METHODS: This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis including articles published in the SID, MagIran, IranMedex, IranDoc, Cochrane, Embase, ScienceDirect, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched systematically to find articles published from 2006 to March 2019. Heterogeneity index was determined using the Cochran's test (Qc) and I2. Considering heterogeneity of studies, the random effects model was used to estimate the standardized difference of mean score for depression. Subsequently, the level of depression reduction in Iran and worldwide in the intervention group before and after the testwas measured.
RESULTS: A total of 19 articles met the inclusion criteria, and were therefore selected for this systematic review and meta-analysis. The sample size of the intervention group in the selected studies was 1948. According to the meta-analysis results, the mean depression score in the intervention group was 26.4 ± 5.6 and 18.4 ± 2.6 before and after intervention respectively, indicating the reducing effect of methadone on depression, and this difference was statistically significant (P
METHOD: A total of 210 respondents who were already enrolled in a formal MMT program in Myanmar were recruited from five cities through stratified random sampling for this cross-sectional study. The addiction severity index (ASI) was used to objectively assess respondents social functioning in the last 30 days. Higher ASI scores denote poorer social functioning.
RESULT: Respondents total ASI scores in the respective domains were: employment (47.4%), alcohol (44.4%), drug use (7.2%), legal (49.2%) and social-family relationship (10.7%). Those reported to have never injected drugs in the last 30 days had lower ASI total scores than those who reported injection drug use (p = 0.01). After identifying the differences in ASI total scores, we found there were significant associations in the clients' hepatitis C status, age category, frequency of heroin injection, quality of life score, marital status, current leisure status with family/friend, current history of injection in the last 30 days, income status, satisfaction with current marital status, as well as reported drug and alcohol use (p
METHODS: We conducted an analysis of policy documents and over 60 h of participant observation in February 2016, which included focus groups with a convenience sample of 20 therapeutic community staff members, 110 prisoners across three male and one female prisons, and qualitative interviews with two former Clean Zone participants. Field notes containing verbatim quotes from participants were analyzed through iterative reading and discussion to understand how participants generally perceive the program, barriers to entry and retention, and implications for future treatment within prisons.
RESULTS: Our analyses discerned three themes: pride in the mission of the Clean Zone, idealism regarding addiction treatment outcomes against all odds, and the demonization of methadone.
CONCLUSION: Despite low enrollment and lack of an evidence base, the therapeutic community is buttressed by the strong support of the prison administration and its clients as an "ordered" alternative to what is seen as chaotic life outside of the Clean Zone. The lack of services for Clean Zone patients after release likely contributes to high rates of relapse to drug use. The Clean Zone would benefit from integration of stabilized methadone patients combined with a post-release program.
METHODS: We used data from the AIDS Care Cohort to Evaluate Exposure to Survival Services (ACCESS) study, a long-running study of a community-recruited cohort of HIV-positive PWUD, linked to comprehensive HIV clinical records in Vancouver, Canada, a setting of no-cost, universal access to HIV care. The longitudinal relationship between MMT-ART dispensation at the same facility and the odds of ≥ 95% ART adherence was analysed using multivariable generalized linear mixed-effects modelling. We conducted a further analysis using a marginal structural mode with inverse probability of treatment weights as a sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS: This study included data on 1690 interviews of 345 ART- and MMT-exposed participants carried out between June 2012 and December 2017. In the final multivariable model, MMT-ART dispensation, compared with nondispensation at the same facility, was associated with greater odds of achieving ≥ 95% adherence [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.96]. A marginal structural model estimated a 1.48 (95% CI 1.15-1.80) greater odds of ≥ 95% adherence among participants who reported MMT-ART dispensation at the same facility compared with those who did not.
CONCLUSIONS: The odds of achieving optimal adherence to ART were 56% higher during periods in which MMT and ART medications were dispensed at the same facility, in a low-barrier setting. Our findings highlight the need to consider a simpler integrated approach with medication dispensation at the same facility in low-threshold settings.