Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34026395›Full record

ArticleThe mental health clinician2021

Veteran adherence to oral versus injectable AUD medication treatment.

Hayden Stewart, Brian G Mitchell, Daniel Ayanga, Annette Walder

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The mental health clinician, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hayden StewartClinical Pharmacy Specialist, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2018-5391
Brian G MitchellClinical Pharmacy Specialist, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1735-5601
Daniel AyangaAddiction Psychiatrist, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2116-5467
Annette WalderStatistician, IQuESt, Houston, Texas.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4799-6039
Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAUD medication treatment has been shown to improve outcomes compared with placebo when confined to per-protocol analysis. The same outcomes, however, have not always been maintained in intent-to-treat analysis, thus suggesting adherence may have a significant impact on efficacy outcomes. There is conflicting evidence present in the literature comparing adherence to oral versus injectable AUD pharmacotherapy and a paucity of information in the veteran population on risk factors for low adherence.

methodsThe primary end point of this retrospective chart review was to determine whether adherence rates differ between oral and injectable AUD treatments in veterans during the first year of treatment (at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months) using the portion of days covered model. Secondary end points were to determine differing characteristics between patients with high versus low adherence and compare alcohol-related readmission rates and discontinuation rates between groups.

resultsAdherence to injectable extended-release (XR) naltrexone was significantly higher than oral naltrexone at all time points and was significantly higher than disulfiram at 3, 6, and 9 months, but it was not significantly different from acamprosate at any time point. At months 9 and 12, acamprosate had significantly higher adherence compared with oral naltrexone. Patients with higher adherence were seen more frequently in the mental health clinic and had previously tried more AUD medications. The discontinuation rates and alcohol-related admission rates were not significantly different between groups at 1 year. DISCUSSION: XR naltrexone may improve adherence rates compared with oral naltrexone or disulfiram, but not acamprosate based on these outcomes. Patients may have increased adherence if they are seen more often in clinic and have trialed more AUD medications.

Indexed as

acamprosateadherencealcohol use disorderAUDdisulfiramnaltrexone

Identifiers

PMID34026395
PMCPMC8120985
OpenAlexW3163037796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.