The relationship between take-away methadone policies and methadone diversion

The development of policies in relation to unsupervised doses of methadone (take-away doses) should be based upon the best available evidence. There are both risks and benefits associated with take-away doses. This study aimed to explore the relationship between take-away policies and one measure of...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Drug and alcohol review 2005-07, Vol.24 (4), p.347-352
Main Authors: Ritter, Alison, Di Natale, Richard
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Australia - epidemiology
Catchment Area (Health)
diversion
Diversion schemes
Drug Abuse
Drug Administration Schedule
Drug dependency
Drugs (Pharmaceuticals)
Humans
Injections, Intravenous
Intravenous drug addiction
Legislation, Drug
Methadone
Methadone - administration & dosage
methadone injecting
Methadone injectioning
Methadone Maintenance
Methadone maintenance treatment
methadone take-away policy
Policy Analysis
Policy Making
Prevalence
Social Control Policies - legislation & jurisprudence
Statistics
Substance-Related Disorders - epidemiology
Substance-Related Disorders - prevention & control
Substance-Related Disorders - rehabilitation
Surveys
Unsupervised methadone dosing
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The development of policies in relation to unsupervised doses of methadone (take-away doses) should be based upon the best available evidence. There are both risks and benefits associated with take-away doses. This study aimed to explore the relationship between take-away policies and one measure of harm: methadone injection rates. Six different states in Australia were compared in relation to their methadone take-away policy and rates of methadone injection within their population of injecting drug users. At a simplistic level, those states with restrictive and less flexible take-away policies tended to have the lowest reported prevalence of methadone injection. However, this does not fully explain variability in methadone injecting. There were also considerable differences between those states with similar take-away policies. Variables which appear to impact upon methadone injecting rates include: take-away policies, drug preference, drug availability, treatment availability and degree of treatment penetration. Consideration of the benefits, rather than merely the harms, of various take-away policy options may provide an evidence-based platform for take-away policy development. [Ritter A, Di Natale R. The relationship between take-away methadone policies and methadone diversion. Drug Alcohol Rev 2005;24:347 - 352]
ISSN:0959-5236
1465-3362
DOI:10.1080/09595230500263939