12.2% (50/409). Complete loss to follow-up was directly related to the number of absences (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval: 1.78; 1.49-2.12), and it was inversely related to age (0.97; 0.95-0.99). Complete loss to follow-up was less common among people who had met one of the researchers (0.51; 0.28-0.95) and among those with connective tissue disease (0.29; 0.09-0.98). For the multivariate logistic model the area under the ROC curve was 0.77.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Complete loss to follow-up after this health-education program can be predicted to some extent from data that are easy to collect (age, number of absences, and diagnosis). Also, face-to-face contact with a researcher deserves further study as a way of increasing participation in follow-up, and health-education programs should include it.</p

Contribution of Cytochrome P450 and ABCB1 Genetic Variability on Methadone Pharmacokinetics, Dose Requirements, and Response

Although the efficacy of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) in opioid dependence disorder has been well established, the influence of methadone pharmacokinetics in dose requirement and clinical outcome remains controversial. The aim of this study is to analyze methadone dosage in responder and nonresponder patients considering pharmacogenetic and pharmacokinetic factors that may contribute to dosage adequacy. Opioid dependence patients (meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, [4th Edition] criteria) from a MMT community program were recruited. Patients were clinically assessed and blood samples were obtained to determine plasma concentrations of (R,S)-, (R) and (S)- methadone and to study allelic variants of genes encoding CYP3A5, CYP2D6, CYP2B6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, and P-glycoprotein. Responders and nonresponders were defined by illicit opioid consumption detected in random urinalysis. The final sample consisted in 105 opioid dependent patients of Caucasian origin. Responder patients received higher doses of methadone and have been included into treatment for a longer period. No differences were found in terms of genotype frequencies between groups. Only CYP2D6 metabolizing phenotype differences were found in outcome status, methadone dose requirements, and plasma concentrations, being higher in the ultrarapid metabolizers. No other differences were found between phenotype and responder status, methadone dose requirements, neither in methadone plasma concentrations. Pharmacokinetic factors could explain some but not all differences in MMT outcome and methadone dose requirements

There is no age limit for methadone: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Data from the US indicates that methadone-maintained populations are aging, with an increase of patients aged 50 or older. Data from European methadone populations is sparse. This retrospective cohort study sought to evaluate the age trends and related developments in the methadone population of Basel-City, Switzerland. METHODS: The study included methadone patients between April 1, 1995 and March 31, 2003. Anonymized data was taken from the methadone register of Basel-City. For analysis of age distributions, patient samples were split into four age categories from '20-29 years' to '50 years and over'. Cross-sectional comparisons were performed using patient samples of 1996 and 2003. RESULTS: Analysis showed a significant increase in older patients between 1996 and 2003 (p < 0.001). During that period, the percentage of patients aged 50 and over rose almost tenfold, while the proportion of patients aged under 30 dropped significantly from 52.8% to 12.3%. The average methadone dose (p < 0.001) and the 1-year retention rate (p < 0.001) also increased significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Findings point to clear trends in aging of methadone patients in Basel-City which are comparable, although less pronounced, to developments among US methadone populations. Many unanswered questions on medical, psychosocial and health economic consequences remain as the needs of older patients have not yet been evaluated extensively. However, older methadone patients, just as any other patients, should be accorded treatment appropriate to their medical condition and needs. Particular attention should be paid to adequate solutions for persons in need of care

Problem drug use the public health imperative: what some of the literature says

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>With more than 200,000 problem drug users is contact with structured treatment services in England the public health imperative behind drug treatment is great. Problem drug use for many is a chronic and relapsing condition, where "cure" is often neither a reasonable or appropriate expectation and it can further be argued that in these circumstances problem drug use is no different from any number of chronic and enduring health conditions that are managed in the health care system and therefore should be conceptualised as such.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>A public health approach to drug treatment emphasises the need for drug users in or accessing treatment, to reduce their harmful drug use, reduce drug use related risks such as sepsis and overdose and stay alive for longer. However a public health perspective in relation to problem drug use isn't always either apparent or readily understood and to that end there is still a significant need to continue the arguments and debate that treatment and interventions for problem and dependent drug users need to extend beyond an individualistic approach. For the purposes of discussion in this article public and population health will be used interchangeably.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>A recognition and acceptance that a public and population health approach to the management of problem drug users is sound public health policy also then requires a long term commitment in terms of staffing and resources where service delivery mirrors that of chronic condition management.</p