Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33970256›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2021

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Treatment of Opioid Dependence With Weekly and Monthly Subcutaneous Depot vs Daily Sublingual Buprenorphine: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Nicholas Lintzeris, Adrian J Dunlop, Paul S Haber, Dan I Lubman, Robert Graham, Sarah Hutchinson, Shalini Arunogiri, Victoria Hayes, Peter Hjelmström, Agneta Svedberg and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Quality of life measures in treatment for active substance misuse: a scoping review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Patient Centered Outcomes Research in Medical Toxicology.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Nicholas LintzerisSouth Eastern Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Adrian J DunlopNew South Wales Drug and Alcohol Clinical Research and Improvement Network, New South Wales Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Paul S HaberUniversity Sydney, Discipline of Addiction Medicine, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Dan I LubmanTurning Point, Eastern Health and Monash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Robert GrahamNew South Wales Drug and Alcohol Clinical Research and Improvement Network, New South Wales Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Sarah HutchinsonSouth Eastern Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Shalini ArunogiriTurning Point, Eastern Health and Monash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Victoria HayesSouth Eastern Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Peter HjelmströmCamurus, Lund, Sweden.
Agneta SvedbergCamurus, Lund, Sweden.
Stefan PetersonCamurus, Lund, Sweden.
Fredrik TibergCamurus, Lund, Sweden.
South Eastern Sydney Local Health District · AUEastern Health · AUHunter Medical Research Institute · AURoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUSydney Local Health District · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Patient-reported outcomes in the treatment of opioid dependence may differ between subcutaneously administered depot buprenorphine and daily sublingual buprenorphine. Objective: To compare patient satisfaction between depot buprenorphine and sublingual buprenorphine in adult outpatients with opioid dependence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted among adult patients with opioid dependence at 6 outpatient clinical sites in Australia from October 2018 to September 2019. Data analysis was conducted from October 2019 to May 2020. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive treatment with weekly or monthly depot buprenorphine or daily sublingual buprenorphine over 24 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the difference in global treatment satisfaction, assessed by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) version 1.4 (range, 0-100; higher score indicates greater satisfaction) at week 24. Secondary end points included other patient-reported outcomes, including quality of life, treatment burden, and health-related outcomes, as well as measures of opioid use, retention in treatment, and safety. Results: A total of 119 participants (70 [58.8%] men; mean [SD] age, 44.4 [10.5] years) were enrolled, randomized to, and received either depot buprenorphine (60 participants [50.4%]) or sublingual buprenorphine (59 participants [49.6%]). From the initial sample of 120, a participant (0.8%) in the sublingual buprenorphine group withdrew consent and did not receive study treatment. All participants were receiving sublingual buprenorphine when enrolled. The mean TSQM global satisfaction score was significantly higher for the depot group compared with the sublingual group at week 24 (mean [SE] score, 82.5 [2.3] vs 74.3 [2.3]; difference, 8.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 14.6; P = .01). Improved outcomes were also observed for several secondary end points after treatment with depot buprenorphine (eg, mean [SE] treatment burden assessed by the Treatment Burden Questionnaire global score, on which lower scores indicate lower burden: 13.2 [2.6] vs 28.6 [2.5]; difference, -15.4; 95% CI, -22.6 to -8.2; P < .001). Thirty-nine participants (65.0%) in the depot buprenorphine group experienced 117 adverse drug reactions, mainly injection site reactions of mild intensity following subcutaneous administration, and 12 participants (20.3%) in the sublingual buprenorphine group experienced 21 adverse drug reactions. No participants withdrew from the trial medication or the trial due to adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, participants receiving depot buprenorphine reported improved treatment satisfaction compared with those receiving sublingual buprenorphine. The results highlight the application of patient-reported outcomes as alternative end points to traditional markers of substance use in addiction treatment outcome studies. Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ANZCTR12618001759280.

Indexed as

Administration, SublingualAdultBuprenorphineDelayed-Action PreparationsFemaleHumansInjections, SubcutaneousMaleMiddle AgedNarcotic AntagonistsOpiate Substitution TreatmentOpioid-Related DisordersPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresSurveys and QuestionnairesBuprenorphineDelayed-Action PreparationsNarcotic Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID33970256
PMCPMC8111483
OpenAlexW3163191299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.