针对海洛因成瘾者美沙酮维持治疗的干预研究  

Intervention studies of Mathadone maintenance treatment on heroin addicts

作　　者：李林涛[1] 周峥 刘文忠[1] 

机构地区：[1]深圳市罗湖区疾病预防控制中心,广东深圳518020

出　　处：《河南预防医学杂志》2017年第12期881-884,共4页Henan Journal of Preventive Medicine

基　　金：深圳市科技计划项目(项目编号:201202167)

摘　　要：目的建立一个适合的美沙酮治疗干预模型,即加强剂量合并社会心理干预,分析新模型在提高治疗保持率和减少毒品偷吸率上的有效性。方法选择深圳2个美沙酮门诊,建立干预组(n=107)和对照组(n=96)。对照组进行常规美沙酮治疗,干预组在常规治疗基础上进行加强剂量干预和社会心理干预;对干预组和对照组病人进行问卷调查以及尿毒品检测;比较组间治疗维持率及毒品偷吸率情况。结果干预组维持治疗6和12个月以上平均美沙酮剂量为(75.34±31.83)g、(62.38±26.46)g,对照组同一时间平均美沙酮剂量为(67.42±26.69)g、(54.43±22.71)g。维持率结果同一时间干预组为59.8%(64/107)、53.3%(57/107),对照组为43.8%(42/96),38.5%(37/96)。尿毒品检测结果同一时间干预组阳性率为53.1%(34/64)、24.6%(14/57),对照组阳性率为64.3%(27/42)、45.9%(17/37)。两组结果均有统计学差异,唯一的例外是6个月时两组的尿毒品检测无统计学上的显著差异(P>0.05)。结论干预组在维持率上显著高于对照组,在毒品偷吸率上显著低于对照组,此干预模型对提高美沙酮治疗效果有显著意义,提高了美沙酮维持治疗的社会效益和经济效益。Objective To build an intervention pattern suitable for methadone treatment by enhancing dose and conducting psycho-social intervention on users so as to analyze the efficacy of this new pattern for increasing the treatment retention and decreasing the furtive drugs taking rate. Methods Two methadone clinics in Shenzhen were chosen as the intervention group（n=107） and the control group（n=96）. The control group was treated with formal methadone maintenance therapy while the intervention group was treated with both enhanced methadone maintenance treatment and psycho-social intervention on the basis of formal treatment. Questionnaires and urine drug testing were done in the two these groups before comparing the results of therapeutic maintenance rate andfurtive drugs taking. Results： The average methadone dosages of the intervention group were 75.34±31.83 g、62.38±26.46 g after taking methadone maintenance treatment for more than 6 or 12 months while 67.42±26.69 g、54.43±22.71 g for the control group during the same period.The maintenance rate was 59.8 %（64/107）、53.3 %（57/107）for the intervention group and 43.8 %（42/96）,38.5 %（37/96）for the control group. As for the urine drug testing, the positive rate of intervention group was 53.1 %（34/64）、24.6%（14/57）and 64.3 %（27/42）、45.9 %（17/37）for the control group. While the twosets ofresults both had statistical differences,the onlyexception was that the urine drugtestingamongthese twogroups had nosignificant differences（P0.05）. Conclusions The maintenance rate ofthe intervention group is obviouslyhigher than that of the control group, but rate of furtive drugs taking is lower than that of the control group. The intervention pattern has incredible meaning in increasing the efficacy of methadone maintenance treatment and alsoits social benefits as well as economic benefits.

关 键 词：美沙酮 阿片类药物成瘾 剂量反应关系 干预性研究 

分 类 号：R512.91[医药卫生—内科学]