Methadone Maintenance in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial | Psychiatry and Behavioral Health | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
National Consensus Development Panel on Effective Medical Treatment of Opiate Addiction.  Effective medical treatment of opiate addiction.  JAMA.1998;280:1936-1943.Google Scholar
Ball JC, Ross A. The Effectiveness of Methadone Maintenance TreatmentNew York, NY: Springer-Verlag Inc; 1991.
Hubbard RL, Craddock SG, Flynn PM, Anderson J, Etheridge RM. Overview of 1-year follow-up outcomes in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS).  Psychol Addict Behav.1997;11:261-278.Google Scholar
Office of National Drug Control Policy.  Policy Paper—Opioid Agonist TreatmentWashington, DC: Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control Policy; March 1999.
Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS): 1993-1998.  Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Web site. Available at: Accessed August 1, 2001.
Drug Abuse Warning Network Annual Medical Examiner Data 1999.  Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies Web site. Available at: Accessed August 2, 2001.
Metzger DS, Navaline H, Woody GE. Drug abuse treatment as AIDS prevention.  Public Health Rep.1998;113(suppl):97-106.Google Scholar
Metzger DS, Woody GE, McLellan AT.  et al.  Human immunodeficiency virus seroconversion among intravenous drug users in and out of treatment: an 18-month prospective follow-up.  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr.1993;6:1049-1056.Google Scholar
Cooper JR. Methadone treatment and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.  JAMA.1989;262:1664-1669.Google Scholar
Cooper JR. Including narcotic addiction treatment in an office-based practice.  JAMA.1995;273:1619-1620.Google Scholar
 Guidelines State Methadone Treatment.  Vol 1. Rockville, Md: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 1993.
Rettig RA, Yarmolinsky A. Federal Regulation of Methadone TreatmentWashington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press; 1995.
O'Connor PG, Fiellin DA. Pharmacologic treatment of heroin-dependent patients.  Ann Intern Med.2000;133:40-54.Google Scholar
Senay EC, Barthwell AG, Marks R, Boros P, Gillman D, White G. Medical maintenance: a pilot study.  J Addict Dis.1993;12:59-76.Google Scholar
Schwartz RP, Brooner RK, Montoya ID, Currens M, Hayes M. A 12-year follow-up of a methadone medical maintenance program.  Am J Addict.1999;8:293-299.Google Scholar
Novick DM, Joseph H, Salsitz EA.  et al.  Outcomes of treatment of socially rehabilitated methadone maintenance patients in physicians' offices (medical maintenance): follow-up at three and a half to nine and a fourth years.  J Gen Intern Med.1994;9:127-130.Google Scholar
Novick DM, Pascarelli EF, Joseph H.  et al.  Methadone maintenance patients in general medical practice: a preliminary report.  JAMA.1988;259:3299-3302.Google Scholar
Salsitz EA, Joseph H, Frank B.  et al.  Methadone medical maintenance (MMM): treating chronic opioid dependence in private medical practice—a summary report (1983-1998).  Mt Sinai J Med.2000;67:388-397.Google Scholar
 Statistical Power Analysis: A Computer Program [computer program]. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
Fiellin D, Storti S, Schottenfeld R.  et al.  Methadone medical maintenance: a training and resource guide for office-based physicians. Available at: Accessed September 10, 2001.
Baumgartner WA, Hill VA. Hair analysis for drugs of abuse. In: Sunshine I, ed. Recent Developments in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker Inc; 1992:577-597.
Ware Jr JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), I: conceptual framework and item selection.  Med Care.1992;30:473-481.Google Scholar
McLellan AT, Kushner H, Metzger D.  et al.  The Fifth Edition of the Addiction Severity Index.  J Subst Abuse Treat.1992;9:199-213.Google Scholar
Zanis DA, McLellan AT, Belding MA, Moyer G. A comparison of three methods of measuring the type and quantity of services provided during substance abuse treatment.  Drug Alcohol Depend.1997;49:25-32.Google Scholar
Radloff LS. The CES-D Scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population.  Appl Psychol Measure.1977;1:385-401.Google Scholar
Parrino MW. The tornado of change.  J Maintenance Addict.1998;1:71-80.Google Scholar
Greenwood J. Persuading general practitioners to prescribe: good husbandry or a recipe for chaos?  Br J Addiction.1992;87:567-575.Google Scholar
Moatti JP, Souville M, Escaffre N, Obadia Y. French general practitioners' attitudes toward maintenance drug abuse treatment with buprenorphine.  Addiction.1998;93:1567-1575.Google Scholar
Reese TV. Treating opioid dependence.  N Engl J Med.2001;344:530.Google Scholar
Berger VW, Exner DV. Detecting selection bias in randomized clinical trials.  Control Clin Trials.1999;20:319-327.Google Scholar
Schulz KF. Subverting randomization in controlled clinical trials.  JAMA.1995;274:1456-1458.Google Scholar
Brooner RK, King VL, Kidorf M, Schmidt CWJ. Psychiatric and substance use comorbidity among treatment-seeking opioid abusers.  Arch Gen Psychiatry.1997;54:71-80.Google Scholar
Hartel DM, Schoenbaum EE, Selwyn PA.  et al.  Heroin use during methadone maintenance treatment: the importance of methadone dose and cocaine use.  Am J Public Health.1995;85:83-88.Google Scholar
Sees KL, Delucchi KL, Masson C.  et al.  Methadone maintenance vs 180-day psychosocially enriched detoxification for treatment of opioid dependence: a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA.2000;283:1303-1310.Google Scholar
Warner EA, Kosten TR, O'Connor PG. Pharmacotherapy for opioid and cocaine abuse.  Med Clin North Am.1997;81:909-925.Google Scholar
Carroll KM, Rounsaville BJ, Gordon LT.  et al.  Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy for ambulatory cocaine abusers.  Arch Gen Psychiatry.1994;51:177-187.Google Scholar
O'Connor PG, Oliveto AH, Shi JM.  et al.  A randomized trial of buprenorphine maintenance for heroin dependence in a primary care clinic for substance users versus a methadone clinic.  Am J Med.1998;105:100-105.Google Scholar
Fiellin DA, Chawarski M, O'Connor PG, Pantalon MV, Schottenfeld RC. Adherence to buprenorphine in office-based treatment of opioid dependence.  Drug Alcohol Depend.2001;63(suppl):47.Google Scholar
Lewis DC. Access to narcotic addiction treatment and medical care: prospects for the expansion of methadone maintenance treatment.  J Addict Dis.1999;18:5-20.Google Scholar
Weinrich M, Stuart M. Provision of methadone treatment in primary care medical practices: review of the Scottish experience and implications for US policy.  JAMA.2000;283:1343-1348.Google Scholar
Bowden CL, Maddux JF, Esquivel M. Methadone dispensing by community pharmacies.  Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse.1976;3:243-254.Google Scholar
 Opioid drugs in maintenance and detoxification treatment of opiate addiction.  66 Federal Register.4076-4102 (2001).Google Scholar
Original Contribution
October 10, 2001

Methadone Maintenance in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Departments of Internal Medicine (Drs Fiellin and O'Connor) and Psychiatry (Drs Chawarski, Pantalon, and Schottenfeld), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; and the Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (Ms Pakes).

JAMA. 2001;286(14):1724-1731. doi:10.1001/jama.286.14.1724

Context Methadone maintenance is an effective treatment for opioid dependence, yet its use is restricted to federally licensed narcotic treatment programs (NTPs). Office-based care of stabilized methadone maintenance patients is a promising alternative but no data are available from controlled trials regarding this type of program.

Objective To determine the feasibility and efficacy of office-based methadone maintenance by primary care physicians vs in an NTP for stable opioid-dependent patients.

Design Six-month, randomized controlled open clinical trial conducted February 1999-March 2000.

Setting Offices of 6 primary care internists and an NTP.

Patients Forty-seven opioid-dependent patients who had been receiving methadone maintenance therapy in an NTP without evidence of illicit drug use for 1 year and without significant untreated psychiatric comorbidity were randomized; 1 patient refused to participate after treatment assignment to NTP.

Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to receive office-based methadone maintenance from primary care physicians, who received specialized training in the care of opioid-dependent patients (n = 22), or usual care at an NTP (n = 24).

Main Outcome Measures Illicit drug use, clinical instability (persistent drug use), patient and clinician satisfaction, functional status, and use of health, legal, and social services, compared between the 2 groups.

Results Eleven of 22 (50%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 29%-71%) patients in office-based care compared with 9 of 24 (38%; 95% CI, 21%-57%) of NTP patients had a self-report or urine toxicology test result indicating illicit opiate use (P = .39). Hair toxicology testing detected an additional 2 patients in each treatment group with evidence of illicit drug use, but this did not change the overall findings. Ongoing illicit drug use meeting criteria for clinical instability occurred in 4 of 22 (18%; 95% CI, 7%-39%) patients in office-based care compared with 5 of 24 (21%; 95% CI, 9%-41%) NTP patients (P = .82). Sixteen of the 22 (73%; 95% CI, 54%-92%) office-based patients compared with 3 of the 24 (13%; 95% CI, 0%-26%) NTP patients thought the quality of care was excellent (P = .001). There were no differences over time within or between groups in functional status or use of health, legal, or social services.

Conclusions Our results support the feasibility and efficacy of transferring stable opioid-dependent patients receiving methadone maintenance to primary care physicians' offices for continuing treatment and suggest guidelines for identifying patients and clinical monitoring.