Search

Background This survey followed a cohort of patients with chronic psychosis recruited from five catchment areas (DSMs) of the Sardinian community mental health services. The objective was to examine whether the amount of resources in the different sites may be a determinant of the outcomes. Methods Naturalistic follow-up study on 309 consecutive users with diagnosis of schizophrenic disorder, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar affective disorder with psychotic symptoms (DSM-IV TR) of five Sardinian community mental health services. Mental state and clinical symptoms along with functioning were assessed using semi-structured clinical interviews (ANTAS), Clinical Global Impression Severity Scale (CGI-S), Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF) and Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HONOS). Assessments were conducted at the beginning of the study and after one year. Results The proportion of professionals working in all DSMs participating in the study was found lower than the national Italian standard (0.7 vs 1.0 per 1,500 inhabitants). Follow-up revealed significant differences between DSMs in the improvement of the Honos scores (F = 5.932, p = 0.000). These differences correlate with the improvement of resources in terms of number of professionals during, and one year prior, to the trial. Conclusions The study shows that mental health services provided in the public sector in Sardinia are still very resource-poor, at least in terms of human resources. Our findings suggest that mental health service resources influence outcomes as regards the social functioning of users. We urge policy makers to take these observations into account when planning future services.

Patients on methadone maintenance were forewarned that a law prohibiting take-home dosages was to be enforced within 6 months. At the end of the 6-month period preceding the enforcement of the law the effect of the anticipated suppression of the take-home privilege was studied on a cohort of 211 methadone-maintained patients on take-home dosages. The outcome of the treatment of these patients was compared to that of a control group of 220 patients at the end of a 6-month period prior to the announcement of the new law. The outcome of the study suggests that the restrictive regulation is counterproductive for retaining patients in treatment.

Cognitive dysfunction is a major feature of drug addiction. In the present paper, we compared the decision-making ability using the Iowa gambling task of methadone- and buprenorphine-maintained individuals to non opiate-dependent drug-free controls. Buprenorphine-maintained individuals performed better than methadone-maintained individuals, and not differently than non opiate-dependent controls. In addition, methadone-maintained individuals had more perseverative errors on the Wisconsin card sorting task (WCST) as compared with non opiate-dependent drug-free controls whereas buprenorphine-maintained individuals had intermediate scores. Scores on Weschler adult intelligence scale (WAIS-R) were similar for methadone- and buprenorphine-maintained individuals whereas drug-free controls had significantly higher scores. In addition, both opiate-dependent groups performed more poorly than drug-free controls on the Benton visual retention test (BVRT). The results suggest that buprenorphine in contrast to methadone improves decision-making, and thus may be more effective in rehabilitation programs of opiate-dependent subjects and this improvement may be related to its distinct pharmacological action as a k antagonist.

Clinical trials carried out to compare methadone and buprenorphine in the treatment of opioid dependence have generally employed an alcoholic solution of buprenorphine, which has a bioavailability superior to that of the tablets. Since the product available for large scale use is in tablet form, one intended to verify the efficacy of this formulation. In a multicentre randomised controlled double blind study, 72 opioid dependent patients were assigned to treatment with buprenorphine (8 mg/day) or methadone (60 mg/day) for a period of 6 months. The two compounds did not show any significant difference with regard to urinalyses: the average percentage of analyses proving negative was 60.4% for patients assigned to buprenorphine, and 65.5% for those assigned to methadone. With regard to retention, a non-significant trend in favour of methadone was observed. Patients completing the trial improved significantly in terms of psychosocial adjustment and global functioning, as ascertained by the DSM-IV-GAF and symptom checklist-90 (SCL-90) scales, and this was independent of the treatment group. Finally, in the case of buprenorphine, patients who dropped out differed significantly from those who stayed, in terms of a higher level of psychopathological symptoms, and a lower level of psychosocial functioning. The results of the study further support the utility of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid dependence.

In a double-blind placebo-controlled trial, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB) (25 mg/kg orally) suppressed most of the withdrawal symptomatology in 14 heroin addicts and 13 methadone-maintained subjects. The GHB effect was prompt (within 15 minutes) and persisted for between 2 and 3 hours. Subsequently, the same patients received GHB in an open study every 2 to 4 hours for the first 2 days and 4 to 6 hours for the following 6 days: most abstinence signs and symptoms remained suppressed and patients reported felling well. Urine analysis failed to detect any presence of opiate metabolites. No withdrawal symptomatology recurred after 8 days of treatment when GHB was suspended, and patients were challenged with an intravenous injection of 0.4 mg naloxone. The results indicate that GHB may be useful in the management of opiate withdrawal.