An evaluation of community methadone services in Victoria, Australia: results of a client survey

Abstract

One hundred and ninety‐five metropolitan clients enrolled in the community‐based methadone programme in Victoria, Australia were surveyed in order to evaluate client perspectives of methadone treatment delivered from primary health care settings. Results indicated that the average daily methadone dose was 41 mg, ranging from 7mg to 140 mg. The majority of clients were satisfied with the programme and the services delivered by dispensing pharmacies and prescribing doctors. Most clients were found to have reduced their heroin use and criminal activity since commencing methadone. A number of concerns about the programme were identified, however, including the high proportion of weekly income spent on methadone‐related activities and a high use of tranquillizers by clients on higher methadone doses. In general the community‐based methadone programme was found to be an acceptable methadone of service delivery to metropolitan clients in Victoria, Australia. [Ezard N, Lintzeris N, Odgers P, Koutroulis G, Muhleisen P, Stowe A, Lanagan A. An evaluation of community methadone services in Victoria, Australia: results of a client survey. Drug Alcohol Rev 1999;18:417–423]

Increased flexibility in methadone take-home scheduling during the COVID-19 pandemic: Should this practice be incorporated into routine clinical care?

“…It is unsurprising, therefore, that MMT patients highly value take-home doses (Fraser, 2006). Even otherwise satisfied MMT patients have concerns about or are dissatisfied with the lack or the small number of methadone take-home doses (Ezard et al, 1999;Madden et al, 2008 T regarding methadone take-home doses to ensure uninterrupted access to the medication while minimizing the risks of COVID-19; those recommendations included, when appropriate, the provision of naloxone kits for overdose reversal. Consequently, as of March 13, 2020, our methadone clinic increased the number of take-home doses per patient on a case-by-case basis after a thorough risk/benefit assessment.…”

The Rhode Island Medical Marijuana Program

“…RIPAC staff offered patients a study information sheet requesting the patient participate in the study. Patient self-selection may have introduced additional bias in the findings but it is difficult to determine what effect this bias might have had (Ezard et al, 1999). Patients who did participate were also asked to share the information sheet with other patients and with their practitioner and because the majority of patients were recruited with the assistance of RIPAC, the findings obtained through patient interviews may not accurately reflect the opinions of the total population of patients.…”

Identifying the most common barriers to opioid agonist treatment in an Australian setting

“…Despite this, treatment-seeking rates are low, with a 2009 study finding that OAT use in the OUD population was 8% globally and 23% in Australia (Mathers et al 2010). Contributing to this are the negative perceptions those with heroin dependence have of OAT in Australia, which include high costs, a lack of flexibility with treatment, OAT as an addiction itself and the stigma associated with OAT (Ezard et al 1999;Gourlay et al 2005;Madden et al 2008).…”