Advertisement

Methadone Maintenance and Delinquency Rates of Opioid Drug Users

  • D. Pfersmann
  • W. Prosche
  • W. Werdenich
  • G. Pakesch
  • V. Pfersmann
  • O. Presslich
  • N. Loimer
  • M. Neider
Conference paper

Abstract

The methadone maintenance therapy still stays controversai, pro- and contra aspects are discussed as well. Besides scientific — medical, social — psychological aspects also economical (“economy of drug use”) are pointed out and become more and more of interest. According to the latter costs have been listed for the consumption of drugs, the court, long time arrest and the costs for rehabilitation and prevention of crime. An alternative which makes sense is the long time therapy in an outpatient department with a dosage, which is adapted gently to the patient. In accordance with Haas (1) especially the methadone maintenance therapy in this group of patients is working palliative for an unlimited period of time.

Keywords

Crime Rate Violent Crime Methadone Maintenance Treatment Methadone Maintenance Drug Addict 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Haas H, Fuchs WJ, Olgiati M, Uchtenhagen A (1990) Methadonabgabe in der Apotheke. Deutsche Apotheker Zeitung 130: 210–216Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pfersmann D, Presslich 0, Pakesch G, Hollerer E, Pfersmann V (1990) Gestaltung und Durchführung des Österreichischen Methadonprogrammes und erste Ergebnisse. Nervenarzt 61: 438–443PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maddux JF, Desmond D (1979) Crime and Treatment of Heroin Users. The Int J of the Addiction 14: 891–904Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ball J, Corty H, Bond C, Myers C, Tommasello A (1988) The Reduction of Intravenous Heroin Use, Non-Opiate Abuse and Crime During Methadone Maintenance Treatment: Further Findings. Natl Inst Drug Abuse Res Monogr Ser 81: 224–230Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harwood HJ, Hubbard RL, Collins JJ, Rachal JV (1988) The Costs of Crime and the Benefits of Drug Abuse Treatment: A Cost - Benefit Analysis Using TOPS ( Treatment Outcome Prospective Study) Data. NIDA Res Monogr 86: 209–235Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Presslich O (1990) Patienten sind keine Objekte für ideologische Spielchen. Spectrum AIDS 1: 83–84Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pfersmann D (1990) HIV–positiv und Drogen, ein auswegsloser Teufelskreis. Spektrum AIDS 1: 91–93Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doyle KM, Quinones MA, Louria DB (1982) Treating the Drug Abuser. Public Health Rev 10: 77–98PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kosten TR, Rounsville BJ (1987) Source of income as a predictor in opioid addicts. J of the Addiction 76: 196–199Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dole VP, Nyswander ME, Warner A (1968) Successful treatment of 750 criminal addicts. Am J Med Assoc 206: 2708–2711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kreek MJ (1979) Methadone in treatment: Physiological and pharmacological issues. In: Dupont, Goldstein and ODonell, Handbook on Drug Abuse. Natl. Institute of Drug Abuse, Washington, D.C. 19079Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stimmei B, Goldberg J, Rotkopf E, Cohen M (1977) Ability to remain abstinent after methadone detoxification: A six-year study. Am J Med Assoc 237: 1216–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Pfersmann
    • 1
  • W. Prosche
    • 1
  • W. Werdenich
    • 2
  • G. Pakesch
    • 1
  • V. Pfersmann
    • 1
  • O. Presslich
    • 1
  • N. Loimer
    • 1
  • M. Neider
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of ViennaWienAustria
  2. 2.Sonderanstalt FavoritenMinistery of JusticeWienAustria
  3. 3.Ministery of JusticeWienAustria

Personalised recommendations