15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Retention in opioid agonist treatment: a rapid review and meta-analysis comparing observational studies and randomized controlled trials

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Although oral opioid agonist therapies (OATs), buprenorphine and methadone, are effective first-line treatments, OAT remains largely underutilized due to low retention rates and wide variation across programs. This rapid review therefore sought to summarize the retention rates reported by randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled observational study designs that compared methadone to buprenorphine (or buprenorphine-naloxone).

          Methods

          We searched four electronic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, up to April 2018) for RCTs and controlled observational studies that compared oral fixed-dose methadone to buprenorphine versus methadone (or buprenorphine-naloxone). Data were extracted separately for two different definitions of retention in treatment: (1) length of time retained in the study and (2) presence on the final day of a study. Separate random effects meta-analyses were performed for RCTs and controlled observational studies. Data from controlled observational studies where retention was measured as the length of time retained in the study were not amenable to meta-analysis.

          Results

          Among 7603 studies reviewed, 10 RCTs and 3 observational studies met inclusion criteria ( n = 5065) and compared fixed-dose oral buprenorphine with methadone. Across studies, the average retention rate was highly variable (RCTs: buprenorphine 20.0–82.5% and methadone 30.7–83.8%; observational studies: buprenorphine 20.2–78.3% and methadone 48.3–74.8%). For time period retained in the study, we observed no significant difference in treatment retention for buprenorphine versus methadone in RCTs (standardized mean difference [SMD] =  − 0.07; 95% CI − 0.35–0.21, p = 0.63; quality of evidence: low). For presence on the final study day, we observed no significant difference between buprenorphine and methadone treatment retention in RCTs (risk ratio [RR] = 0.89; 95% CI 0.73–1.08, p = 0.24; quality of evidence: low) and controlled observational studies (RR = 0.75; 95% CI 0.36–1.58, p = 0.45).

          Conclusion

          Meta-analysis of existing RCTs suggests retention in oral fixed-dose opioid agonist therapy with methadone appears to be generally equal to buprenorphine (or buprenorphine-naloxone), with wide variation across studies. Similarly, a meta-analysis of three controlled observational studies indicated no difference in treatment retention although there was significant heterogeneity among the included studies. The length of follow-up did not appear to affect the retention rate.

          Systematic review registration

          PROSPERO CRD42018104452.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-021-01764-9.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

          Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Buprenorphine maintenance versus placebo or methadone maintenance for opioid dependence

            Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Retention in medication-assisted treatment for opiate dependence: A systematic review.

              Retention in medication-assisted treatment among opiate-dependent patients is associated with better outcomes. This systematic review (55 articles, 2010-2014) found wide variability in retention rates (i.e., 19%-94% at 3-month, 46%-92% at 4-month, 3%-88% at 6-month, and 37%-91% at 12-month follow-ups in randomized controlled trials), and identified medication and behavioral therapy factors associated with retention. As expected, patients who received naltrexone or buprenorphine had better retention rates than patients who received a placebo or no medication. Consistent with prior research, methadone was associated with better retention than buprenorphine/naloxone. And, heroin-assisted treatment was associated with better retention than methadone among treatment-refractory patients. Only a single study examined retention in medication-assisted treatment for longer than 1 year, and studies of behavioral therapies may have lacked statistical power; thus, studies with longer-term follow-ups and larger samples are needed. Contingency management showed promise to increase retention, but other behavioral therapies to increase retention, such as supervision of medication consumption, or additional counseling, education, or support, failed to find differences between intervention and control conditions. Promising behavioral therapies to increase retention have yet to be identified.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jan.klimas@ubc.ca
                Journal
                Syst Rev
                Syst Rev
                Systematic Reviews
                BioMed Central (London )
                2046-4053
                6 August 2021
                6 August 2021
                2021
                : 10
                : 216
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.511486.f, ISNI 0000 0004 8021 645X, British Columbia Centre On Substance Use, ; 400-1045 Howe Street, Vancouver, BC V6Z 2A9 Canada
                [2 ]GRID grid.17091.3e, ISNI 0000 0001 2288 9830, Innovation Support Unit, Department of Family Practice, , University of British Columbia, ; 3rd Floor David Strangway Building, 5950 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3 Canada
                [3 ]GRID grid.17091.3e, ISNI 0000 0001 2288 9830, Department of Medicine, , University of British Columbia, St. Paul’s Hospital, ; 608-1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC V6Z 1Y6 Canada
                [4 ]GRID grid.7886.1, ISNI 0000 0001 0768 2743, School of Medicine, , University College Dublin, Health Sciences Centre, ; Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5179-0052
                Article
                1764
                10.1186/s13643-021-01764-9
                8348786
                34362464
                1771ba26-a3fc-4f66-a155-5dba894f1050
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 18 March 2020
                : 20 July 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002, National Institutes of Health;
                Award ID: R25DA037756
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000024, Canadian Institutes of Health Research;
                Award ID: 165004
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010665, H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions;
                Award ID: 701698
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Public health
                rapid review,opioid agonist treatment,retention,randomization
                Public health
                rapid review, opioid agonist treatment, retention, randomization

                Comments

                Comment on this article