PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Alex Wodak

Publications and source records attributed to Alex Wodak.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Buprenorphine use: the international experience.

The confluence of the heroin injection epidemic and the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection epidemic has increased the call for expanded access to effective treatments for both conditions. Buprenorphine and methadone are now listed on the World Health Organization's Model Essential Drugs List. In France, which has the most extensive experience, buprenorphine has been associated with a dramatic decrease in deaths due to overdose, and buprenorphine diversion appears to be associated with inadequate dosage, social vulnerability, and prescriptions from multiple providers. Other treatment models (in the United States, Australia, Germany, and Italy) and buprenorphine use in specific populations are also reviewed in the present article. In countries experiencing a dual epidemic of heroin use and HIV infection, such as former states of the Soviet Union and other eastern European and Asian countries, access to buprenorphine and methadone may be one potential tool for reducing the spread of HIV infection among injection drug users and for better engaging them in medical care.

Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active↗
PubMed2006

Value for money in drug treatment: economic evaluation of prison methadone.

BACKGROUND: Although methadone maintenance treatment in community settings is known to reduce heroin use, HIV infection and mortality among injecting drug users (IDU), little is known about prison methadone programs. One reason for this is the complexity of undertaking evaluations in the prison setting. This paper estimates the cost-effectiveness of the New South Wales (NSW) prison methadone program. METHODS: Information from the NSW prison methadone program was used to construct a model of the costs of the program. The information was combined with data from a randomised controlled trial of provision of prison methadone in NSW. The total program cost was estimated from the perspective of the treatment provider/funder. The cost per heroin free day, compared with no prison methadone, was estimated. Assumptions regarding resource use were tested through sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The annual cost of providing prison methadone in NSW was estimated to be 2.9 million Australian dollars (or 3,234 Australian dollars per inmate per year). The incremental cost effectiveness ratio is 38 Australian dollars per additional heroin free day. CONCLUSIONS: From a treatment perspective, prison methadone is no more costly than community methadone, and provides benefits in terms of reduced heroin use in prisons, with associated reduction in morbidity and mortality.

Costs and Cost Analysis↗
PubMed2006

Where there's smoke, there's fire: high prevalence of smoking among some sub-populations and recommendations for intervention.

In Australia, the prevalence of smoking is higher among certain sub-populations compared to the general population. These sub-populations include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, as well as people with mental and substance use disorders and prisoners. The aims of this paper are to: describe the high prevalence of smoking among these particular sub-populations and harms associated with smoking; explore possible reasons for such high prevalence of smoking; review the evidence regarding the efficacy of existing smoking cessation interventions; and make recommendations for smoking interventions and further research among these groups. In addition to low socio-economic status, limited education and other factors, there are social, systems and psychobiological features associated with the high prevalence of smoking in these sub-groups. General population-based approaches to reducing smoking prevalence have been pursued for decades with great success and should be continued with further developments that aim specifically to affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and some cultural groups. However, increasing attention, more specific targeting and flexible goals and interventions are also required for these and other distinct sub-populations with high smoking prevalence. Recommendations include: more funding and increased resources to examine the most appropriate education and treatment strategies to promote smoking cessation among people from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and some culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds; larger and better-designed studies evaluating smoking cessation/reduction interventions among distinct sub-groups; and system-wide interventions requiring strong leadership among clients and staff within mental health, drug and alcohol and prison settings.

Alcoholism↗
PubMed2006

Do needle syringe programs reduce HIV infection among injecting drug users: a comprehensive review of the international evidence.

This first international review of the evidence that needle syringe programs reduce HIV infection among injecting drug users found that conservative interpretation of the published data fulfills six of the nine Bradford Hill criteria (strength of association, replication of findings, temporal sequence, biological plausibility, coherence of evidence, and reasoning by analogy) and all six additional criteria (cost-effectiveness, absence of negative consequences, feasibility of implementation, expansion and coverage, unanticipated benefits, and application to special populations). The Bradford Hill criteria are often used to evaluate public health interventions. The principal finding of this review was that there is compelling evidence of effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness, consistent with seven previous reviews conducted by or on behalf of U.S. government agencies. Authorities in countries affected or threatened by HIV infection among injecting drug users should carefully consider this convincing evidence now available for needle syringe programs with a view to establishing or expanding needle syringe programs to scale.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2006

Promoting smoking cessation among prisoners: feasibility of a multi-component intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a pilot study to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of a multi-component smoking cessation intervention among prison inmates. METHODS: A prospective study conducted within a maximum-security prison located near Sydney, New South Wales, and housing around 330 men. Participants received a smoking cessation intervention with six-month follow-up to determine abstinence. The smoking cessation intervention consisted of two brief cognitive behavioural therapy sessions, nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion and self-help resources. Point prevalence and continuous abstinence at follow-up were verified with expired carbon monoxide measures. RESULTS: Thirty male inmates participated in the intervention. At six months, the biochemically validated point prevalence and continuous abstinence rates were 26% and 22% respectively. Reasons for relapse to smoking included: transfers to other prisons without notice, boredom, prolonged periods locked in cells, and stress associated with family or legal concerns. Those inmates who relapsed, or continued to smoke following the intervention, smoked less tobacco than at baseline and 95% stated they were willing to try to quit again using our intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Prison inmates are able to quit or reduce tobacco consumption while in prison but any smoking cessation intervention in this setting needs to address prison-specific issues such as boredom, stress, transfers to other prisons, court appearances, and isolation from family and friends. IMPLICATIONS: The prevalence of smoking within Australian prisons is alarmingly high. Further work into how to encourage prisoners to quit smoking is required.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Survey of drug consumption rooms: service delivery and perceived public health and amenity impact.

Drug consumption rooms (DCRs) have operated in Europe for more than 20 years. At the time of this study three Australian jurisdictions were considering trials of DCRs and little information about these services was available in the English literature. We surveyed 39 DCRs in the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland and Spain in 1999-2000 regarding service delivery and perceived public health and amenity impact and 15 (40%) responded. The DCRs surveyed were professionally staffed, low threshold services which provided a range of health, psych-social, drug treatment and welfare services and referrals. No overdose deaths were reported and the estimated rate of non-fatal overdose ranged from 1 to 36 per 10,000 visits. These DCRs appeared to be achieving their service delivery objectives with few negative consequences.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

The current status of heroin prescription treatment for heroin dependence.

Heroin prescription (HP) to treat severe heroin dependence has been available to few patients in the UK for several decades with limited, but generally favourable, evaluation. In the last decade, large trials have been reported from two countries, are presently underway in three other countries and under consideration in several other countries. The standard pharmacological treatments for heroin dependence, methadone and buprenorphine, attract and retain many more drug users than other pharmacological or nonpharmacological treatments and are strongly supported by evidence of efficacy, effectiveness, safety and cost effectiveness. On present evidence, HP is feasible and safe with limited, but increasing, evidence of efficacy and effectiveness. Although HP is more expensive than methadone, there is some evidence of cost effectiveness. HP is, at present, only considered a therapeutic option for a small minority of treatment refractory, severely heroin-dependent persons in developed countries with comprehensive treatment systems.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2004

Rationale for evaluating North America's first medically supervised safer-injecting facility.

Many cities throughout the world are experiencing ongoing infectious disease and overdose epidemics among illicit injection drug users (IDUs). In particular, HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) have become endemic in many settings and bacterial infections, such as endocarditis, have become extremely common among this population. In an effort to reduce these public health concerns, in September 2003, Vancouver, Canada, opened a pilot medically supervised safer- injecting facility (SIF), where IDUs can inject pre-obtained illicit drugs under the supervision of medical staff. Before and since the facility's opening, there has been a substantial misunderstanding about the rationale for evaluating SIF as a public-health strategy. This article outlines the evidence and rationale in support of the Canadian initiative. This rationale involves limitations in conventionally applied drug-control efforts, and gaps in current public-health policies in controlling the spread of infectious diseases, and the incidence of overdose among IDUs.

British Columbia↗
PubMed2004

Can drug injectors be encouraged to adopt non-injecting routes of administration (NIROA) for drugs?

Drug use by injection can cause problems specific to this form of administration. Problems include an increased risk of drug overdose, drug dependence, the transmission of HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C and vein damage. Shifting drug injectors from injecting to another route of administration may minimize these problems. The aims of the study were to develop and trial an intervention to assist willing injecting drug users (IDUs) to shift to non-injecting routes of administration (NIROA) and to explore the acceptability and practicality of facilitating NIROA. IDUs were assessed and suitable subjects entered a cognitive behavioural trial consisting of five 1-hour sessions of individual therapy with a registered psychologist. Forty-two subjects were assessed (22 males and 20 females). Thirty subjects entered treatment. The mean age was 36 years. Twenty-one subjects were followed-up at 3 months and 10 subjects at 6 months. At 3 and 6 months, the proportion of subjects who had commenced using NIROA was 30% and 50%, respectively. This pilot study showed that it was possible to assist a minority of drug injectors to move from injecting to the non-injecting administration of drugs. However, many of these appeared to be already motivated to cease using drugs and adopting NIROA was one way of assisting this. Poor follow-up rate, lack of control group, questions about cost-effectiveness and the impact of market factors which possibly constrain shifting to NIROA suggest that further research is needed before it could be said that NIROA should be recommended as a viable harm reduction strategy in the Australian context.

Adult↗