Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorWarholak, Terrien
dc.contributor.authorCradick, Mary
dc.contributor.authorDeGrote, Shannon
dc.contributor.authorMarsall, Spencer
dc.contributor.authorWarholak, Terri
dc.date.accessioned2016-06-22T18:20:57Z
dc.date.available2016-06-22T18:20:57Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/614151
dc.descriptionClass of 2014 Abstracten
dc.description.abstractSpecific Aims: To show that Suboxone is more effective than no MAT (Medically Assisted Treatment) in opioid dependence. Additionally, that Suboxone is as effective as methadone in MAT. Methods: This study was a retrospective chart review of probationer’s case files at The Pima County Adult Probation Office. Treatment groups included: Suboxone (n=16), methadone (n=15), and no MAT control group (n=15). The total sample size was 46 probationers. The primary dependent variables were the number of negative events and time to a negative event (i.e. missed/positive urinalysis, violation of terms of probation). The secondary outcome variables were the number of positive events and time to a positive event (i.e. finding employment, documented social/family improvement). Data analysis utilized chi-square for categorical data while t-tests were used for continuous data. Main Results: 46 probationers of Pima County with violations related to possession or use of an opioid substance were analyzed. No significant differences were found between Suboxone and placebo (no MAT) for any of the four outcomes (number of negative events p=0.82; time to first negative event p=0.41; number of positive events p=0.93; time to first positive event p=0.45). No significant differences were found between Suboxone and methadone as well (number of negative events p=0.34; time to first negative event p=0.52; number of positive events p=0.93; time to first positive event p=0.56). Conclusion: This study found no statistically significant differences between no MAT and Suboxone nor Suboxone and methadone. Differences in baseline characteristics between groups were found that could characterize the Suboxone group as being more severely ill.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author.en
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectSuboxoneen
dc.subjectMAT (Medically Assisted Treatment)en
dc.subjectOpioid Dependenceen
dc.subject.meshOpioid-Related Disorders
dc.subject.meshBuprenorphine, Naloxone Drug Combination
dc.titleSuboxone for Medically Assisted Treatment for Opioid Dependenceen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Reporten
dc.contributor.departmentCollege of Pharmacy, The University of Arizonaen
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item is part of the Pharmacy Student Research Projects collection, made available by the College of Pharmacy and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact Jennifer Martin, Librarian and Clinical Instructor, Pharmacy Practice and Science, jenmartin@email.arizona.edu.en
html.description.abstractSpecific Aims: To show that Suboxone is more effective than no MAT (Medically Assisted Treatment) in opioid dependence. Additionally, that Suboxone is as effective as methadone in MAT. Methods: This study was a retrospective chart review of probationer’s case files at The Pima County Adult Probation Office. Treatment groups included: Suboxone (n=16), methadone (n=15), and no MAT control group (n=15). The total sample size was 46 probationers. The primary dependent variables were the number of negative events and time to a negative event (i.e. missed/positive urinalysis, violation of terms of probation). The secondary outcome variables were the number of positive events and time to a positive event (i.e. finding employment, documented social/family improvement). Data analysis utilized chi-square for categorical data while t-tests were used for continuous data. Main Results: 46 probationers of Pima County with violations related to possession or use of an opioid substance were analyzed. No significant differences were found between Suboxone and placebo (no MAT) for any of the four outcomes (number of negative events p=0.82; time to first negative event p=0.41; number of positive events p=0.93; time to first positive event p=0.45). No significant differences were found between Suboxone and methadone as well (number of negative events p=0.34; time to first negative event p=0.52; number of positive events p=0.93; time to first positive event p=0.56). Conclusion: This study found no statistically significant differences between no MAT and Suboxone nor Suboxone and methadone. Differences in baseline characteristics between groups were found that could characterize the Suboxone group as being more severely ill.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record