Economic evaluation of interventions to treat opiate dependence: A review of the evidence

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 371-393

  Doran, Christopher M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Buprenorphine, therapeutic use; Cost benefit; Cost effectiveness; Cost utility; Drug withdrawal therapies, therapeutic use; Heroin abuse, treatment; Methadone, therapeutic use; Naltrexone, therapeutic use; Opioid abuse, treatment

Indexed keywords

BUPRENORPHINE; DIAMORPHINE; LEVACETYLMETHADOL; METHADONE; NALTREXONE; OPIATE;

ABSENTEEISM; BEHAVIOR THERAPY; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST OF ILLNESS; CRIME; DRUG DEPENDENCE TREATMENT; DRUG DETOXIFICATION; EMBASE; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MAINTENANCE THERAPY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDLINE; METHADONE TREATMENT; OPIATE ADDICTION; OUTPATIENT CARE; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRISON; PSYCHOSOCIAL CARE; PSYCINFO; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW; SOCIAL WELFARE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; NARCOTIC ANTAGONISTS; NARCOTICS; OPIOID-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 42449136114     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200826050-00003     Document Type: Review

References (91)

1. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. World drug report. Vienna: UNODC, 2004
2. Darke S, Ross J. Suicide among heroin users: rates, risk factors and methods. Addiction 2002; 97 (11): 1383-94
3. Goldstein A, Herrera J. Heroin addicts and methadone treatment in Albuquerque: a 22-year follow-up. Drug Alcohol Depend 1995; 40 (2): 139-50
4. Hulse G, English DR, Milne E, et al. The quantification of mortality resulting from the regular use of illicit opiates. Addiction 1999; 94 (2): 221-9
5. Hall W, Lynskey M, Degenhardt L. Heroin use in Australia [monograph 42]. Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, 1999
6. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). Annual report on the state of the drugs problem in the European Union, 2001. Lisbon: EMCDDA, 2002
7. UNAIDS (Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS) and WHO (World Health Organization). AIDS epidemic update December 2001. Geneva: UNAIDS and WHO, 2002
8. World Health Organization. The world health report 2004. Geneva: WHO, 2004
9. Single E, Robson L, Xie X, et al. The economic costs of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs in Canada, 1992. Addiction 1998; 93 (7): 991-1006
10. Collins DJ, Lapsley HM. Counting the cost: estimates of the social costs of drug abuse in Australia in 1998-99 [National Drug Strategy monograph series no. 49]. Canberra (ACT): Commonwealth of Australia, 2002
11. Mark T, Woody GE, Juday T, et al. The economic costs of heroin addiction in the United States. Drug Alcohol Depend 2001; 61 (2): 195-206
12. García-Altés A, Ollé JM, Antoñanzas F, et al. The social cost of illegal drug consumption in Spain. Addiction 2002; 97 (9): 1145-53
13. Hammersley R, Forsyth A, Lavelle T. The criminality of new drug users in Glasgow. Br J Addict 1990; 85: 1583-94
14. Bell J, Hall W, Byth K. Changes in criminal activity after entering methadone maintenance. Br J Addict 1992; 87: 251-8
15. Bell J, Mattick R, Hay A, et al. Methadone maintenance and drug-related crime. J Subst Abuse 1997; 9: 15-25
16. Bennett T, Wright R. The impact of prescribing on the crimes of opioid users. Br J Addict 1986; 81: 265-73
17. Ball JC, Shaffer JW, Nurco DN. The day-to-day criminality of heroin addicts in Baltimore: a study in the continuity of offence rates. Drug Alcohol Depend 1983; 12 (2): 119-42
18. Hubbard RL, Marsden ME, Rachal JV, et al. Drug abuse treatment: a national study of effectiveness. London: Chapel Hill, 1989
19. Rothbard A, Alterman A, Rutherford M, et al. Revisiting the effectiveness of methadone treatment on crime reductions in the 1990s. J Subst Abuse Treat 1999; 16 (4): 329-35
20. Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D, et al. Reductions in acquisitive crime and drug use after treatment of addiction problems: 1-year follow-up outcomes. Drug Alcohol Depend 2000; 58 (1-2): 165-72
21. Gossop M, Trakada K, Stewart D, et al. Reductions in criminal convictions after addiction treatment: 5-year follow-up. Drug Alcohol Depend 2005; 79 (3): 295-302
22. World Health Organization. WHO report on neuroscience of psychoactive substance use and dependence. Geneva: WHO, 2005
23. Amato L, Minozzi S, Davoli M, et al. Psychosocial and pharmacological treatments versus pharmacological treatments for opioid detoxification. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004 Oct 18; (4): CD005031
24. Amato L, Minozzi S, Davoli M, et al. Psychosocial combined with agonist maintenance treatments versus agonist maintenance treatments alone for treatment of opioid dependence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004 Oct 18; (4): CD004147
25. Clark N, Lintzeris N, Gijsbers A, et al. LAAM maintenance vs methadone maintenance for heroin dependence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002; (2): CD002210
26. Gowing L, Ali R, White J. Opioid antagonists with minimal sedation for opioid withdrawal. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002; (2): CD002021
27. Gowing L, Ali R, White J. Buprenorphine for the management of opioid withdrawal. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002; (2): CD002025
28. Farrell M, Ward J, Mattick R, et al. Methadone maintenance treatment in opiate dependence: a review. BMJ 1994; 309 (6960): 997-1001
29. National Institute on Drug Abuse. Report of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Health Services Research at the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, 2004
30. Tucker T, Ritter A. Naltrexone in the treatment of heroin dependence: a literature review. Drug and Alcohol Review 2000; 19: 73-82
31. Mattick RP, Kimber J, Breen C, et al. Buprenorphine maintenance versus placebo or methadone maintenance for opioid dependence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003; (2): CD002207
32. Cartwright WS. Cost-benefit analysis of drug treatment services: review of the literature. J Ment Health Policy Econ 2000; 3: 11-26
33. French MT, Drummond MF. A research agenda for economic evaluation of substance abuse services. J Subst Abuse Treat 2005; 29: 125-37
34. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 2005
35. Gold M, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996
36. McCollister KE, French MT. The relative contribution of outcome domains in the total economic benefit of addiction interventions: a review of first findings. Addiction 2003; 98: 1647-59
37. French M, Martin R. The costs of drug abuse consequences: a summary of research findings. J Subst Abuse Treat 1996; 13 (6): 453-66
38. Choi B, Robson L, Single E. Estimating the economic costs of the abuse of tobacco, alcohol and illicit drugs: a review of methodologies and Canadian data sources. Chronic Dis Can 1997; 18 (4): 149-65
39. Hall W, Doran CM, Degenhardt L, et al. Illicit opioid use. In: Jamison D, Breman J, Measham JG, editors. Disease control priorities in developing countries. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006: 907-32
40. Simoens S, Ludbrook A, Matheson C, et al. Pharmaco-economics of community maintenance for opiate dependence: a review of evidence and methodology. Drug Alcohol Depend 2006; 84 (1): 28-39
41. Simoens S, Matheson C, Inkster K, et al. The effectiveness of treatment for drug users: an international systematic review of the evidence. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Drug Misuse Research Programme, 2002
42. French M, McGeary K. Estimating the economic cost of substance abuse treatment. Health Econ 1997; 6: 1-6
43. French M, Dunlap LJ, Zarkin GA, et al. A structured instrument for estimating the economic cost of drug abuse treatment: the Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program (DATCAP). J Subst Abuse Treat 1997; 14 (5): 445-55
44. Bradley CJ, French MT, Rachal JV. Financing and cost of restandard and enhanced methadone treatment. J Subst Abuse Treat 1994; 11 (5): 433-42
45. French MT, Bradley CJ, Calingaert B, et al. Cost analysis of costtraining and employment services in methadone treatment. Eval Program Plann 1994; 17 (2): 107-20
46. Roebuck C, French MT, McLellan T. DATStats: results from 85 studies using the Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program (DATCAP). J Subst Abuse Treat 2003; 25: 51-7
47. Alexandre PK, Roebuck MC, French MT, et al. The cost of residential addiction treatment in public housing. J Subst Abuse Treat 2003; 24 (4): 285-90
48. French MT, Salome HJ, Carney M. Using the DATCAP and ASI to estimate the costs and benefits of residential addiction treatment in the State of Washington (provisional record). Soc Sci Med 2002; 55 (12): 2267-82
49. French MT, Saloḿe HJ, Krupski A, et al. Benefit-cost analysis of residential and outpatient addiction treatment in the State of Washington. Eval Rev 2000; 24 (6): 609-34
50. Saloḿe HJ, French MT, Miller M, et al. Estimating the client costs of addiction treatment: first findings from the client drug abuse treatment cost analysis program (client DATCAP). Drug Alcohol Depend 2003; 71 (2): 195-206
51. Mattick RP, Digiusto E, Doran CM, et al. National evaluation of pharmacotherapies for opioid dependence (NEPOD). Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing, 2001
52. Shanahan MD, Doran CM, Digiusto E, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of heroin detoxification methods in the Australian National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD). Addict Behav 2006; 31 (3): 371-87
53. Shepard DS, Larson MJ, Hoffmann NG. Cost-effectiveness of substance abuse services: implications for public policy. Psychiatr Clin North Am 1999; 22 (2): 385-400
54. Gossop M, Strang J. Price, cost and value of opiate detoxification treatments: reanalysis of data from two randomised trials. Br J Psychiatry 2000; 177: 262-6
55. De Jong C, Laheij R, Krabbe P, et al. General anaesthesia does not improve outcome in opioid antagonist detoxification treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Addiction 2005; 100 (2): 206-15
56. Doran CM, Shanahan M, Bell J, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of buprenorphine-assisted heroin withdrawal. Drug Alcohol Rev 2004; 23 (2): 171-5
57. Hartz DT, Meek P, Piotrowski NA, et al. A cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis of contingency contracting-enhanced methadone detoxification treatment. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 1999; 25 (2): 207-18
58. Masson C, Barnett PG, Sees KL, et al. Cost and cost-effectiveness of standard methadone maintenance treatment compared to enriched 180-day methadone detoxification. Addiction 2004; 99 (6): 718-26
59. Doran CM, Shanahan M, Digiusto E, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of maintenance agonist treatments in the National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD). Exp Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res 2006; 6 (4): 437-46
60. Barnett PG. The cost-effectiveness of methadone maintenance as a health care intervention. Addiction 1999; 94 (4): 479-88
61. Zaric GS, Barnett PG, Brandeau ML. HIV transmission and the cost-effectiveness of methadone maintenance. Am J Public Health 2000; 90 (7): 1100-11
62. Strang J, Marsden J, Cummins M, et al. Randomized trial of supervised injectable versus oral methadone maintenance: restandard port of feasibility and 6-month outcome. Addiction 2000; 95 (11): 1631-45
63. Kraft M, Rothbard AB, Hadley TR, et al. Are supplementary services provided during methadone maintenance really cost-training effective? Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154 (9): 1214-9
64. Avants SK, Margolin A, Sindelar JL, et al. Day treatment versus enhanced standard methadone services for opioid-dependent patients: a comparison of clinical efficacy and cost. Am J Psychiatry 1999; 156 (1): 27-33
65. Sigmon SC, Stitzer ML. Use of low-cost incentive intervention to improve counseling attendance among methadone maintained patients. J Subst Abuse Treat 2005; 29 (4): 253-8
66. Warren E, Viney R, Shearer J, et al. Value for money in drug treatment: economic evaluation of prison methadone. Drug Alcohol Depend 2006; 84 (2): 160-6
67. Dolan K, Shearer J, Macdonald M, et al. A randomised controlled trial of methadone maintenance treatment versus wait list control in an Australian prison system. Drug Alcohol Depend 2003; 72: 59-65
68. Barnett PG, Zaric GS, Brandeau ML. The cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine maintenance therapy for opiate addiction in the United States. Addiction 2001; 96: 1267-78
69. Doran CM, Shanahan M, Mattick RP, et al. Buprenorphine versus methadone maintenance: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend 2003; 71 (3): 295-302
70. Harris AH, Gospodarevskaya E, Ritter AJ. A randomised trial of the cost effectiveness of buprenorphine as an alternative to methadone maintenance treatment for heroin dependence in a primary care setting. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23 (1): 77-91
71. Dijkgraaf MG, van der Zanden BP, de Borgie CA, et al. Cost utility analysis of co-prescribed heroin compared with methadone maintenance treatment in heroin addicts in two randomised trials. BMJ 2005; 330 (7503): 1297-302
72. Mojtabai R, Zivin JG. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of four treatment modalities for substance disorders: a propensity score analysis (provisional record). Health Serv Res 2003; 38 (1): 233-59
73. Hubbard RL, Rachal JV, Craddock SG. Treatment Outcome Prospective Study (TOPS): client characteristics and behaviors before, during, and after treatment. In: Tims FM, Ludford JP, editors. Drug abuse treatment evaluation: strategies, progress, and prospects [National Institute on Drug Abuse Research monograph no. 51; DHHS publication no. (ADM) 84-1329]. Washington, DC: US Government Print Office, 1984
74. Mauser E, Van Stelle KR, Moberg DP. The economic impact of diverting substance-abusing offenders into treatment. Crime Delinq 1994; 40 (4): 568-88
75. The California Drug and Alcohol Treatment Assessment (CALDATA) general report. Sacramento (CA): State of California, Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, 1994
76. Hser Y, Teruya E, Hardy M, et al. The California Treatment Outcome Project (CalTOP) final report submitted to the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Los Angeles (CA): UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, 2002
77. Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D, et al. Substance use, health and social problems of service users at 54 drug treatment agencies: intake data from the National Treatment Outcome Research Study. Br J Psychiatry 1998; 173: 166-71
78. Harwood H, Hubbard RL, Collins JJ, et al. The costs of crime and the benefits of drug abuse treatment: a cost-benefit analysis using TOPS data, in compulsory treatment of drug abuse. Research and clinical practice. Rockville (MD): US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, 1998
79. Harwood HJ, Napolitano DM, Kristiansen PL, et al. Economic costs to society of alcohol and drug abuse and mental illness. Research Triangle Park (NC): Research Triangle Institute, 1984
80. Rajkumar AS, French MT. Drug use, crime costs, and the economic benefits of treatment. J Quantitative Criminol 1997; 13: 291-323
81. Gerstein DR, Johnson RA, Harwood H, et al. Evaluating recovery services: the California drug and alcohol treatment system (CALDATA). Sacramento (CA): California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, 1994
82. Ettner SL, Huang DH, Rose D, et al. Benefit-cost in the California treatment outcome project: does substance abuse treatment "pay for itself"? Health Serv Res 2006; 41 (1): 192-213
83. Godfrey C, Stewart D, Gossop M. Economic analysis of costs and consequences of the treatment of drug misuse: 2-year outcome data from the National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS). Addiction 2004; 99 (6): 697-707
84. Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D. NTORS at one year: changes in substance use, health and criminal behaviour one year after intake. London: Department of Health, 1998
85. Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D, et al. The National Treatment Outcome Research Study in the United Kingdom: six month follow-up outcomes. Psychol Addict Behav 1997; 11: 324-37
86. Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D, et al. Outcomes after methadone maintenance reduction treatments: two-year follow-up results from the National Treatment Outcome Research Study. Drug Alcohol Depend 2001; 62: 255-64
87. French MT, Salome HJ, Carney M. Benefit-cost analysis of addiction treatment in Arkansas: specialty and standard resiles dential programs for pregnant and parenting women. Soc Sci Med 2002; 55 (12): 2267-82
88. Daley M, Argeriou M, McCarty D, et al. The costs of crime and the benefits of substance abuse treatment for pregnant women. J Subst Abuse Treat 2000; 19 (4): 445-58
89. Fals-Stewart W, Birchler GR, O'Farrell TJ. Behavioral couples therapy for male substance-abusing patients: effects on relationship adjustment and drug-using behavior J Consult Clin Psychol 1996; 64: 959-72
90. Fals-Stewart W, O'Farrell TJ, Birchler GR. Behavioral couples therapy for male substance-abusing patients: a cost outcomes analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol 1997; 65: 789-802
91. Koenig L, Siegel JM, Harwood H, et al. Economic benefits of substance abuse treatment: findings from Cuyahoga County, Ohio. J Subst Abuse Treat 2005; 28: S41-50