Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21791093›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2011

Client satisfaction among participants in a randomized trial comparing oral methadone and injectable diacetylmorphine for long-term opioid-dependency.

Kirsten I Marchand, Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes, Daphne Guh, Suzanne Brissette, David C Marsh, Martin T Schechter

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00175357 (North American Opiate Medication Initiative), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00175357 phase3completednot on this map

North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI): Multi-Centre, Randomized Controlled Trial of Heroin-Assisted Therapy for Treatment-Refractory Injection Opiate Users

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of British ColumbiaRan2005 to 2009Enrolled192ConditionsOpiate AddictionArmsMethadone, Diamorphine hydrochloride
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kirsten I MarchandCentre for Health Evaluation & Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, St, Paul's Hospital 620B - 1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC, V6Z 1Y6, Canada.
Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes
Daphne Guh
Suzanne Brissette
David C Marsh
Martin T Schechter
Centre for Advancing Health Outcomes · CANOSM University · CAUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSubstitution with opioid-agonists (e.g., methadone) has shown to be an effective treatment for chronic long-term opioid dependency. Patient satisfaction with treatment has been associated with improved addiction treatment outcomes. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating patients' satisfaction with Opioid Substitution Treatment (OST). In the present study, participants' satisfaction with OST was evaluated at 3 and 12 months. We sought to test the relationship between satisfaction and patients' characteristics, the treatment modality received and treatment outcomes.

methodsData from a randomized controlled trial, the North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI), conducted in Vancouver and Montreal (Canada) between 2005-2008, was analyzed. The NAOMI study compared the effectiveness of oral methadone vs. injectable diacetylmorphine over 12 months. A small sub-group of patients received injectable hydromorphone on a double blind basis with diacetylmorphine. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8) was used to measure satisfaction with treatment. CSQ-8 scores, as well as retention and response to treatment, did not differ between those receiving hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine at 3 or 12 months assessments; therefore, these two groups were analyzed together as the 'injectable' treatment group.

resultsA total of 232 (92%) and 237 (94%) participants completed the CSQ-8 at 3 and 12 months, respectively. Participants in both groups were highly satisfied with treatment. Independent of treatment group, participants satisfied with treatment at 3 months were more likely to be retained at 12 months. Multivariate analysis indicated that satisfaction was greater among those randomized to the injection group after controlling for treatment effectiveness. Participants who were retained, responded to treatment, and had fewer psychological symptoms were more satisfied with treatment. Finally, open-ended comments were made by 149 (60.3%) participants; concerns about the randomization process and the study ending were most commonly reported by participants receiving the oral and injectable medications, respectively.

conclusionsThe higher satisfaction among those receiving medically prescribed injectable diacetylmorphine (or hydromorphone) supports current evidence regarding the attractiveness of this treatment for long-term, opioid-dependent individuals not benefiting sufficiently from other treatments. In addition, the measurement of treatment satisfaction provides valuable information about participants at risk of relapse and in need of additional services.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00175357.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionAdultAnalgesics, OpioidCanadaDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleHeroinHumansInjections, SubcutaneousMaleMethadoneOpioid-Related DisordersOutcome Assessment, Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesAnalgesics, OpioidHeroinMethadone

Identifiers

PMID21791093
PMCPMC3161847
OpenAlexW2141544941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.