ArticleResearch square2025
"Trust and suspicion" Client and provider perspectives on the acceptability of medication for opioid use disorder among people who inject drugs in Kampala, Uganda.
Article in Research square, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite strong evidence supporting medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), acceptability varies considerably across contexts. This study explored client and provider perspectives on MOUD acceptability among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Kampala, Uganda.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative descriptive study during November and December 2023 in Kampala Capital City, Uganda. In-depth interviews with 20 PWID (10 enrolled, 10 not enrolled) and key informant interviews with 10 MOUD service providers were conducted. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) and managed with ATLAS.ti software.
resultsMOUD was highly acceptable among providers, enrolled and non-enrolled participants. Facilitators included comprehensive, person-centered services that addressed health and psychosocial needs, supportive family relationships, alignment with personal recovery goals, and the safety and effectiveness of supervised medication therapy. However, participants encountered significant barriers. Structural challenges such as high transport costs, limited clinic operating hours, and strict enrolment criteria impeded access and continuity. Fear of arrest due to drug criminalization and stigma, both societal and within healthcare settings, further discouraged engagement. Additionally, some participants questioned methadone's effectiveness relative to heroin and reported widespread reliance on traditional and spiritual healing practices, often coerced by family members. Social norms promoting mutual drug-sharing as a symbol of trust were disrupted by MOUD enrolment, resulting in peer resistance and social isolation.
conclusionMOUD was highly acceptable among PWID and providers in Uganda, valued for its effectiveness in restoring health and stability. However, structural barriers, stigma, misinformation, and restrictive enrolment often drove PWID to non-evidence-based treatment. Flexible service models, simplified enrolment procedures, community sensitisation, and collaboration with abstinence-based providers and law enforcement are vital to improving MOUD acceptability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.