Article

Effect of incentives for medication adherence on health care use and costs in methadone patients with HIV.

Veterans Affairs Health Economics Resource Center, 795 Willow Rd. (152 MPD), VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA.
Drug and alcohol dependence (Impact Factor: 3.28). 02/2009; 100(1-2):115-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.09.017
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The potential benefits of anti-retroviral therapy for HIV is not fully realized because of difficulties in adherence with demanding treatment regimens, especially among injection drug users.
HIV-positive methadone patients who were less than 80% adherent with their primary anti-retroviral therapy were randomized to a trial of incentives for on-time adherence. Adherence was rewarded with an escalating scale of vouchers redeemable for goods. Both intervention and control group visited a medication coach twice a month. The cost of the intervention was determined by micro-costing. Other costs were obtained from administrative data and patient report of out-of-system care.
During the 12-week intervention period, the incremental direct cost of the intervention, including treatment vouchers, was $942. The voucher group incurred $2572 in anti-retroviral drug cost, significantly more than the $1973 incurred by the comparison group (p<.01). Adherence, as measured by on-time openings of an electronically monitored vial, was 78% in the intervention group and 56% in the control group.
The incremental direct cost of voucher incentives was $292 per month. If the observed increase in adherence from voucher incentives can be sustained in the long-term, the literature suggests that disease progression will be slowed. Further research is needed to evaluate if the improvement can be sustained or achieved at lower cost. Mitigation of treatment resistance and reduction in HIV transmission are additional benefits that favor adoption.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Paul G Barnett, Jun 30, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
97 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We review evidence for effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for injecting drug users (IDUs) infected with HIV, with particular attention to low-income and middle-income countries. In these countries, nearly half (47%) of all IDUs infected with HIV are in five nations--China, Vietnam, Russia, Ukraine, and Malaysia. In all five countries, IDU access to ART is disproportionately low, and systemic and structural obstacles restrict treatment access. IDUs are 67% of cumulative HIV cases in these countries, but only 25% of those receiving ART. Integration of ART with opioid substitution and tuberculosis treatment, increased peer engagement in treatment delivery, and reform of harmful policies--including police use of drug-user registries, detention of drug users in centres offering no evidence-based treatment, and imprisonment for possession of drugs for personal use--are needed to improve ART coverage of IDUs.
    The Lancet 07/2010; 376(9738):355-66. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60832-X · 45.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Research conducted during the first 20 years of the AIDS epidemic provided a solid foundation of data supporting methadone treatment as HIV prevention. Drug users in methadone treatment were consistently found to reduce the frequency of drug use, risk behaviors, and infections. These data have been consistent over time and across cultural settings and have been used to promote the expansion of drug treatment as a prevention intervention. More recently, data have emerged suggesting the prevention potential of medication-assisted treatments other than methadone (buprenorphine/naloxone and naltrexone). Still, with a few notable exceptions, global drug treatment coverage for opiate injectors remains remarkably low and only a few treatment interventions for stimulant use have shown efficacy in reducing HIV risk. Importantly, more recent data provide support for the role of drug treatment programs in improving access and adherence to antiretroviral treatment and that injection drug users in substance abuse treatment are more likely to achieve sustained viral suppression. While important challenges remain in maximizing its impact, the scientific literature provides strong evidence of the efficacy of drug treatment as an HIV prevention strategy.
    Current HIV/AIDS Reports 11/2010; 7(4):220-5. DOI:10.1007/s11904-010-0059-z
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Drug use continues to be a major factor fueling the global epidemic of HIV infection. This article reviews the current literature on the ability of drug treatment programs to reduce HIV transmission among injection and noninjection drug users. Most data come from research on the treatment of opiate dependence and provide strong evidence on the effectiveness of medication-assisted treatment for reducing the frequency of drug use, risk behaviors, and HIV infections. This has been a consistent finding since the epidemic began among diverse populations and cultural settings. Use of medications other than methadone (such as buprenorphine/naloxone and naltrexone) has increased in recent years with promising data on their effectiveness as HIV prevention and as new treatment options for communities heavily affected by opiate use and HIV infection. However, few treatment interventions for stimulant abuse and dependence have shown efficacy in reducing HIV risk. The cumulative literature provides strong support of drug treatment programs for improving access and adherence to antiretroviral treatment. Drug users in substance abuse treatment are significantly more likely to achieve sustained viral suppression, making viral transmission less likely. Although there are challenges to implementing drug treatment programs for maximum impact, the scientific literature leaves no doubt about the effectiveness of drug treatment as an HIV prevention strategy.
    JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 12/2010; 55 Suppl 1:S32-6. DOI:10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181f9c10b · 4.39 Impact Factor