Mortality risk of opioid substitution therapy with methadone versus buprenorphine: a retrospective cohort study

被引:101
作者
Kimber, Jo [1 ,3 ]
Larney, Sarah [1 ,4 ]
Hickman, Matthew [5 ]
Randall, Deborah [2 ]
Degenhardt, Louisa [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ New S Wales, Natl Drug & Alcohol Res Ctr, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
[2] Univ New S Wales, Ctr Big Data Res, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
[3] Kings Coll London, Inst Psychiat Psychol & Neurosci, Addict Dept, London WC2R 2LS, England
[4] Brown Univ, Alpert Med Sch, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[5] Univ Bristol, Sch Social & Community Med, Bristol, Avon, England
[6] Univ Melbourne, Sch Populat & Global Hlth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
NEW-SOUTH-WALES; DRUG-RELATED MORTALITY; MAINTENANCE TREATMENT; RECEIVING METHADONE; OPIATE USERS; DEPENDENCE; RETENTION; HEROIN; ADDICTION; SURVIVAL;
D O I
10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00366-1
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
Background Opioid dependence increases risk of premature mortality. Opioid substitution therapy with methadone or buprenorphine reduces mortality risk, especially for drug-related overdose. Clinical guidelines recommend methadone as the first line of opioid substitution therapy. We aimed to test whether buprenorphine treatment has a lower mortality risk than does methadone treatment by comparing all-cause mortality and drug-related overdose mortality at treatment induction, after in-treatment medication switches, and following treatment cessation. Methods We did a retrospective cohort study of all patients with opioid dependency (n=32 033) in New South Wales, Australia, who started a methadone or buprenorphine treatment episode from Aug 1, 2001, to Dec 31, 2010, including 190 232.6 person-years of follow-up. We compared crude mortality rates (CMRs) for all-cause and drug-related overdose mortality, and mortality rate ratios (MRRs) according to age, sex, period in or out of treatment, medication type, and in-treatment switching. Findings Patients who initiated with buprenorphine had reduced all-cause and drug-related mortality during the first 4 weeks of treatment compared with those who initiated with methadone (adjusted all-cause MRR 2.17, 95% CI 1.29-3.67; adjusted drug-related MRR 4.88, 1.73-13.69). For the remaining time on treatment, drug-related mortality risk did not differ (adjusted MRR 1.18, 95% CI 0.89-1.56), but weak evidence suggested that all-cause mortality was lower for buprenorphine than methadone (1.66, 1.40-1.96). In the 4 weeks after treatment cessation, all-cause mortality did not differ, but drug-related mortality was lower for methadone (adjusted all-cause MRR 1.12, 0.79-1.59; adjusted drug-related MRR 0.50, 0.29-0.86). Patients who switched from buprenorphine to methadone during treatment had lower mortality in the first 4 weeks of methadone treatment than matched controls who received methadone only (CMR difference 7.1 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI 0.1-14.0); no mortality difference was noted for switches from buprenorphine to methadone or for switches to either medication beyond the first 4 weeks of treatment. Interpretation In a setting with high risk of death in the first 4 weeks of opioid substitution therapy, buprenorphine seemed to reduce mortality in this period, but little difference between buprenorphine and methadone was noted thereafter or for in-treatment switching of medications. Cross-cohort corroboration of our findings and further assessment of the stepped treatment model is warranted.
引用
收藏
页码:901 / 908
页数:8
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 301 NDARC
[2]  
[Anonymous], ACCIDENTAL DRUG INDU
[3]  
[Anonymous], BMJ
[4]  
[Anonymous], JAMA
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2011, WHO Model List of Essential Medicines, 17th list
[6]  
[Anonymous], DRUG ALCOHOL REV
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2007, METH BUPR MAN OP DEP
[8]  
[Anonymous], MED J AUST
[9]  
[Anonymous], 1993, INT STAT CLASS DIS R, V10th
[10]   Mortality in opioid-maintained patients after release from an addiction clinic [J].
Bauer, Susanne M. ;
Loipl, Rita ;
Jagsch, Reinhold ;
Gruber, Diego ;
Risser, Daniele ;
Thau, Kenneth ;
Fischer, Gabriele .
EUROPEAN ADDICTION RESEARCH, 2008, 14 (02) :82-91