ArticleHarm reduction journal2025
Seventeen years of experience: a retrospective cohort analysis of methadone maintenance treatment program patterns in Georgia.
Article in Harm reduction journal, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Georgia, MMT has evolved since 2005 from donor-funded pilot projects to a fully government-funded national program. We aimed to describe long-term patterns of engagement, retention and exit rates in the context of policy changes (removing financial barriers in 2017 and introducing take-home doses in 2020), by retrospectively analyzing nationwide data. We also aimed to analyze the association between the retention and factor variables (age, average daily methadone doses and location of MMT).
methodsWe used routine data obtained from the Center for Mental Health and Prevention of Addiction as of February 9, 2025. Each patient can have multiple treatment episodes. Retention days were assessed at the episode level, whereas "total engagement duration" reflected the total time a patient spent in treatment across all episodes. Exit rates for first treatment episodes were calculated for one, three, and five-year follow-ups, standardized per 100 person-years. Cox regression was used to examine associations between retention duration and factor variables.
resultsThe final dataset consisted of 59828 treatment episodes representing 30747 patients, enrolled in the program from August 6, 2008, to December 31, 2024. Age ranged from 21 to 85 years with median of 40 [IQR 34-47] years. The mean years of total engagement gradually declined across annual cohorts from 6.6 to 0,3 from 2008 to 2024. Peaks in retention occurred: in 2017 and in 2020. Each additional year of age reduced the risk of dropout by 26-28%, while higher doses were associated with 48% lower risk. One year exit rates calculated per 100 person-years showed higher variability across the annual cohorts from 40 (95%CI 33-47) in 2008 to 186 (95%CI 168-197) in 2015, compared to three- (40(95%CI 37-47) in 2008 to 120 (95%CI (113-128) in 2015), and five-year follow-ups (40 (95%CI 33-44) in 2008 to 102 (95%CI(95-106) in 2015).
conclusionsFindings highlight the potential role of adequate dosing, sustained accessibility, and patient-centered approaches. Descriptive results suggest that removing financial barriers and introducing take-home doses may improve retention. For a comprehensive assessment of program effectiveness, total engagement duration and long-term exit rates should also be considered.
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.