Opioid agonist therapy drastically reduces the risk of mortality after release from prison. Providers, however, reported that some patients prefer to cease treatment prior to release back into the community.
Opioid agonist therapy drastically reduces the risk of mortality after release from prison. Providers, however, reported that some patients prefer to cease treatment prior to release back into the community.
l
However, evidence based practice suggests that opioid agonist treatment in custody, with continued treatment in the community, significantly reduces post-release mortality by 75% and re-incarceration.
This study addressed the clinically important question of why patients choose to cease opioid agonist therapy while in custody. If clinicians can better understand patient’s ambivalence towards opioid agonist therapy, then they may be better able to attract and retain opioid dependent prisoners into treatment.
This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews of 46 participants with a history of opioid dependence from seven correctional centers in New South Wales, Australia. All correctional centers in which recruitment was undertaken offered opioid agonist treatment.
In order to obtain a diversity of views on opioid agonist treatment in prisons, they included participants who initiated treatment in the community prior to incarceration, initiated treatment in custody, ceased treatment in custody, and not sought treatment while in custody. Over 2/3 of the sample were male and the average age was 35. Of the 27 participants currently in opioid agonist treatment, 26 were prescribed methadone, and one, buprenorphine–naloxone.
Specifically, the researchers examined:
Several reasons were identified for not seeking opioid agonist treatment while in custody, seeking treatment while in custody, ending treatment prior to release into the community, and continuing treatment post-release.
Research with opioid dependent patients from the community has shown considerable ambivalence toward opioid agonist therapy. Little is known, however, about why people may terminate treatment prior to release from custody.
This study added to our knowledge-base by documenting reasons for opioid agonist treatment decisions among prisoners.
This qualitative study has generated unique data on patient perspectives of opioid agonist therapy in correctional settings. The next steps are to use the qualitative responses to inform a quantitative study, and determine the generalizability of the results to the larger population of incarcerated individuals. In addition, a longitudinal study will provide information on if the participants followed through with their treatment decisions, and how it affected their recovery.
Larney, S. Zador, D., Sindicich, N., & Dolan, K. (2016). A qualitative study of reasons for seeking and ceasing opioid substitution treatment in prisons in New South Wales, Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, e-pub ahead of print.
Image Source: http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/lg/public/2015/
l
However, evidence based practice suggests that opioid agonist treatment in custody, with continued treatment in the community, significantly reduces post-release mortality by 75% and re-incarceration.
This study addressed the clinically important question of why patients choose to cease opioid agonist therapy while in custody. If clinicians can better understand patient’s ambivalence towards opioid agonist therapy, then they may be better able to attract and retain opioid dependent prisoners into treatment.
This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews of 46 participants with a history of opioid dependence from seven correctional centers in New South Wales, Australia. All correctional centers in which recruitment was undertaken offered opioid agonist treatment.
In order to obtain a diversity of views on opioid agonist treatment in prisons, they included participants who initiated treatment in the community prior to incarceration, initiated treatment in custody, ceased treatment in custody, and not sought treatment while in custody. Over 2/3 of the sample were male and the average age was 35. Of the 27 participants currently in opioid agonist treatment, 26 were prescribed methadone, and one, buprenorphine–naloxone.
Specifically, the researchers examined:
Several reasons were identified for not seeking opioid agonist treatment while in custody, seeking treatment while in custody, ending treatment prior to release into the community, and continuing treatment post-release.
Research with opioid dependent patients from the community has shown considerable ambivalence toward opioid agonist therapy. Little is known, however, about why people may terminate treatment prior to release from custody.
This study added to our knowledge-base by documenting reasons for opioid agonist treatment decisions among prisoners.
This qualitative study has generated unique data on patient perspectives of opioid agonist therapy in correctional settings. The next steps are to use the qualitative responses to inform a quantitative study, and determine the generalizability of the results to the larger population of incarcerated individuals. In addition, a longitudinal study will provide information on if the participants followed through with their treatment decisions, and how it affected their recovery.
Larney, S. Zador, D., Sindicich, N., & Dolan, K. (2016). A qualitative study of reasons for seeking and ceasing opioid substitution treatment in prisons in New South Wales, Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, e-pub ahead of print.
Image Source: http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/lg/public/2015/
l
However, evidence based practice suggests that opioid agonist treatment in custody, with continued treatment in the community, significantly reduces post-release mortality by 75% and re-incarceration.
This study addressed the clinically important question of why patients choose to cease opioid agonist therapy while in custody. If clinicians can better understand patient’s ambivalence towards opioid agonist therapy, then they may be better able to attract and retain opioid dependent prisoners into treatment.
This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews of 46 participants with a history of opioid dependence from seven correctional centers in New South Wales, Australia. All correctional centers in which recruitment was undertaken offered opioid agonist treatment.
In order to obtain a diversity of views on opioid agonist treatment in prisons, they included participants who initiated treatment in the community prior to incarceration, initiated treatment in custody, ceased treatment in custody, and not sought treatment while in custody. Over 2/3 of the sample were male and the average age was 35. Of the 27 participants currently in opioid agonist treatment, 26 were prescribed methadone, and one, buprenorphine–naloxone.
Specifically, the researchers examined:
Several reasons were identified for not seeking opioid agonist treatment while in custody, seeking treatment while in custody, ending treatment prior to release into the community, and continuing treatment post-release.
Research with opioid dependent patients from the community has shown considerable ambivalence toward opioid agonist therapy. Little is known, however, about why people may terminate treatment prior to release from custody.
This study added to our knowledge-base by documenting reasons for opioid agonist treatment decisions among prisoners.
This qualitative study has generated unique data on patient perspectives of opioid agonist therapy in correctional settings. The next steps are to use the qualitative responses to inform a quantitative study, and determine the generalizability of the results to the larger population of incarcerated individuals. In addition, a longitudinal study will provide information on if the participants followed through with their treatment decisions, and how it affected their recovery.
Larney, S. Zador, D., Sindicich, N., & Dolan, K. (2016). A qualitative study of reasons for seeking and ceasing opioid substitution treatment in prisons in New South Wales, Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, e-pub ahead of print.
Image Source: http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/lg/public/2015/