Search

The article presents a study on drug screening of hair using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. It is implied that hair has become a relevant matrix for drug analysis which is complementary to blood and urine as a matrix. Methods of the study include a long-term detection window which makes hair analysis fitted for the detection of illegal and medicinal drugs exposure for twelve months. Within the given period, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) method was validated through the use of internal standards, ion mode electrospray LC-MS-MS, and drugs or metabolites. Results show that LC-MS-MS method proved to be simple and robust in identifying drugs in hair.

Background: Open-door policy is a recommended framework to reduce coercion in psychiatric wards. However, existing observational data might not fully capture potential increases in harm and use of coercion associated with open-door policies. In this first randomised controlled trial, we compared coercive practices in open-door policy and treatment-as-usual wards in an urban hospital setting. We hypothesised that the open-door policy would be non-inferior to treatment-as-usual on the proportion of patients exposed to coercive measures., Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial comparing two open-door policy wards and three treatment-as-usual acute psychiatric wards at Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital in Oslo, Norway. An exemption from the consent requirements enabled inclusion and random allocation of all patients admitted to these wards using an open list (2:3 ratio) administrated by a team of ward nurses. The primary outcome was the proportion of patient stays with one or more coercive measures, including involuntary medication, isolation or seclusion, and physical and mechanical restraints. The non-inferiority margin was set to 15%. Primary and safety analyses were assessed using the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN registry and is complete, ISRCTN16876467., Findings: Between Feb 10, 2021, and Feb 1, 2022, we randomly assigned 556 patients to either open-door policy wards (n=245; mean age 41·6 [SD 14·5] years; 119 [49%] male; 126 [51%] female; and 180 [73%] admitted to the ward involuntarily) or treatment-as-usual wards (n=311; mean age 41·6 [4·3] years; 172 [55%] male and 138 [45%] female; 233 [75%] admitted involuntarily). Data on race and ethnicity were not collected. The open-door policy was non-inferior to treatment-as-usual on all outcomes: the proportion of patient stays with exposure to coercion was 65 (26·5%) in open-door policy wards and 104 (33·4%) in treatment-as-usual wards (risk difference 6·9%; 95% CI -0·7 to 14·5), with a similar trend for specific measures of coercion. Reported incidents of violence against staff were 0·15 per patient stay in open-door policy wards and 0·18 in treatment-as-usual wards. There were no suicides during the randomised controlled trial period., Interpretation: The open-door policy could be safely implemented without increased use of coercive measures. Our findings underscore the need for more reliable and relevant randomised trials to investigate how a complex intervention, such as open-door policy, can be efficiently implemented across health-care systems and contexts., Funding: South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority and The Research Council of Norway., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: First study to assess any compensatory increase in use of non-opioid illicit substances and alcohol in opioid dependent patients randomized to treatment with extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or buprenorphine-naloxone (BP-NLX) and in longer term treatment with extended-release naltrexone., Method: A multicenter, outpatient, open-label randomized clinical trial where patients received intramuscular extended-release naltrexone hydrochloride, 380 mg/month, or daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone 8-24/2-6 mg for 12 weeks, and an option to continue with extended-release naltrexone for an additional 36 week follow-up. The study was conducted at five urban addiction clinics and detoxification units in Norway between November 2012, and July 2016., Results: Among the 143 patients, 106 men and 37 women, there were no significant differences between those randomized to XR-NTX or BP-NLX in the risk of first relapse to alcohol (HR 1.31; 0.68-2.53), amphetamines (HR 0.88; 0.43-1.80), benzodiazepines (HR 1.24; 0.74-2.09) or cannabis (HR 1.55; 0.83-2.89). Also in the 36-week (12-48 weeks) follow-up period we found no significant differences between patients continuing with XR-NTX compared to those switching to XR-NTX after the randomized period in risk of first relapse to any non-opioid substance. In both study periods, the mean time in the study were longer among those relapsing to non-opioid addictive substances than those who did not. There was no significant association between first relapse to illicit opioids and first relapse to non-opioid addictive substances., Conclusion: There was no increase in the risk of relapse to non-opioid addictive substances neither in short term nor longer-term treatment with extended-release naltrexone. Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01717963., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: The reduction of coercion in psychiatry is a high priority for both the WHO and many member countries. Open-door policy (ODP) is a service model for psychiatric ward treatment that prioritises collaborative and motivational measures to better achieve acute psychiatric safety - and treatment objectives. Keeping the ward main door open is one such measure. Evidence on the impact of ODP on coercion and violent events is mixed, and only one randomised controlled trial (RCT) has previously compared ODP to standard practice. The main objectives of the Lovisenberg Open Acute Door Study (LOADS) are to implement and evaluate a Nordic version of ODP for acute psychiatric inpatient services. The evaluation is designed as a pragmatic RCT with treatment-as-usual (TAU) control followed by a 4-year observational period., Methods and Analysis: In this 12-month pragmatic randomised trial, all patients referred to acute ward care will be randomly allocated to either TAU or ODP wards. The primary outcome is the proportion of patient stays with one or more coercive measures. Secondary outcomes include adverse events involving patients and/or staff, substance use and users' experiences of the treatment environment and of coercion. The main hypothesis is that ODP services will not be inferior to state-of-the art psychiatric treatment. ODP and TAU wards are determined via ward-level randomisation. Following conclusion of the RCT, a longitudinal observational phase begins designed to monitor any long-term effects of ODP., Ethics and Dissemination: The trial has been approved by the Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REC) in Norway (REC South East #29238), who granted LOADS exemption from consent requirements for all eligible, admitted patients. Data are considered highly sensitive but can be made available on request. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences and meetings., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN16876467., Protocol Version: 1.4, 21 December 2021., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Objectives: Compare the risk of relapse to heroin and other illicit opioids among opioid-dependent patients receiving treatment with extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or buprenorphine-naloxone (BP-NLX)., Methods: Re-analyzed data from a 12-week multicenter, open-label, randomized treatment study with a subsequent 36-week open-label follow-up study. All patients, N = 143, had completed detoxification and received at least one dose of study medication., Results: Of 143 patients (72% men), mean age 36 years, 71 received XR-NTX and 72 BP-NLX. The risk of first relapse and the risk of any relapse to heroin and other illicit opioids were both significantly lower in the XR-NTX group compared with the BP-NLX group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.76; P = .002, and HR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.29; P < .001, respectively) and (HR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.09-0.27; P < .001 and HR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.03-0.09; P < .001, respectively). There was a stable low risk of relapse among participants receiving XR-NTX in the follow-up., Discussion and Conclusions: Compared to BP-NLX, patients on XR-NTX had a substantially reduced risk of relapse to illicit opioids and showed a stable low risk of relapse over time in longer-term treatment., Scientific Significance: Our data support XR-NTX as a first-line treatment option for patients with opioid addiction both in short and longer-term treatment. This is the first European study showing that XR-NTX significantly reduces the risk of first and any relapse to heroin use in opioid-dependent patients compared to BP-NLX. Our data contradict previous data from the X:BOT study, showing no significant difference in relapse risk between the groups in a 6-month randomised controlled trial. (© 2021 Authors. The American Journal on Addictions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry). (Am J Addict 2021;30:451-458)., (© 2021 American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry.)

Disruption of non-drug reward processing in addiction could stem from long-term drug use, addiction-related psychosocial stress, or a combination of these. It remains unclear whether long-term opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) disrupts reward processing. Here, we measured subjective and objective reward responsiveness in 26 previously heroin-addicted mothers in >7 years stable OMT with minimal psychosocial stress and illicit drug use. The comparison group was 30 healthy age-matched mothers (COMP). Objective reward responsiveness was assessed in a two-alternative forced-choice task with skewed rewards. Results were also compared to performance from an additional 968 healthy volunteers (meta-analytic approach). We further compared subprocesses of reward-based decisions across groups using computational modelling with a Bayesian drift diffusion model of decision making. Self-reported responsiveness to non-drug rewards was high for both groups (means: OMT = 6.59, COMP = 6.67, p = 0.84, BF 10  = 0.29), yielding moderate evidence against subjective anhedonia in this OMT group. Importantly, the mothers in OMT also displayed robust reward responsiveness in the behavioral task (t 19  = 2.72, p = 0.013, BF 10  = 3.98; d = 0.61). Monetary reward changed their task behavior to the same extent as the local comparison group (reward bias OMT = 0.12, COMP = 0.12, p = 0.96, BF 10  = 0.18) and in line with data from 968 healthy controls previously tested. Computational modelling revealed that long-term OMT did not even change decision subprocesses underpinning reward behavior. We conclude that reduced sensitivity to rewards and anhedonia are not necessary consequences of prolonged opioid use.

Importance: To date, extended-release naltrexone hydrochloride has not previously been compared directly with opioid medication treatment (OMT), currently the most commonly prescribed treatment for opioid dependence., Objective: To determine whether treatment with extended-release naltrexone will be as effective as daily buprenorphine hydrochloride with naloxone hydrochloride in maintaining abstinence from heroin and other illicit substances in newly detoxified individuals., Design, Setting and Participants: A 12-week, multicenter, outpatient, open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted at 5 urban addiction clinics in Norway between November 1, 2012, and December 23, 2015; the last follow-up was performed on October 23, 2015. A total of 232 adult opioid-dependent (per DSM-IV criteria) individuals were recruited from outpatient addiction clinics and detoxification units and assessed for eligibility. Intention-to-treat analyses of efficacy end points were performed with all randomized participants., Interventions: Randomization to either daily oral flexible dose buprenorphine-naloxone, 4 to 24 mg/d, or extended-release naltrexone hydrochloride, 380 mg, administered intramuscularly every fourth week for 12 weeks., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points (protocol) were the randomized clinical trial completion rate, the proportion of opioid-negative urine drug tests, and number of days of use of heroin and other illicit opioids. Secondary end points included number of days of use of other illicit substances. Safety was assessed by adverse event reporting., Results: Of 159 participants, mean (SD) age was 36 (8.6) years and 44 (27.7%) were women. Eighty individuals were randomized to extended-release naltrexone and 79 to buprenorphine-naloxone; 105 (66.0%) completed the trial. Retention in the extended-release naltrexone group was noninferior to the buprenorphine-naloxone group (difference, -0.1; with 95% CI, -0.2 to 0.1; P = .04), with mean (SD) time of 69.3 (25.9) and 63.7 (29.9) days, correspondingly (P = .33, log-rank test). Treatment with extended-release naltrexone showed noninferiority to buprenorphine-naloxone on group proportion of total number of opioid-negative urine drug tests (mean [SD], 0.9 [0.3] and 0.8 [0.4], respectively, difference, 0.1 with 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.2; P < .001) and use of heroin (mean difference, -3.2 with 95% CI, -4.9 to -1.5; P < .001) and other illicit opioids (mean difference, -2.7 with 95% CI, -4.6 to -0.9; P < .001). Superiority analysis showed significantly lower use of heroin and other illicit opioids in the extended-release naltrexone group. No significant differences were found between the treatment groups regarding most other illicit substance use., Conclusions and Relevance: Extended-release naltrexone was as effective as buprenorphine-naloxone in maintaining short-term abstinence from heroin and other illicit substances and should be considered as a treatment option for opioid-dependent individuals., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01717963.

Background: Current guidelines for opioid dependence recommend daily maintenance of physical dependence with methadone or buprenorphine, and discourage abstinence due to the high risk of relapse and overdose. Extended-release formulations of the opioid antagonist naltrexone (XR-NTX) block heroin and other opioid agonists competitively for around 4 weeks per administration. XR-NTX thus enables opioid users to experience abstinence from opioid agonists with greatly reduced risk of overdose compared to medication-free abstinence. While XR-NTX has shown promise compared to placebo and daily naltrexone tablets, there is limited information on long-term safety and its performance compared to daily maintenance treatment., Methods/design: In this five-hospital RCT with long-term follow-up, we aim to recruit n = 180 patients in treatment for opioid dependence and allocate them in an open, randomized manner (1:1) to receive either 4-week XR-NTX or daily buprenorphine-naloxone (BP-NLX) for the duration of 12 weeks. Allocation is open-label due to the risk of overdose during attempts to self-unmask allocation using heroin. Urine drug tests are scheduled every week with follow-up visits & assessment every 4 weeks. Primary outcomes are abstinence from illicit opioids in urine drug tests and self-report, as well as retention in treatment. Secondary outcomes include other substance use, injecting behavior, drug craving, mental health, quality of life, treatment satisfaction, abstinence motivation, opioid agonist effect rating, insomnia, and pain. Observation is continued for another 36 weeks in order to assess longer-term safety, adherence and effectiveness. The study is an investigator-initiated trial, funded by public grants and approved by an Independent Ethical Committee (the Regional Ethical Committee for Research South-East B # 2011/1320) and the Norwegian Medicines Agency., Discussion: Despite minor implementation problems, the protocol appears sufficiently robust to generate results of high interest to patients, clinicians and policy makers., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT01717963 , first registered: Oct 28, 2012. Protocol version # 3C, June 12th 2012.

Background/aims: Treatment for addiction to illicit opioids has, thus far, been limited to 2 main approaches: maintaining physical dependence by administering opioids medically and medication-free abstinence with psychosocial support. Assisted abstinence by taking daily tablets with the opioid antagonist naltrexone is rarely practiced, but it is unclear whether this is due to the limited efficacy of this method or because of user opposition to antagonist medication. Therefore, we wanted to investigate opioid users' interest in antagonist treatment with naltrexone, administered as extended release injection, which supports abstinence by blocking illicit opioids for 4-5 weeks per administration., Method: A one-page questionnaire was distributed among opiate users at a broad range of outreach facilities and a total of 731 answered surveys were analysed., Results: More than half of the opioid users in our study were 'very' or 'quite' interested in receiving a 4-weekly opioid-blocking medication for a year (n = 421), while less than a quarter (n = 164) were 'not interested' at all., Conclusion: We discovered a high user interest for naltrexone treatment, suggesting that the interest for such treatment was not a barrier to the implementation of extended release naltrexone treatment., (© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

The Norwegian prison inmates are burdened by problems before they enter prison. Few studies have managed to assess this burden and relate it to what occurs for the inmates once they leave the prison. The Norwegian Offender Mental Health and Addiction (NorMA) study is a large-scale longitudinal cohort study that combines national survey and registry data in order to understand mental health, substance use, and criminal activity before, during, and after custody among prisoners in Norway. The main goal of the study is to describe the criminal and health-related trajectories based on both survey and registry linkage information. Data were collected from 1,499 inmates in Norwegian prison facilities during 2013-2014. Of these, 741 inmates provided a valid personal identification number and constitute a cohort that will be examined retrospectively and prospectively, along with data from nationwide Norwegian registries. This study describes the design, procedures, and implementation of the ongoing NorMA study and provides an outline of the initial data.

Sustained release technologies for administering the opioid antagonist naltrexone (SRX) have the potential to assist opioid-addicted patients in their efforts to maintain abstinence from heroin and other opioid agonists. Recently, reliable SRX formulations in intramuscular or implantable polymers that release naltrexone for 1-7 months have become available for clinical use and research. This qualitative review of the literature provides an overview of the technologies currently available for SRX and their effectiveness in reducing opioid use and other relevant outcomes. The majority of studies indicate that SRX is effective in reducing heroin use, and the most frequently studied SRX formulations have acceptable adverse events profiles. Registry data indicate a protective effect of SRX on mortality and morbidity. In some studies, SRX also seems to affect other outcomes, such as concomitant substance use, vocational training attendance, needle use, and risk behaviour for blood-borne diseases such as hepatitis or human immunodeficiency virus. There is a general need for more controlled studies, in particular to compare SRX with agonist maintenance treatment, to study combinations of SRX with behavioural interventions, and to study at-risk groups such as prison inmates or opioid-addicted pregnant patients. The literature suggests that sustained release naltrexone is a feasible, safe and effective option for assisting abstinence efforts in opioid addiction., (© 2012 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology © 2012 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Naltrexone is an opioid receptor antagonist that blocks the reinforcing effects of opioids and reduces alcohol consumption and craving. It has no abuse potential, mild and transient side effects, and thus appears an ideal pharmacotherapy for opioid dependence. Its effectiveness in alcohol dependence is less evident, but compliance with naltrexone combined with psychosocial support has been repeatedly shown to improve drinking outcomes. Limited compliance with oral naltrexone treatment is a known drawback. Several naltrexone implant and injectable depot formulations are being investigated and provide naltrexone release for at least 1 month. Studies among opioid-dependent patients indicate significant reductions in heroin use, but sample sizes are usually small. In alcohol dependence, two large multicenter trials report alcohol and craving reductions for naltrexone and placebo groups, indicating a significant but moderate effect. The pharmacokinetic profile of the injectable formulation indicates reliable naltrexone release over 1 month at therapeutic levels. Implant formulations releasing naltrexone up to 7 months are reported. Findings on safety and tolerability confirm the generally mild adverse effects described for naltrexone tablets. However, further research on therapeutic levels (i.e., opioid blocking) is warranted. The majority of naltrexone implants lacks approval for regular clinical use and larger longitudinal studies are needed. The available naltrexone depot formulations have the potential to significantly improve medication compliance in opioid and alcohol dependence. In certain circumstances, they may constitute a promising new treatment option., (© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Background: Naltrexone's usefulness in the treatment of opioid dependence stems from its ability to block the action of heroin and other opioids. However, many patients are ambivalent towards naltrexone and often drop out of treatment with orally administered naltrexone. Sustained release naltrexone seems promising in reducing opioid use, but the extent to which patients remain in treatment beyond the first dosage of naltrexone is not clear., Methods: Patients (n=61) receving treatment with sustained release naltrexone implants were offered a second naltrexone implant after 6 months. Patients who remained in treatment were compared to those who did not, on drug use, mental health, and social problems before and during naltrexone implant treatment. Information was obtained on other treatments sought by patients who discontinued naltrexone. Blood samples were used to verify naltrexone release, and hair samples to confirm opioid intake., Results: Of the patients who received the first naltrexone implant, 51% (n=31) remained in naltrexone implant treatment. Among those who discontinued treatment, 21% expressed a wish to reimplant but failed to attend for reimplantation and 28% declined reimplantation: 6 non-retained patients initiated maintenance or residential treatment. Remaining in naltrexone treatment was related to pre-study length of employment, illicit drug use, and concern for family problems. Higher levels of substance misuse and criminal activity during naltrexone treatment were negatively related to subsequent retention., Conclusion: Rates of retention among opioid-dependent patients receiving naltrexone implant treatment are encouraging and support this as a feasible long-term treatment option., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Naltrexone is a competitive opioid antagonist that effectively blocks the action of heroin and other opioid agonists. Sustained-release naltrexone formulations are now available that provide long-acting opioid blockade. This study investigates the use of heroin and other opioids among opioid-dependent patients receiving treatment with long-acting naltrexone implants, their subjective experience of drug 'high' after opioid use, and factors associated with opioid use., Methods: Participants (n = 60) were opioid-dependent patients receiving treatment with naltrexone implants. Outcome data on substance use, drug 'high', depression and criminal activity were collected over a 6-month period. Blood samples were taken to monitor naltrexone plasma levels, and hair samples to verify self-reported opioid use., Findings: More than half [n = 34 or 56%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 44-68%)] the patients challenged the blockade with illicit opioids during the 6-month treatment period; 44% (n = 26; 95% CI 32-56%) were abstinent from opioids. Mean opioid use was reduced from 18 [standard deviation (SD)13] days during the month preceding treatment to 6 days (SD 11) after 6 months. Of the respondents questioned on opioid 'high' (n = 31), nine patients (30%; 95% CI 16-47%) reported partial drug 'high' following illicit opioid use, and three (12%; 95% CI 3-26%) reported full 'high'. Opioid use was associated with use of non-opioid drugs and criminal behaviour., Conclusions: Challenging naltrexone blockade with heroin on at least one occasion is common among sustained-release naltrexone patients, but only a minority of patients use opioids regularly. Challenges represent a warning sign for poor outcomes and often occur in the context of polydrug use and social adjustment problems.

Background: After prison release, offenders with heroin use problems are at high risk of relapse and overdose death. There is a particular need for treatments that can be initiated in prison and continued after release into the community. Methadone maintenance treatment has been shown to reduce heroin use, criminality and mortality. Naltrexone implant treatment has not previously been evaluated in prison settings., Methods: This study compares the effects of naltrexone implants and methadone treatment on heroin and other illicit drug use, and criminality among heroin-dependent inmates after release from prison., Results: Forty-six volunteers were randomly allocated to naltrexone implants or methadone before release. Intention-to-treat analyses showed reductions in both groups in frequency of use of heroin and benzodiazepines, as well as criminality, 6 months after prison release., Conclusions: Naltrexone implants may be a valuable treatment option in prison settings., (2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Naltrexone has considerable potential in helping to prevent relapse in heroin dependency. A longer-lasting formulation for naltrexone treatment is desirable to further reduce non-adherence and relapse during treatment of opiate dependence., Aims: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a 6-month naltrexone implant in reducing opioid use after in-patient treatment., Method: A group of 56 abstinence-oriented patients who completed in-patient treatment for opioid dependence were randomly and openly assigned to receive either a 6-month naltrexone implant or their usual aftercare. Drug use and other outcomes were assessed at 6-month follow-up., Results: Patients receiving naltrexone had on average 45 days less heroin use and 60 days less opioid use than controls in the 180-day period (both P<0.05). Blood tests showed naltrexone levels above 1 ng/ml for the duration of 6 months. Two patients died, neither of whom had received an implant., Conclusions: Naltrexone implant treatment safely and significantly reduces opioid use in a motivated population of patients.

Background: Naltrexone is an opioid antagonist which effectively blocks heroin effects. Since opioid dependence treatment with naltrexone tablets suffers from high dropout rates, several depot injections and implants are under investigation. Sustained-release formulations are claimed to be effective, but a systematic review of the literature is lacking., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of sustained-release naltrexone for opioid dependence and its adverse effects in different study populations., Search Strategy: The following databases were searched from their inception to November 2007: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Science, trial database at http://clinicaltrials.gov, available NIDA monographs, CPDD and AAAP conference proceedings. The reference lists of identified studies, published reviews and relevant web sides were searched manually. Study authors and drug companies were contacted to obtain any unpublished material or missing data., Selection Criteria: To evaluate effectiveness only RCTs were included. To evaluate safety, any clinical trial reporting adverse effects was assessed. Treatment condition was extended to include alcohol dependent subjects and healthy volunteers., Data Collection and Analysis: Reviewers independently evaluated the reports, rated methodological quality and extracted data. Analyses were performed separately for opioid dependent, alcohol dependent and healthy participants., Main Results: Foe effectiveness, one report met inclusion criteria. Two dosages of naltrexone depot injections (192 and 384 mg) were compared to placebo. High-dose significantly increased days in treatment compared to placebo (WMD 21.00, 95% CI 10.68 to 31.32, p<0.0001). High-dose compared to low-dose significantly increased days in treatment (WMD 12.00, 95% CI 1.69 to 22.31, p=0.02). Number of patients retained in treatment did not show significant differences between groups. For adverse effects, seventeen reports met inclusion criteria analyses, six were RCTs. Side effects were significantly more frequent in naltrexone depot groups compared to placebo. In alcohol dependent samples only, adverse effects appeared to be significantly more frequent in the low-dose naltrexone depot groups compared to placebo (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.36, p=0.02). In the opioid dependent sample, group differences were not statistically significant. Reports on systematic assessment of side effects and adverse events were scarce., Authors' Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of sustained-release naltrexone for treatment of opioid dependence. For naltrexone injections, administration site-related adverse effects appear to be frequent, but of moderate intensity and time limited. For a harm-benefit evaluation of naltrexone implants, more data on side effects and adverse events are needed.

Background: Little is known about the information available to smokers who started smoking in the early days of research on smoking and health. The main topics of investigation in our study were: How much information on the health hazards of smoking was available to non-professionals in Norway between 1940 and 1960? What characterised this information, and did it change in quantity or quality over this period?, Materials and Methods: Representative samples of health magazines and books from 1940 to 1960 were analysed for information on the health effects of smoking. Frequency and size of articles were registered and a basic statistical analysis of the information performed., Results: There was a slight increase in the amount of literature published on the subject. Religious publications were the most direct in their communication and the most consistent in recommending non-smoking. Compared to other publications, they eagerly speculated on underlying physiological mechanisms. The non-religious publications seem to better reflect the general discussions and disagreements in the field; according to several, only "exaggerated" smoking constituted a threat to health; "moderate consumption" was considered harmless., Interpretation: While religious literature engaged in overt and sometimes undue speculation, the non-religious publications in the sample seemed to reflect a belief in the harmlessness of a "normal" consumption of cigarettes. The debates and disagreements in the scientific community are also more apparent in the non-religious publications.