Richard P. Mattick

Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety.

The development and validation of the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) and the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) two companion measures for assessing social phobia fears is described. The SPS assesses fear of being scrutinised during routine activities (eating, drinking, writing, etc.), while the SIAS assesses fear of more general social interaction, the scales corresponding to the DSM-III-R descriptions of Social Phobia--Circumscribed and Generalised types, respectively. Both scales were shown to possess high levels of internal consistency and test-retest reliability. They discriminated between social phobia, agoraphobia and simple phobia samples, and between social phobia and normal samples. The scales correlated well with established measures of social anxiety, but were found to have low or non-significant (partial) correlations with established measures of depression, state and trait anxiety, locus of control, and social desirability. The scales were found to change with treatment and to remain stable in the face of no-treatment. It appears that these scales are valid, useful, and easily scored measures for clinical and research applications, and that they represent an improvement over existing measures of social phobia.

Global epidemiology of injecting drug use and HIV among people who inject drugs: a systematic review

BACKGROUND Injecting drug use is an increasingly important cause of HIV transmission in most countries worldwide. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of injecting drug use among individuals aged 15-64 years, and of HIV among people who inject drugs. METHODS We did a systematic search of peer-reviewed (Medline, EmBase, and PubMed/BioMed Central), internet, and grey literature databases; and data requests were made to UN agencies and international experts. 11 022 documents were reviewed, graded, and catalogued by the Reference Group to the UN on HIV and Injecting Drug Use. FINDINGS Injecting drug use was identified in 148 countries; data for the extent of injecting drug use was absent for many countries in Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America. The presence of HIV infection among injectors had been reported in 120 of these countries. Prevalence estimates of injecting drug use could be ascertained for 61 countries, containing 77% of the worlds total population aged 15-64 years. Extrapolated estimates suggest that 15.9 million (range 11.0-21.2 million) people might inject drugs worldwide; the largest numbers of injectors were found in China, the USA, and Russia, where mid-estimates of HIV prevalence among injectors were 12%, 16%, and 37%, respectively. HIV prevalence among injecting drug users was 20-40% in five countries and over 40% in nine. We estimate that, worldwide, about 3.0 million (range 0.8-6.6 million) people who inject drugs might be HIV positive. INTERPRETATION The number of countries in which the injection of drugs has been reported has increased over the last decade. The high prevalence of HIV among many populations of injecting drug users represents a substantial global health challenge. However, existing data are far from adequate, in both quality and quantity, particularly in view of the increasing importance of injecting drug use as a mode of HIV transmission in many regions.

HIV prevention, treatment, and care services for people who inject drugs: a systematic review of global, regional, and national coverage

BACKGROUND Previous reviews have examined the existence of HIV prevention, treatment, and care services for injecting drug users (IDUs) worldwide, but they did not quantify the scale of coverage. We undertook a systematic review to estimate national, regional, and global coverage of HIV services in IDUs. METHODS We did a systematic search of peer-reviewed (Medline, BioMed Central), internet, and grey-literature databases for data published in 2004 or later. A multistage process of data requests and verification was undertaken, involving UN agencies and national experts. National data were obtained for the extent of provision of the following core interventions for IDUs: needle and syringe programmes (NSPs), opioid substitution therapy (OST) and other drug treatment, HIV testing and counselling, antiretroviral therapy (ART), and condom programmes. We calculated national, regional, and global coverage of NSPs, OST, and ART on the basis of available estimates of IDU population sizes. FINDINGS By 2009, NSPs had been implemented in 82 countries and OST in 70 countries; both interventions were available in 66 countries. Regional and national coverage varied substantially. Australasia (202 needle-syringes per IDU per year) had by far the greatest rate of needle-syringe distribution; Latin America and the Caribbean (0.3 needle-syringes per IDU per year), Middle East and north Africa (0.5 needle-syringes per IDU per year), and sub-Saharan Africa (0.1 needle-syringes per IDU per year) had the lowest rates. OST coverage varied from less than or equal to one recipient per 100 IDUs in central Asia, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa, to very high levels in western Europe (61 recipients per 100 IDUs). The number of IDUs receiving ART varied from less than one per 100 HIV-positive IDUs (Chile, Kenya, Pakistan, Russia, and Uzbekistan) to more than 100 per 100 HIV-positive IDUs in six European countries. Worldwide, an estimated two needle-syringes (range 1-4) were distributed per IDU per month, there were eight recipients (6-12) of OST per 100 IDUs, and four IDUs (range 2-18) received ART per 100 HIV-positive IDUs. INTERPRETATION Worldwide coverage of HIV prevention, treatment, and care services in IDU populations is very low. There is an urgent need to improve coverage of these services in this at-risk population. FUNDING UN Office on Drugs and Crime; Australian National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales; and Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Role of maintenance treatment in opioid dependence

Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) involves the daily administration of the oral opioid agonist methadone as a treatment for opioid dependence-a persistent disorder with a substantial risk of premature death. MMT improves health and reduces illicit heroin use, infectious-disease transmission, and overdose death. However, its effectiveness is compromised if low maintenance doses of methadone (<60 mg) are used and patients are pressured to become prematurely abstinent from methadone. Pregnancy and psychiatric comorbidity are not contraindications for MMT. As an alternative to MMT, other oral opioid agents (eg, naltrexone, buprenorphine) may increase patient choice and avoid some of the more unpleasant aspects of MMT. The public-health challenge for the future is to develop and continue to deliver safe and effective forms of opioid maintenance treatment to as many opioid-dependent individuals as can benefit from them.

Methadone maintenance treatment in opiate dependence: a review.

This paper examines the changes and advances in research and clinical practice and examines the role of treatment structure and programme characteristics in the delivery of methadone maintenance. Methadone prescribing has become much more available over the past decade, both in countries with a history of its use, such as the United Kingdom and Australia, and in countries around the world which previously had not endorsed substitute prescribing.1 There is a need to examine closely the framework in which this treatment is delivered to ensure that the modes of delivery most effective from both cost and benefit perspectives are utilised. This review focuses entirely on methadone maintenance because this is the most extensively evaluated and most used treatment, with about a quarter of a million drug misusers receiving methadone treatment globally. A small number of experimental diamorphine and buprenorphine substitute programmes are being evaluated in several countries. Most studies have come from the United States and focus on the long term use of methadone in a specific setting; in contrast, methadone treatment in the United Kingdom has received virtually no formal evaluation to date bar one study.2 There is concern that a considerable amount of the methadone prescribing could be having little impact on illicit drug use or risk taking behaviour,3 a recent study of drug users in police custody echoes this.4 The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs has recommended a shift to a more structured approach for delivery of oral methadone maintenance. The organisation and regulation of methadone maintenance treatment varies widely, with explicit guidelines for programme operation in the United States and Australia and a virtual absence of structure and regulation in Britain. It is likely that policy analysts and treatment providers in countries with high levels of regulation and structured programmes …

Exposure and cognitive restructuring for social phobia: A controlled study *

Forty-three social phobics were assigned to exposure (EXP), cognitive restructuring without exposure (CR-alone), or to an intervention combining these techniques (COMB), in a wait-list controlled (WLC) trial. Treatment integrity assessment showed compliance with instructions consistent with the treatments. Within-group analyses showed that the COMB and CR-alone groups improved significantly on all variables, whereas the EXP group showed changes on phobia but not attitudinal measures. Between-group analyses indicated COMB to be superior to EXP on two phobia measures. CR-alone was inferior to EXP and COMB on behavioral approach after treatment, but showed continued improvement relative to the exposure groups on this and other variables by follow-up. The relative ability of treatment-induced changes in fear of negative evaluation (FNE), locus of control, and irrational beliefs to predict long-term improvement was assessed. Changes in these variables were predictive of improvement. The change in FNE accounted for the majority of the explained variance.

A randomised controlled trial of methadone maintenance treatment versus wait list control in an Australian prison system

OBJECTIVES The aim was to determine whether methadone maintenance treatment reduced heroin use, syringe sharing and HIV or hepatitis C incidence among prisoners. METHODS All eligible prisoners seeking drug treatment were randomised to methadone or a waitlist control group from 1997 to 1998 and followed up after 4 months. Heroin use was measured by hair analysis and self report; drugs used and injected and syringe sharing were measured by self report. Hepatitis C and HIV incidence was measured by serology. RESULTS Of 593 eligible prisoners, 382 (64%) were randomised to MMT (n=191) or control (n=191). 129 treated and 124 control subjects were followed up at 5 months. Heroin use was significantly lower among treated than control subjects at follow up. Treated subjects reported lower levels of drug injection and syringe sharing at follow up. There was no difference in HIV or hepatitis C incidence. CONCLUSIONS Consideration should be given to the introduction of prison methadone programs particular where community based programs exist.

Are detoxification programmes effective

Detoxification programmes provide supervised withdrawal from a drug of dependence so that the severity of withdrawal symptoms and serious medical complications are reduced to a minimum. Our main focus in this review is on the forms of supervised detoxification that are most common in the UK and other English speaking countries-namely, detoxification programmes for those dependent on alcohol and illicit opioids. We also briefly review detoxification procedures in other countries. Clinical procedures for detoxification or withdrawal from benzodiazepines, amphetamines, and other major drug groups are provided elsewhere.1

Deficits in behavioural inhibition in substance abuse and addiction: A meta-analysis

AIMS Deficits in behavioural inhibitory control are attracting increasing attention as a factor behind the development and maintenance of substance dependence. However, evidence for such a deficit is varied in the literature. Here, we synthesised published results to determine whether inhibitory ability is reliably impaired in substance users compared to controls. METHODS The meta-analysis used fixed-effects models to integrate results from 97 studies that compared groups with heavy substance use or addiction-like behaviours with healthy control participants on two experimental paradigms commonly used to assess response inhibition: the Go/NoGo task, and the Stop-Signal Task (SST). The primary measures of interest were commission errors to NoGo stimuli and stop-signal reaction time in the SST. Additionally, we examined omission errors to Go stimuli, and reaction time in both tasks. Because inhibition is more difficult when inhibition is required infrequently, we considered papers with rare and equiprobable NoGo stimuli separately. RESULTS Inhibitory deficits were apparent for heavy use/dependence on cocaine, MDMA, methamphetamine, tobacco, and alcohol (and, to a lesser extent, non-dependent heavy drinkers), and in pathological gamblers. On the other hand, no evidence for an inhibitory deficit was observed for opioids or cannabis, and contradictory evidence was observed for internet addiction. CONCLUSIONS The results are generally consistent with the view that substance use disorders and addiction-like behavioural disorders are associated with impairments in inhibitory control. Implications for treatment of substance use are discussed, along with suggestions for future research arising from the limitations of the extant literature.

Exposure to opioid maintenance treatment reduces long-term mortality

AIMS To (i) examine the predictors of mortality in a randomized study of methadone versus buprenorphine maintenance treatment; (ii) compare the survival experience of the randomized subject groups; and (iii) describe the causes of death. DESIGN Ten-year longitudinal follow-up of mortality among participants in a randomized trial of methadone versus buprenorphine maintenance treatment. SETTING Recruitment through three clinics for a randomized trial of buprenorphine versus methadone maintenance. PARTICIPANTS A total of 405 heroin-dependent (DSM-IV) participants aged 18 years and above who consented to participate in original study. MEASUREMENTS Baseline data from original randomized study; dates and causes of death through data linkage with Births, Deaths and Marriages registries; and longitudinal treatment exposure via State health departments. Predictors of mortality examined through survival analysis. FINDINGS There was an overall mortality rate of 8.84 deaths per 1000 person-years of follow-up and causes of death were comparable with the literature. Increased exposure to episodes of opioid treatment longer than 7 days reduced the risk of mortality; there was no differential mortality among methadone versus buprenorphine participants. More dependent, heavier users of heroin at baseline had a lower risk of death, and also higher exposure to opioid treatment. Older participants randomized to buprenorphine treatment had significantly improved survival. Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander participants had a higher risk of death. CONCLUSIONS Increased exposure to opioid maintenance treatment reduces the risk of death in opioid-dependent people. There was no differential reduction between buprenorphine and methadone. Previous studies suggesting differential effects may have been affected by biases in patient selection.