Dataset Information

Evaluating comparative effectiveness of psychosocial interventions adjunctive to opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder: A systematic review with network meta-analyses.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Guidelines recommend that individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) receive pharmacological and psychosocial interventions; however, the most appropriate psychosocial intervention is not known. In collaboration with people with lived experience, clinicians, and policy makers, we sought to assess the relative benefits of psychosocial interventions as an adjunct to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) among persons with OUD.

Methods

A review protocol was registered a priori (CRD42018090761), and a comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) was conducted from database inception to June 2020 in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Established methods for study selection and data extraction were used. Primary outcomes were treatment retention and opioid use (measured by urinalysis for opioid use and opioid abstinence outcomes). Odds ratios were estimated using network meta-analyses (NMA) as appropriate based on available evidence, and in remaining cases alternative approaches to synthesis were used.

Results

Seventy-two RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias evaluations commonly identified study limitations and poor reporting with regard to methods used for allocation concealment and selective outcome reporting. Due to inconsistency in reporting of outcome measures, only 48 RCTs (20 unique interventions, 5,404 participants) were included for NMA of treatment retention, where statistically significant differences were found when psychosocial interventions were used as an adjunct to OAT as compared to OAT-only. The addition of rewards-based interventions such as contingency management (alone or with community reinforcement approach) to OAT was superior to OAT-only. Few statistically significant differences between psychosocial interventions were identified among any other pairwise comparisons. Heterogeneity in reporting formats precluded an NMA for opioid use. A structured synthesis was undertaken for the remaining outcomes which included opioid use (n = 18 studies) and opioid abstinence (n = 35 studies), where the majority of studies found no significant difference between OAT plus psychosocial interventions as compared to OAT-only.

Conclusions

This systematic review offers a comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence and the limitations of current trials of psychosocial interventions applied as an adjunct to OAT for OUD. Clinicians and health services may wish to consider integrating contingency management in addition to OAT for OUD in their settings to improve treatment retention. Aside from treatment retention, few differences were consistently found between psychosocial interventions adjunctive to OAT and OAT-only. There is a need for high-quality RCTs to establish more definitive conclusions.

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration CRD42018090761.

SUBMITTER: Rice D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7769275 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating comparative effectiveness of psychosocial interventions adjunctive to opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder: A systematic review with network meta-analyses.

Rice Danielle D Corace Kimberly K Wolfe Dianna D Esmaeilisaraji Leila L Michaud Alan A Grima Alicia A Austin Bradley B Douma Reuben R Barbeau Pauline P Butler Claire C Willows Melanie M Poulin Patricia A PA Sproule Beth A BA Porath Amy A Garber Gary G Taha Sheena S Garner Gord G Skidmore Becky B Moher David D Thavorn Kednapa K Hutton Brian B

PloS one 20201228 12

<h4>Background</h4>Guidelines recommend that individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) receive pharmacological and psychosocial interventions; however, the most appropriate psychosocial intervention is not known. In collaboration with people with lived experience, clinicians, and policy makers, we sought to assess the relative benefits of psychosocial interventions as an adjunct to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) among persons with OUD.<h4>Methods</h4>A review protocol was registered a priori (CRD ...[more]

PMID: 33370393

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInformation on cost-effectiveness of interventions to treat schizophrenia can assist health policy decision making, particularly given the lack of health resources in developing countries like Thailand. This study aims to determine the optimal treatment package, including drug and non-drug interventions, for schizophrenia in Thailand.MethodsA Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of typical antipsychotics, generic risperidone, olanzapine, clozapine and family interventions. Health outcomes were measured in disability adjusted life years. We evaluated intervention benefit by estimating a change in disease severity, taking into account potential side effects. Intervention costs included outpatient treatment costs, hospitalization costs as well as time and travel costs of patients and families. Uncertainty was evaluated using Monte Carlo simulation. A sensitivity analysis of the expected range cost of generic risperidone was undertaken.ResultsGeneric risperidone is more cost-effective than typicals if it can be produced for less than 10 baht per 2 mg tablet. Risperidone was the cheapest treatment with higher drug costs offset by lower hospital costs in comparison to typicals. The most cost-effective combination of treatments was a combination of risperidone (dominant intervention). Adding family intervention has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,900 baht/DALY with a 100% probability of a result less than a threshold for very cost-effective interventions of one times GDP or 110,000 baht per DALY. Treating the most severe one third of patients with clozapine instead of risperidone had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 320,000 baht/DALY with just over 50% probability of a result below three times GDP per capita.ConclusionsThere are good economic arguments to recommend generic risperidone as first line treatment in combination with family intervention. As the uncertainty interval indicates the addition of clozapine may be dominated and there are serious side effects, treating severe patients with clozapine is advisable only for patients who do not respond to risperidone and only in the presence of a stricter side effect monitoring system than currently exists.

Project description:ImportancePeople with schizophrenia are commonly treated with psychotropic medications in addition to antipsychotics, but there is little evidence about the comparative effectiveness of these adjunctive treatment strategies.ObjectiveTo study the comparative real-world effectiveness of adjunctive psychotropic treatments for patients with schizophrenia.Design, setting, and participantsThis comparative effectiveness study used US national Medicaid data from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2010, to examine the outcomes of initiating treatment with an antidepressant, a benzodiazepine, a mood stabilizer, or another antipsychotic among adult outpatients (aged 18-64 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia who were stably treated with a single antipsychotic. Data analysis was performed from January 1, 2017, to June 30, 2018. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to estimate propensity scores to balance covariates across the 4 medication groups. Weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare treatment outcomes during 365 days on an intention-to-treat basis.Main outcomes and measuresRisk of hospitalization for a mental disorder (primary), emergency department (ED) visits for a mental disorder, and all-cause mortality.ResultsThe study cohort included 81 921 adult outpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia (mean [SD] age, 40.7 [12.4] years; 37 515 women [45.8%]) who were stably treated with a single antipsychotic and then initiated use of an antidepressant (n = 31 117), a benzodiazepine (n = 11 941), a mood stabilizer (n = 12 849), or another antipsychotic (n = 26 014) (reference treatment). Compared with initiating use of another antipsychotic, initiating use of an antidepressant was associated with a lower risk (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.80-0.88) of psychiatric hospitalization, whereas initiating use of a benzodiazepine was associated with a higher risk (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.02-1.15); the risk associated with initiating use of a mood stabilizer (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.03) was not significantly different from initiating use of another antipsychotic. A similar pattern of associations was observed in psychiatric ED visits for initiating use of an antidepressant (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88-0.96), a benzodiazepine (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19), and a mood stabilizer (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94-1.04). Initiating use of a mood stabilizer was associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.04-1.66).Conclusions and relevanceIn the treatment of schizophrenia, initiating adjunctive treatment with an antidepressant was associated with reduced risk of psychiatric hospitalization and ED visits compared with initiating use of alternative psychotropic medications. Associations of benzodiazepines and mood stabilizers with poorer outcomes warrant clinical caution and further investigation.

Project description:IntroductionThe global opioid-related disease burden is significant. Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) can be effective in reducing illicit opioid use and fatal overdose, and improving multiple health and social outcomes. Despite evidence for its effectiveness, there are significant deficits in OAT globally. COVID-19 has required rapid adaptation of remote models of healthcare. Telemedicine is not used routinely in OAT, and little is known about the current levels of use and effectiveness. The objective of this review is to describe models of telemedicine and their efficacy.Methods and analysisThis scoping review uses the review methodology described by Arksey and O'Malley and adapted by Levac et al. The search strategy developed by the medical librarian at the Irish College of General Practitioners in conjunction with the research team will involve five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, PsycInfo and OpenGrey) and the hand searching of reference lists. A limited initial search of two databases will be completed to refine search terms, followed by a second comprehensive search using newly refined search terms of all databases and finally hand searching references of included studies. To be included, studies must report on remote ways of providing OAT (including assessment, induction and monitoring) or related psychosocial support; be published in English after 2010. Two researchers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full-text articles considered for inclusion. Data will be extracted onto an agreed template and will undergo a descriptive analysis of the contextual or process-oriented data and simple quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. The results of this scoping review will inform the development of a national remote model of OAT. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences.

Dataset Information

Evaluating comparative effectiveness of psychosocial interventions adjunctive to opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder: A systematic review with network meta-analyses.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Evaluating comparative effectiveness of psychosocial interventions adjunctive to opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder: A systematic review with network meta-analyses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets