Jarvis Brantley P, Holtyn August F, DeFulio Anthony, Dunn Kelly E, Everly Jeffrey J, Leoutsakos Jeannie-Marie S, Umbricht Annie, Fingerhood Michael, Bigelow George E, Silverman Kenneth
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Department of Psychology, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI, USA.
Addiction. 2017 May;112(5):830-837. doi: 10.1111/add.13724. Epub 2017 Feb 3.
To test whether an incentive-based intervention that increased adherence to naltrexone also increased opiate abstinence.
Post-hoc combined analysis of three earlier randomized controlled trials that showed individually that incentives for adherence to oral and to extended-release injection naltrexone dosing schedules increased naltrexone adherence, but not opiate abstinence.
Out-patient therapeutic work-place in Baltimore, MD, USA.
One hundred and forty unemployed heroin-dependent adults participating from 2006 to 2010.
Participants were hired in a model work-place for 26 weeks and randomized to a contingency (n = 72) or prescription (n = 68) group. Both groups were offered naltrexone. Contingency participants were required to take scheduled doses of naltrexone in order to work and earn wages. Prescription participants could earn wages independent of naltrexone adherence.
Thrice-weekly and monthly urine samples tested for opiates and cocaine and measures of naltrexone adherence (percentage of monthly urine samples positive for naltrexone or percentage of scheduled injections received). All analyses included pre-randomization attendance, opiate use and cocaine use as covariates. Additional analyses controlled for cocaine use and naltrexone adherence during the intervention.
Contingency participants had more opiate abstinence than prescription participants (68.1 versus 52.9% opiate-negative thrice-weekly urine samples, respectively; and 71.9 versus 61.7% opiate-negative monthly urine samples, respectively) based on initial analyses [thrice-weekly samples, odds ratio (OR) = 3.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.7-6.5, P < 0.01; monthly samples, OR = 2.6, 95% CI = 1.0-7.1, P = 0.06] and on analyses that controlled for cocaine use (thrice-weekly samples, OR = 3.9, 95% CI = 3.3-4.5, P < 0.01; monthly samples, OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.1-11.1, P = 0.04), which was high and associated with opiate use. The difference in opiate abstinence rates between contingency and prescription participants was reduced when controlling for naltrexone adherence (monthly samples, OR = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.7-1.7, P = 0.84).
Incentives for naltrexone adherence increase opiate abstinence in heroin-dependent adults, an effect that appears to be due to increased naltrexone adherence produced by the incentives.
测试基于激励措施的干预能否在提高纳曲酮依从性的同时增加阿片类药物戒断率。
对三项早期随机对照试验进行事后综合分析,这三项试验单独显示,针对口服和缓释注射纳曲酮给药方案的依从性激励措施可提高纳曲酮依从性,但不能提高阿片类药物戒断率。
美国马里兰州巴尔的摩的门诊治疗工作场所。
2006年至2010年参与研究的140名失业的海洛因依赖成年人。
参与者在一个模拟工作场所工作26周,并随机分为应急组(n = 72)或处方组(n = 68)。两组均提供纳曲酮。应急组参与者为了工作和赚取工资需要按规定剂量服用纳曲酮。处方组参与者可独立于纳曲酮依从性赚取工资。
每周三次和每月采集尿液样本检测阿片类药物和可卡因,并测量纳曲酮依从性(纳曲酮检测呈阳性的每月尿液样本百分比或接受的预定注射百分比)。所有分析均将随机分组前的出勤率、阿片类药物使用和可卡因使用作为协变量。额外分析控制了干预期间的可卡因使用和纳曲酮依从性。
基于初始分析[每周三次样本,优势比(OR)= 3.3,95%置信区间(CI)= 1.7 - 6.5,P < 0.01;每月样本,OR = 2.6,95% CI = 1.0 - 7.1,P = 0.06]以及控制了可卡因使用的分析(每周三次样本,OR = 3.9,95% CI = 3.3 - 4.5,P < 0.01;每月样本,OR = 3.4,95% CI = 1.1 - 11.1,P = 0.04),应急组参与者的阿片类药物戒断率高于处方组参与者(每周三次尿液样本中阿片类药物呈阴性的比例分别为68.1%和52.9%;每月尿液样本中阿片类药物呈阴性的比例分别为71.9%和61.7%),可卡因使用量较高且与阿片类药物使用相关。在控制纳曲酮依从性后,应急组和处方组参与者之间的阿片类药物戒断率差异减小(每月样本,OR = 1.1,95% CI = 0.7 - 1.7,P = 0.84)。
对纳曲酮依从性的激励措施可提高海洛因依赖成年人的阿片类药物戒断率,这种效果似乎是由于激励措施提高了纳曲酮依从性所致。