5 курс / Психиатрия и наркология для детей и взрослых (доп.) / Программы_снижения_вреда_в_наркологической_практике_клинический
.pdf222.Johnson R.E., Jaffe J.H., Fudala P.J. A controlled trial of buprenorphine treatment for opioid dependence. // JAMA. - 1992. - Vol.
267.- P. 2750-2755
223.Johnson R.E., Chutuape M.A., Strain E.C., Walsh S.L., Stitzer M.L., Bigelow G.E.Acom-parison of levomethadyl acetate, buprenorphine, and methadobe for opioid dependence. // N Engi J Med. - 2000.- Vol. 343. - P. 1290-1297
224.Klingemann H. Потребление алкоголя и его социальные последствия – забытый аспект // Всемирная организация здравоохранения / Европейское региональное бюро, 2001, 19 стр.
225.KlingemannH.,BergmarkA.DrugtreatmentsysteminanInternational perspective // European addiction research journal. – Vol. 5. – N 3, 1999
226.Kosten T.R., Schottenfeld R., Ziedonis D., Falcioni J., Buprenorphine versus methadone maintenance for opioid dependence. // J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. - 1993. - Vol. 181. - P. 358-364
227.Krausz M., Raschke P., Naber D. Substitution von Heroinabhangigen mit Methadon. // Internist. - 1999. - Vol. 40. - P. 645-650
228.Krausz M., Naber D., Raschke P., Flenker U. Heroin als Medikament. // Deutsches Aerzte-blatt. - 2002. - Vol. 99. - P. 26
229.Kerstin P.V. Report on the drug situation in Slovenia in 1997, Ministry of health, Ljubljana, 1998
230.Lintzeris N., Clark N., Muhleisen P., RitterA.,Ali R, Bell J, Gowing L, Hawkin L, Henry Ed-wards S., Mattick R.P., Monheit Â., Newton I., Quigley A., Whicker S., White J. National Clinical Guidelines and Procedures for the use of Buprenorphine in the Treatment of Heroin Dependence. Department of Health and Aged Care, 2001
231.Ling W., Wesson D.R., Charuvastra C., Klett C.J. A controlled trial comparing buprenorphine and methadone maintenance in opioid dependence. // Arch. Gen. Psychiat. - 1996. - Vol. 53. - P. 401-407
232.Lithuanian AIDS Center Epidemiological information on HIV/ AIDS in Lithuanian, 2002
233.Lurie P., Reingold A. (1993) The public health impact of needle exchange programs in the United Slates and abroad (prepared for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Berkeley, CA: University of California, School of Public Health and San Francisco, CA: University of California, Institute for Health Policy Studies. – P. 388
191
234.Lenton S., Hummeniuk R., Heale P., Christie P. (2000) Infringement versus conviction: The social impact of a minor cannabis offence in SA and WA. Drug and Alcohol Review 19. – P. 257-264
235.Lurie P., Drucker E. (1997) An opportunity lost: H1V infections associated with lack of a national needle-exchange programme in the USA. Lancet 349. – P. 604-608
236.Laufer F.N. (2001) Cost-effectiveness of syringe exchange as an HIV prevention strategy. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 28(3). – P. 273-278
237.Musto D.F. The American disease, the origins of narcotic control. New Haven, Connecticut, Yale University Press, 1983
238.Marlatt G.A. Matching clients to treatment: treatment models and stages of change / InAssessment of addictive behaviors. Ed. by D.M.Donovan and A.Marlatt. – New York, Guilford Press, 1988. – P. 474-483
239.Marsch L.A. (1998) The efficacy of methadone maintenance interventions in reducing illicit opiate use, HIV risk behavior and criminality: a meta-analysis. Addiction 93(4). – P. 515-532
240.Mattick R.P., Breen Ñ., Kimber J., Davoli M. (2003) Methadone maintenance therapy versus no opioid replacement therapy for opioid dependence (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1. Oxford: Update Software
241.Mattick R.P., Kimber J., Breen C., Davoli M. (2003) Buprenorphine maintenance versus placebo or methadone maintenance for opioid dependence (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1. Oxford: Update Software
242.Mattick R.P., Kimber J., Kaldor J., MacDonald M., Weatherburn D., Lapsley H. (2001) Six-month process evaluation report on the Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC). Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre
243.MacCoun R.J. (1993) Drugs and the law:A psychological analysis of drug prohibition. Psychological Bulletin 113. – P. 87-512
244.MacCoun R., Reuter P. (1997) Interpreting Dutch cannabis policy: Reasoning by analogy in the legalization debate. Science 278. – P. 47-52
245.Macalino G.E., et. al (1998) Community based programs for safe disposal of used needles and syringes. Journal ofAcquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes and Human Retrovirology 18(Supplement I): S 111 -S 119
192
246.Moskalewicz J., Sieroslawski J. Lifestyles of drug dependent persons living in Poland, Pompidou group, council of Europe, Strasburg, France, 1995
247.Mattick R.P., Ali R., White J.M., O’Brien S., Wolk S., Danz C. Buprenorphine versus metha-done maintenance therapy: a randomized doubleblind trial with 405 opioid-dependent patients. // Ad-diction. - 2003, 441-452
248.Nadelmann E.A., Coffin P., Halingby L., Greenshields A. (1999) Safer Injection Rooms. New York: Open Society Institute
249.Normand J., Vlahov D., Moses L.E., eds. (1995) Preventing HIV Transmission: The Role of Sterile Needles and Bleach. Washington DC: National Academy Press: 224-226, 248-250
250.Normand J., Vlahov D., Moses L.E., eds. (1995) Preventing HIV Transmission: The Role of Sterile Needles and Bleach. Washington DC: National Academy Press. 224-226, 248-250
251.Nikolov Z. et. al Detecting of HIV-1 Antibodies in Used Syringes
//In Social Science and Right, Politics, Commitment and Action, Proceedings of the 13th International AIDS Conference, Durban, South Africa, 9-14 July 2000
252.Nociar A. National report on the drug situation in the Slovak Republic, General secretariat of the Board of Ministers for drug dependencies and drug control, Bratislava, 1998
253.Oliver K.J., Friedman S.R., Maynard H., Magnuson L., Des Jarlais D.C. (1992) Impact of a needle exchange program on potentially infectious syringes in public places. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 5: 380
254.Phibbs C.S., Bateman D.A., Schwartz R.M. The neonatal costs of maternal cocaine use // Journal of the American medical association, 266: 1521-1526, 1991
255.Paone D., Des Jarlais D.C., Gangloff R., Milliken J., Friedman S.R. (1995) Syringe Exchange: HIV prevention, key findings, and future directions. International Journal of the Addictions 30. – P. 1647-1683
256.Ðroject evolution reports, 1999
257.Paulus I., Halliday R. Rehabilitation and the Narcotic Addict: Results of a comparative metha-done withdrawal program. // Canadian Medical Association Journal. - 1967. - Vol. 96. - P. 655-659
193
258.Petitjean S., Stohler R., Deglon J.J., Levoti S., Waldvogel D., Uehlinger C., Ladewig D. Dou-ble-blind randomized trial of buprenorphine and methadone in opiate dependence. // Drug and Alcohol Dependence. - 2001. - Vol. 62. -P. 97-104
259.Pernerger T.V., Giner F.S., del Rio M., Mino A. Randomized trial of heroin maintenance programme for addicts who fail in conventional drug treatments. // Br. Med. J. - 1998. - Vol. 317. - P. 13-18
260.Perneger T.V., Mino A., Giner P., Broers B. Patterns of opiate use in a heroin maintenance pro-gramme. // Psychopharmacology - 2000. - Vol. 152. - P. 7-13
261.Rehn N., Room R., Edwards G. Алкоголь в Европейском регионе ВОЗ - потребление, вред и политика // Всемирная организация здравоохранения / Европейское региональное бюро, 2001, 147 стр.
262.Room R., Greenfield T., Weisner C. People who might have liked you to drink less: changing responses to drinking by U.S. family members and friends, 1979-1990 // Contemporary drug problems, 18:4:573-595, 1991
263.Robins I., Mills J. Effects of in-utero exposure to street drugs // American Journal of public health, 83: 123-129, 1993
264.Rice D.P., Kelman S., Miller L.S. Estimates of the economic costs of alcohol, drug abuse and mental illness, 1985 and 1988 // Public health report, 1063: 281-292, 1991
265.Settertobulte W., Jensen B.B., Hurrelmann K. Употребление алкоголя молодыми людьми в странах Европы // Всемирная организация здравоохранения / Европейское региональное бюро, 2001, 62 стр.
266.Schuckit M.A. Why don’t we diagnose alcoholism in our patients?
//Journal of family practice, 22:225-226, 1987
267.Schmidt C.M., Weisner L.S. Spare people in the public sector human services. Paper presented at the International Conference onAlcohol and Drug Treatment Systems Research. Kettil Braun Society, Toronto, Canada, 18-22 October 1990
268.Svikis D.S. Cost effectiveness of treatment for drug abusing pregnant women // Drug and alcohol dependence, 45:1-2: 105-113, 1997
269.Single E.W. (1989) The impact of marijuana decriminalization: An update. Journal of Public Health Policy. – P. 456-466
194
270.Single E., Christie P., Ali R. (2000) The impact of cannabis decriminalization in Australia and the United States. Journal of Public Health Policy 21. – P. 157-186
271.Svitkilwicz G., Moskalewicz J., Sieroslawski Therapeutic communities as a major responds to drug abuse in Poland / In H.Klingemann and G.Hunt, Drug treatment system in an International perspective: Drugs, Demons and Delinguchts Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, London and New Delhi. – P. 124-132
272.Subata E., Tenkanov J. The work of general practitioners among Lithuanian Roma in Vilnius: incorporating harm redaction into primary medical practice // Journal of drug illness, 1999, 29(4). – P. 805-810
273.Steshenko V.S. Ukraine: Entering the AIDS epidemic, Ukrainian AIDS Center, Ministry of health and UNAIDS. – Kiev, 1999
274.Strain E.C., Stitzer M.L., Liebson I.A., Bigelow G.E. Buprenorphine versus methadone in the treatment ofopioid-dependent cocaine users. // Psychopharmacology. - 1994. - Vol. 116. - P. 401-406
275.Schottenfeld R.S., Pakes J.R., Oliveto A., Ziedonis D., Kosten T.R. Buprenorphine vs metha-done maintenance treatment for concurrent opioid dependence and cocaine abuse. // Archs. Gen. Psychiat. - 1997. - Vol. 54. -P. 713-720
276.Strain E.C., Stitzer M.L., Liebson I.A, Bigelow G.E.. Methadone dose and treatment out-come. // DrugAlcohol. Depend. - 1993. - Vol. 33. -P. 105-117
277.Scherbaum N., Beckmann J.P., Klein S, Rehm J. Medizinethische Aspekte der arztlichen Hero-inverschreibung. //Nervenarzt. - 2001. - Vol.
72.-P. 717-722
278.Single E. The costs of substance abuse in Canada. – Ottawa, Canadian Center on Substance Abuse, 1996
279.Saul M., Levin M.D. Рекомендации для врачей по профилактике и лечению злоупотребления алкоголем и наркотиками / Краткое настольное руководство // Серия протоколов повышения эффективности лечения. - ¹ 24, 1998, 43 стр.
280.Theis C.F., Register C.A. (1993) Decriminalization of marijuana and the demand for alcohol, marijuana and cocaine. The Social Science Journal, 30: 385-399
281.Terminal report on project KAZ/97/018 AD/98/KAZ/D40: Promotion of effective multisectoral response to HIV/AIDS and STI and
195
drug use speared in Karaganda oblast and nation – wide, United Nations, Office for drug control and crime prevention, regional office for Central Asia, Tashkent, UNDCP, 2000
282.Torrens M., San L., Martinez A., Castillo C., Domingo-Salvany A., Alonso J. Use of the Notting-ham Health Profile for measuring health status of patients in methadone maintenance treatment. // Ad-diction. - 1997. - Vol. 92, ¹ 6. - P. 707-16
283.UNODCCPGlobal illicit Drug Trends. – 2002. – New York: United Nations Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention
284.UNAIDS and WHO Epidemiological fact sheet on HIV and sexually transmitted infections. – Slovenia, 2000, update. – Geneva, 2001
285.Vassilev M., Nikolov Z. Infecting of Drugs – Situation, Trends and Risks, Initiative for health foundation, Sofia, 1999
286.WHO (2002) Prevention of psychoactive substance use: a selected review of what works in the area of prevention. Geneva: World Health Organization
287.Weisner C.M., Schmidt L. Alcohol and drug problems among diverse health and social service populations // American journal of public health, 83:824-829, 1993
288.WHO Report on the global HIV/AIDS epidemic June 1998. http:/ /www.who.int/emc-hiv/global_report/rep_html/report5.html
289.Ward J., Mattick R.P., Hall W. (1998) Methadone Maintenance Treatment and other Opioid Replacement Therapies.Amsterdam: Harwood
290.Ward P., Sutton M. (1998) The effectiveness of methadone maintenance treatment: cost effectiveness. In (eds.) Ward J., Mattick R.P., Hall W., Methadone Maintenance Treatment and other Opioid Replacement Therapies. Amsterdam: Harwood
291.Walters J.K., Estilo M.J., Clark G.L. et al (1994) Syringe and needle exchange as HIV/AIDS prevention for injection drug users. JAMA 271:115-120
292.Wolk J., Wodak A., Guinan J., Macaskill P., Simpson J.M. (1990) The effect of a needle and syringe exchange on a methadone maintenance unit. British Journal of Addictions 85. – P. 1445-1450
293.Yankova T. Bulgarian National report, European Commission, Phase Project on drug information systems, final phase, MSDP,Amsterdam, 1998
196
ПРИЛОЖЕНИЯ |
Приложение А |
Клинические особенности контингента наркозависимых, не состоявших на учете специализированных наркологических учреждениях и пациентов исследуемой группы |
|
|
â |
.Îòêë3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.Îòêë2 |
|
|
|
6,467 |
|
2,567 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.Îòêë1 |
5,5 |
|
1,566 |
|
7,066 |
||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Среднийпроцент |
17,5 |
|
64,466 |
|
18,033 |
||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
учете(n=131),% |
19,1 |
|
72,5 |
|
8,4 |
||
Несостоящиена |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(n=131),% |
21,4 |
|
58 |
|
20,6 |
||
Состоящиенаучете |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.Â.Ñ(n=315),% |
12 |
|
62,9 |
|
25,1 |
||
Участникипроекта |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
№ |
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Наименование |
1.1Быстропрогредиент |
ное развитие |
1.2 Развитие среднепрогредиентное |
1.3Медленнопрогреди |
ентное развитие |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
1. Динамика |
синдрома влечения (психической зависимости) |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197
198
Наименование |
№ |
|
Участникипроекта (n=315),%С.В. |
Состоящиена учете (n=131),% |
состоящиеНе на (n=131),%учете |
Среднийпроцент |
Îòêë.1 |
Îòêë.2 |
Îòêë.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1Быстропрогредиент |
4 |
|
50,8 |
38,2 |
71,8 |
53,6 |
2,8 |
15,4 |
|
|
ное развитие |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.Динамика |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2 Развитие |
5 |
3 |
33 |
40,4 |
19,1 |
30,833 |
2,166 |
|
11,73 |
|
синдрома |
|
|||||||||
среднепрогредиентное |
|
|||||||||
опьянения |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.3Медленнопрогреди |
6 |
4 |
16,2 |
21,4 |
9,1 |
15,566 |
0,633 |
5,833 |
|
|
ентное развитие |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1Быстропрогредиент |
7 |
|
4,1 |
32,8 |
42 |
26,3 |
22,2 |
|
|
3. Динамика |
ное развитие |
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
синдрома |
3.2 Развитие средне- |
8 |
5 |
27,9 |
32,1 |
40,5 |
33,5 |
5,6 |
1,4 |
|
изменения |
прогредиентное |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
толерантности |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.3Медленнопрогреди |
9 |
6 |
68 |
35,1 |
17,5 |
40,2 |
27,8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
ентное развитие |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1Быстропрогредиент |
10 |
|
5 |
19,1 |
55 |
26,366 |
21,36 |
7,267 |
|
4.Динамика |
ное развитие |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
синдрома |
4.2 Развитие |
11 |
7 |
21 |
29 |
34,4 |
28,133 |
7,133 |
|
|
физической |
среднепрогредиентное |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
зависимости |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3Медленнопрогреди |
12 |
8 |
74 |
51,9 |
10,6 |
45,5 |
28,5 |
6,4 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
ентное развитие |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
199
Наименование |
№ |
|
Участникипроекта (n=315),%.В.С |
Состоящиена учете (n=131),% |
состоящиеНе на (n=131),%учете |
Среднийпроцент |
Откл. 1 |
Откл. 2 |
Откл. 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.1Быстропрогредиент |
13 |
|
31,1 |
16 |
67,9 |
38,333 |
7,233 |
22,33 |
|
|
ное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. Динамика |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.2 Развитие |
14 |
9 |
43,5 |
38,9 |
28,2 |
36,866 |
|
|
8,666 |
|
абстинентного |
среднепрогредиентное |
|
|
|||||||
синдрома |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.3 Медленно- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
прогредиентное |
15 |
10 |
25,4 |
45,1 |
3,9 |
24,8 |
0,6 |
20,3 |
|
|
развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.1Быстропрогредиент |
16 |
|
7 |
1,5 |
55 |
21,166 |
14,167 |
19,67 |
|
6.Динамика |
ное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2 Развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
анозогностиче |
17 |
11 |
12 |
9,2 |
20,6 |
13,933 |
1,933 |
4,733 |
|
|
ского |
среднепрогредиентное |
|
||||||||
синдрома |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.3Медленнопрогреди |
18 |
12 |
81 |
89,3 |
24,4 |
64,9 |
16,1 |
24,4 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
ентное развитие |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.1Быстропрогредиент |
19 |
|
5 |
14,5 |
49,7 |
23,0667 |
18,067 |
8,567 |
|
7. Динамика |
ное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
синдрома хро- |
7.2 Развитие |
20 |
13 |
27,9 |
32,1 |
42 |
34 |
6,1 |
1,9 |
|
нической ин- |
среднепрогредиентное |
|
||||||||
токсикации |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.3Медленнопрогреди |
21 |
14 |
67,1 |
53,4 |
8,3 |
42,9333 |
24,167 |
10,47 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
ентное развитие |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Наименование |
№ |
|
Участникипроекта (n=315),%.В.С |
Состоящиена учете (n=131),% |
состоящиеНе на (n=131),%учете |
Среднийпроцент |
Откл. 1 |
Откл. 2 |
Откл. 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.1Быстропрогредиент |
22 |
|
11,1 |
34,3 |
52,7 |
32,7 |
21,6 |
|
|
|
8. Динамика |
ное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.2 Развитие |
23 |
15 |
14,9 |
19,1 |
28,2 |
20,7333 |
5,8333 |
1,633 |
|
|
|
изменения |
|
|||||||||
|
среднепрогредиентное |
|
|||||||||
|
личности |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.3Медленнопрогреди |
24 |
16 |
74 |
46,6 |
19,1 |
46,5667 |
27,433 |
0,033 |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
200 |
|
ентное |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.1Быстропрогредиент |
25 |
|
185 |
6,9 |
30,6 |
74,1667 |
|
67,27 |
43,567 |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
9. Динамика |
ное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.2 Развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
психопатопо- |
26 |
17 |
37,7 |
45,8 |
47,3 |
43,6 |
5,9 |
|
|
|
|
среднепрогредиентное |
|
|
||||||||
|
добного |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.3Медленнопрогреди |
27 |
18 |
44,3 |
47,3 |
22,1 |
37,9 |
6,4 |
9,4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
ентное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1Быстропрогредиен |
28 |
|
19 |
22,9 |
42,8 |
28,2333 |
9,2333 |
5,333 |
|
|
10. Динамика |
тное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.2 Развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
психооргани- |
среднепрогредиентное |
29 |
19 |
21,9 |
34,4 |
36,6 |
30,9667 |
9,0667 |
|
|
|
ческого |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.3Медленнопрогред |
30 |
20 |
59,1 |
42,7 |
20,6 |
40,8 |
18,3 |
1,9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
иентное развитие |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|