MethControl

Learn more about Methadone maintenance. Integrated & Comprehensive Treatment Centers offer Methadone treatment to adults struggling with an opiate addiction.

Details on public policy statements by ASAM

New Hampshire cannot allow these for-profit methadone treatment programs to place their profits over the people they are treating or the public that they serve.

The rule is expected to increase access to methadone, an effective treatment for opioid use disorder, in rural and underserved urban areas.

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

This cross-sectional study examines the proportion of clinics accepting new patients with opioid use disorder and time until first appointment in the US and Canada.

An official website of the State of Maryland.

National Alliance of Methadone Advocates 435 Second Avenue New York, NY Voice/Message/Fax Education Series Number 10 (212) 595-NAMA June 2003 The New Federal Regulations What Do They Mean for Patients?

For nearly three decades, methadone hydrochloride has been the primary means of treating opiate addiction. Today, about 115,000 people receive such treatment, and thousands more have benefited from it in the past. Even though methadone's effectiveness has been well established, its use remains controversial, a fact reflected by the extensive regulation of its manufacturing, labeling, distribution, and use. The Food and Drug Administration regulates the safety and effectiveness of methadone, as it does for all drugs, and the Drug Enforcement Administration regulates it as a controlled substance. However, methadone is also subjected to a unique additional tier of regulation that prescribes how and under what circumstances it may be used to treat opiate addiction. Federal Regulation of Methadone Treatment examines current Department of Health and Human Services standards for narcotic addiction treatment and the regulation of methadone treatment programs pursuant to those standards. The book includes an evaluation of the effect of federal regulations on the provision of methadone treatment services and an exploration of options for modifying the regulations to allow optimal clinical practice. The volume also includes an assessment of alternatives to the existing regulations.

Background In the United States, methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly regulated. Federal agencies announced guidelines in March 2020 allowing for relaxation of take-home methadone dispensing at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to improve treatment access and reduce COVID-19 transmission risk during the public health emergency. We explored patient perspectives at three OTPs serving rural communities on how take-home policy changes were received and implemented and how these changes impacted their addiction treatment and recovery. Methods We completed semi-structured individual qualitative interviews in 2 phases: (1) August–October 2020 and (2) November 2020–January 2021 (total n = 46), anticipating possible policy changes as the pandemic progressed. We interviewed patients with OUD enrolled at 3 rural OTPs in Oregon. Participants received varying take-home methadone allowances following the COVID-19-related policy changes. All interviews were conducted via phone, audio-recorded, and transcribed. We conducted a thematic analysis, iteratively coding transcripts, and deductively and inductively generating codes. Results The 46 participants included 50% women and 89% had Medicaid insurance. Three main themes emerged in the analysis, with no differences between study phases: (1) Adapting to changing OTP policies throughout the pandemic; (2) Recognizing the benefits, and occasional struggles, with increased take-home methadone dosing; and (3) Continuing policies and procedures post-pandemic. Participants described fears and anxieties around ongoing methadone access and safety concerns prior to OTP policy changes, but quickly adapted as protocols soon seemed “natural.” The majority of participants acknowledged significant benefits to increased take-homes independent of reducing COVID-19 infection risk including feeling “more like a normal person,” improved recovery support, reduced time traveling, and having more time with family and for work. Looking to a post-pandemic future, participants thought some COVID-19-related safety protocols should continue that would reduce risk of other infections, make OTP settings less stressful, and result in more individualized care. Conclusions As the pandemic progressed, study participants adapted to rapidly changing OTP policies. Participants noted many unanticipated benefits to increased take-home methadone and other COVID-19 protocols including strengthened self-efficacy and recovery and reduced interpersonal conflict, with limited evidence of diversion. Patient perspectives should inform future policies to better address the ongoing overdose epidemic.

When an opioid treatment program opens its doors in a residential area, its neighbors may have concerns, but these programs are providing life-saving treatment that will ultimately strengthen the community.

Journal of Cognitive Enhancement - Virtual reality (VR) has become an increasingly viable non-pharmacological adjunct to reduce the use of analgesics in hospitals. Within the context of the ongoing...

Simulation in anesthesia is a field that has revolutionized the teaching outlook. The uncommon grave situations are no more unseen. The ability of these devices to test and give a taste of nerves to an anesthetist is actually preparing him for a safe future management when the need be. The role of s …

Background Immersive virtual reality (IVR) is a form of distraction therapy that has shown potential as an analgesia and sedation sparing agent. This study assessed the effect of IVR on the self-administered sedation requirements of patients undergoing joint replacement surgery under regional anesthesia in a single center. Methods and findings This study was a single-center, randomized control trial at St Vincent’s Hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Fifty patients undergoing elective total knee and total hip arthroplasty were randomized to IVR and Propofol patient-controlled sedation (PCS) or propofol PCS alone. The primary outcome measure was intra-operative propofol use. Secondary outcomes included pattern of propofol use over time, use of adjunct analgesia, unmet propofol demand, and patient satisfaction survey scores. Of 50 total patients, 25 received IVR in conjunction with PCS, and 25 received PCS alone. All patients received adjunct analgesia from the treating Anesthesiologist. Median propofol use/hour over the entire procedure in the control group was 40 (11.1, 93.9) mg/hour compared with 45 (0, 94.7) mg/hour in the IVR group (p = 0.90). There were no differences in patterns of propofol use over the course of each procedure. Adjusting for various baseline characteristics did not change the results. Postoperative satisfaction scores were equivalent in both groups. The VR intervention was well tolerated by all patients, with no report of major side effects. Key limitations were relatively small sample size, the non-blinded nature of the study, and use of adjunct analgesia. Conclusions In patients receiving joint replacement surgery under regional anesthesia with PCS, IVR was well tolerated but did not decrease the overall sedation requirement.

Due to the inherent characteristics of immersion, imagination, and interactivity in virtual reality (VR), it might be suitable for non-drug behavior management of children in dental clinics. The purpose of this trial was to measure the role of VR distraction ...

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03614325. Registered on 9 July 2018.