FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4375852011> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4375852011 endingPage "402" @default.
• W4375852011 startingPage "386" @default.
• W4375852011 abstract "Background Opioid dependence is associated with substantial health and social burdens, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is highly effective in improving multiple outcomes for people who receive this treatment. Methadone and buprenorphine are common medications provided as OAT. We aimed to examine buprenorphine compared with methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence across a wide range of primary and secondary outcomes. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with GATHER and PRISMA guidelines. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO from database inception to Aug 1, 2022; clinical trial registries and previous relevant Cochrane reviews were also reviewed. We included all RCTs and observational studies of adults (aged ≥18 years) with opioid dependence comparing treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. Primary outcomes were retention in treatment at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, treatment adherence (measured through doses taken as prescribed, dosing visits attended, and biological measures), or extra-medical opioid use (measured by urinalysis and self-report). Secondary outcomes were use of benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, amphetamines, and alcohol; withdrawal; craving; criminal activity and engagement with the criminal justice system; overdose; mental and physical health; sleep; pain; global functioning; suicidality and self-harm; and adverse events. Single-arm cohort studies and RCTs that collected data on buprenorphine retention alone were also reviewed. Data on study, participant, and treatment characteristics were extracted. Study authors were contacted to obtain additional data when required. Comparative estimates were pooled with use of random-effects meta-analyses. The proportion of individuals retained in treatment across multiple timepoints was pooled for each drug. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020205109). Findings We identified 32 eligible RCTs (N=5808 participants) and 69 observational studies (N=323 340) comparing buprenorphine and methadone, in addition to 51 RCTs (N=11 644) and 124 observational studies (N=700 035) that reported on treatment retention with buprenorphine. Overall, 61 studies were done in western Europe, 162 in North America, 14 in north Africa and the Middle East, 20 in Australasia, five in southeast Asia, seven in south Asia, two in eastern Europe, three in central Europe, one in east Asia, and one in central Asia. 1 040 827 participants were included in these primary studies; however, gender was only reported for 572 111 participants, of whom 377 991 (66·1%) were male and 194 120 (33·9%) were female. Mean age was 37·1 years (SD 6·0). At timepoints beyond 1 month, retention was better for methadone than for buprenorphine: for example, at 6 months, the pooled effect favoured methadone in RCTs (risk ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·67–0·85]; I·=74·2%; 16 studies, N=3151) and in observational studies (0·77 [0·68–0·86]; I·=98·5%; 21 studies, N=155 111). Retention was generally higher in RCTs than observational studies. There was no evidence suggesting that adherence to treatment differed with buprenorphine compared with methadone. There was some evidence that extra-medical opioid use was lower in those receiving buprenorphine in RCTs that measured this outcome by urinalysis and reported proportion of positive urine samples (over various time frames; standardised mean difference –0·20 [–0·29 to –0·11]; I·=0·0%; three studies, N=841), but no differences were found when using other measures. Some statistically significant differences were found between buprenorphine and methadone among secondary outcomes. There was evidence of reduced cocaine use, cravings, anxiety, and cardiac dysfunction, as well as increased treatment satisfaction among people receiving buprenorphine compared with methadone; and evidence of reduced hospitalisation and alcohol use in people receiving methadone. These differences in secondary outcomes were based on small numbers of studies (maximum five), and were often not consistent across study types or different measures of the same constructs (eg, cocaine use). Interpretation Evidence from trials and observational studies suggest that treatment retention is better for methadone than for sublingual buprenorphine. Comparative evidence on other outcomes examined showed few statistically significant differences and was generally based on small numbers of studies. These findings highlight the imperative for interventions to improve retention, consideration of client-centred factors (such as client preference) when selecting between methadone and buprenorphine, and harmonisation of data collection and reporting to strengthen future syntheses. Funding Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Opioid dependence is associated with substantial health and social burdens, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is highly effective in improving multiple outcomes for people who receive this treatment. Methadone and buprenorphine are common medications provided as OAT. We aimed to examine buprenorphine compared with methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence across a wide range of primary and secondary outcomes. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with GATHER and PRISMA guidelines. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO from database inception to Aug 1, 2022; clinical trial registries and previous relevant Cochrane reviews were also reviewed. We included all RCTs and observational studies of adults (aged ≥18 years) with opioid dependence comparing treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. Primary outcomes were retention in treatment at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, treatment adherence (measured through doses taken as prescribed, dosing visits attended, and biological measures), or extra-medical opioid use (measured by urinalysis and self-report). Secondary outcomes were use of benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, amphetamines, and alcohol; withdrawal; craving; criminal activity and engagement with the criminal justice system; overdose; mental and physical health; sleep; pain; global functioning; suicidality and self-harm; and adverse events. Single-arm cohort studies and RCTs that collected data on buprenorphine retention alone were also reviewed. Data on study, participant, and treatment characteristics were extracted. Study authors were contacted to obtain additional data when required. Comparative estimates were pooled with use of random-effects meta-analyses. The proportion of individuals retained in treatment across multiple timepoints was pooled for each drug. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020205109). We identified 32 eligible RCTs (N=5808 participants) and 69 observational studies (N=323 340) comparing buprenorphine and methadone, in addition to 51 RCTs (N=11 644) and 124 observational studies (N=700 035) that reported on treatment retention with buprenorphine. Overall, 61 studies were done in western Europe, 162 in North America, 14 in north Africa and the Middle East, 20 in Australasia, five in southeast Asia, seven in south Asia, two in eastern Europe, three in central Europe, one in east Asia, and one in central Asia. 1 040 827 participants were included in these primary studies; however, gender was only reported for 572 111 participants, of whom 377 991 (66·1%) were male and 194 120 (33·9%) were female. Mean age was 37·1 years (SD 6·0). At timepoints beyond 1 month, retention was better for methadone than for buprenorphine: for example, at 6 months, the pooled effect favoured methadone in RCTs (risk ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·67–0·85]; I·=74·2%; 16 studies, N=3151) and in observational studies (0·77 [0·68–0·86]; I·=98·5%; 21 studies, N=155 111). Retention was generally higher in RCTs than observational studies. There was no evidence suggesting that adherence to treatment differed with buprenorphine compared with methadone. There was some evidence that extra-medical opioid use was lower in those receiving buprenorphine in RCTs that measured this outcome by urinalysis and reported proportion of positive urine samples (over various time frames; standardised mean difference –0·20 [–0·29 to –0·11]; I·=0·0%; three studies, N=841), but no differences were found when using other measures. Some statistically significant differences were found between buprenorphine and methadone among secondary outcomes. There was evidence of reduced cocaine use, cravings, anxiety, and cardiac dysfunction, as well as increased treatment satisfaction among people receiving buprenorphine compared with methadone; and evidence of reduced hospitalisation and alcohol use in people receiving methadone. These differences in secondary outcomes were based on small numbers of studies (maximum five), and were often not consistent across study types or different measures of the same constructs (eg, cocaine use). Evidence from trials and observational studies suggest that treatment retention is better for methadone than for sublingual buprenorphine. Comparative evidence on other outcomes examined showed few statistically significant differences and was generally based on small numbers of studies. These findings highlight the imperative for interventions to improve retention, consideration of client-centred factors (such as client preference) when selecting between methadone and buprenorphine, and harmonisation of data collection and reporting to strengthen future syntheses." @default.
• W4375852011 created "2023-05-10" @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5000073653 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5004809640 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5007290128 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5039827409 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5041032803 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5042696745 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5053091774 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5060125444 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5076358651 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5078637043 @default.
• W4375852011 creator A5092336975 @default.
• W4375852011 date "2023-06-01" @default.
• W4375852011 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W4375852011 title "Buprenorphine versus methadone for the treatment of opioid dependence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and observational studies" @default.
• W4375852011 cites W125827253 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1687925784 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1822568028 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1964555525 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1968420582 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1973849525 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1979184030 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1980315117 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1980425431 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1981968038 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1987858307 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1989822829 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W1997754879 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2002091306 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2003884991 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2005501262 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2007434419 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2007802571 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2007959700 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2009257194 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2017058683 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2017627129 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2023768553 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2024931452 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2029891253 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2032506622 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2037102846 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2037597491 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2041219912 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2045588669 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2046992424 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2049435742 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2052551617 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2066706905 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2068749862 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2074851203 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2092115346 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2095384147 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2096235928 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2096453480 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2099849656 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2103050138 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2108978934 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2111331712 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2112174894 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2121153184 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2126701437 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2128492756 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2129088846 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2132974770 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2135214206 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2148488822 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2152781982 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2156082865 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2158957358 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2161701454 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2166291295 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2166747419 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2169255825 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2173844711 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2200493588 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2281058637 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2462161029 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2509721097 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2531269403 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2537679246 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2560039305 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2613716300 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2613871176 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2756083674 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2763061437 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2765348434 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2765352165 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2771500999 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2782655728 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2799522112 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2887770017 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2888512995 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2908612960 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2912654919 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2923332423 @default.
• W4375852011 cites W2942243081 @default.

• next