|
Summary
-
Many
of the commonly experienced problems in methadone prescribing can
be reduced by open, honest relationships and written contracts.
-
Responsible
use of urinalysis seeks to strike a balance in which the urine test
is a positive corroboration for the written records of information
given to the worker.
-
Urinalysis
has an important role in providing documentary evidence to support
methadone prescribing at the start of treatment.
-
The
limitations mean that only limited weight should be given to the result
of the initial urinalysis.
-
Prescribing
benzodiazepines to opiate users should only be undertaken by specialist
prescribers, within clear guidelines.
-
Problem
alcohol use may contra-indicate methadone prescribing.
Introduction
This section
covers some of the areas of methadone prescribing that all workers and
services need to consider carefully. Preparation of policies and strategies
to deal with these practical issues will greatly assist in the smooth
and effective running of any prescribing service.
Confidentiality
There are a
number of reasons why drug users may be anxious about people finding out
about their opiate use which may include some or all of the list below.
Opiate users are often:
- Held in very low
regard
- Worried by guilt
feelings about their drug use
- Anxious because
they have not told key professionals about their drug use before e.g.
health visitor, GP or probation officer
- Aware that some
professionals still believe that a heroin-using parent is a bad parent
- Concerned that
friends and relatives will react to them differently if they find out
about their opiate use.
These concerns and
the level of anxiety are added to by the fact that:
For these reasons
it is important to be clear with drug users about who will become aware
of their methadone treatment. If information is to be passed on then the
method and content of the disclosure needs to be explained clearly.
Fears about the lack
of confidentiality within the NHS and other drug services is one of the
areas cited by clients who are not in contact with services as a reason
for not making contact. Being explicit with all clients about what confidentiality
means to you and your agency will help reduce paranoia and anxiety among
both the group who are in contact with your service and those who are
not.
Clients
going away
The practicalities
of picking up a methadone prescription from the prescribing doctor and/or
collecting the methadone itself can be restricting. Clients wanting to
go away and requesting changes to their prescribing regime to accommodate
this can be a major cause of friction. For this reason it is good practice
to include a clause in the prescribing agreement that details how much
notice is required for changes to be made in the regime and, if possible,
what the parameters will be around accommodating employment or holidays.
If the client is leaving
the country they may need an export licence: see Section
5: Methadone and the law.
As with all other
aspects of prescribing it is important to weigh any possible risks – particularly
those of overdose and illicit sale of methadone – against the therapeutic
advantages of work or holiday.
Other possibilities
for retaining some degree of control while allowing the travel or work
plans to proceed are:
- Finding a pharmacy
near the destination and arranging to post the methadone prescription
there
- Arranging a temporary
prescription with a doctor or prescribing service near the destination
- Checking with the
local pharmacies and arranging evening methadone pick-ups.
However, in the end,
it is important for the prescribing doctor not to feel pressured into
making prescribing arrangements that may not be safe, and for the client
to realise that sufficient warning must be given and that some negotiation
has to take place before prescribing arrangements can be altered.
Contracting
The prescribing
contract is not simply a set of rules the client must obey. Rather it
is an agreement in which the client agrees to work with the prescribing
service and in return the service agrees to prescribe methadone and provide
an agreed level of support and help.
It should be borne
in mind that there are few other areas of health care which require people
to enter into contracts. A badly written contract that is simply a list
of rules the client must obey can leave the client feeling devalued. Contracts
should include the complaint procedures available to the client should
they be dissatisfied with the service they receive.
It is important to
read the contract to each client and discuss each issue in detail, not
least because they may have literacy problems which they are reluctant
to disclose.
In drawing up a contract
it is important that if cessation of prescribing is mentioned as a response
to behaviour, it is in terms that allow a measure of discretion or it
is used only in circumstances in which there would be no doubt about the
decision to stop prescribing.
This is particularly
important with regard to clauses about illicit drug use as you may not
want to respond to increases in drug taking and HIV risk behaviour by
withdrawing treatment.

Components
of a prescribing contract
The
contract is usually between the prescribing doctor, client and drug worker.
The agreement should
include what each party agrees to do, which in most cases would include
the doctor agreeing to:
- Provide a regular
methadone prescription
- Liaise with the
drug worker regarding the client’s progress
- Discuss alterations
in the agreed prescribing regime with the drug worker and client
The drug worker agreeing
to:
- See the client
at agreed intervals
- Be available within
an agreed time should the client request extra time
- Liaise with the
prescribing doctor
- Review the programme
with the client and doctor at agreed intervals
The client agreeing
to:
- Attend appointments
with the drug worker and doctor
- Accept full responsibility
for the perscription and medication once issued
- Give adequate warning
of plans to go away/request alterations to the prescribing regime
- Provide urine samples
for drug screen when requested
- Reduce and minimise
use of illicit drugs and to try and stop heroin use
- Use methadone for
personal use and not sell or share any of the prescription
- Not to approach
any other doctor for psychiatric medication during the treatment programme
And all parties agreeing
that:
- They will not use
abusive or threatening behaviour
- Any breach of the
agreement will result in a review of the programme
- A serious breach
may result in termination of the prescription regime.
Urinalysis
A urine drug
screen that is opiate positive is an essential safeguard that should always
be obtained at the outset of treatment. However, it is easy to over-emphasise
the importance of urinalysis in methadone treatment. It cannot give a
full picture of someone’s drug use (unless it is done daily – which is
prohibitively expensive). It can only ever give a snapshot indication
of drug use. It carries with it a number of dangers to the relationship
between the prescriber/drug worker and client.91
The
testing procedure
The urine
specimen can be collected in a standard sterile pathology lab bottle and
labelled accurately in the presence of the client.
The pathology lab
form can be filled in by anyone but, unless there are special arrangements,
must be signed by a doctor. The form would normally state: ‘receiving
methadone treatment, full drug screen please’ although some services specify
the drugs they want screened for e.g. ‘…please screen for methadone and
other opiates, cocaine and amphetamine’.
The urine sample should
be:
- Kept in the dark
- Refrigerated
- Tested as soon
as possible.

The
tests used
Most laboratories
will use a relatively insensitive test first of all and, where a trace
of a drug is found, follow it up with a more accurate test to confirm.
If
this procedure is used it is unlikely that there would be a false positive
result for methadone (or any other drug) although there is a possibility
of a false negative result. This is particularly likely if the client has
added water to the sample or drunk large quantities of fluid to reduce the
concentration of illicit drugs in the urine.
The tests used are:
- Thin layer chromatography
- Paper chromatography
- Gas chromatography
- EMIT scan.
The
benefits of urinalysis
Urinalysis
is used as part of methadone treatment to:
- Confirm heroin
use prior to treatment commencing
and, once treatment
has commenced, to:
- Confirm methadone
is being taken
- Discourage illicit/additional
drug use
- Assess illicit/additional
drug use
- Inform treatment
decisions such as allowing take-home doses, dose increases and reductions
and removal from programmes
- Provide information
to support research into prescribing programmes.
The value of urinalysis
in these functions is largely unresearched and, in some respects, a flawed
procedure. Its use in each of these functions is outlined below.

Urinalysis
prior to treatment
A urine
test prior to commencement of treatment is a standard feature of almost
all methadone prescribing. It is a useful safeguard against accusations
of irresponsible prescribing as it is good evidence of opiate use prior
to commencement of treatment.
However it is only
evidence of at least one dose of a drug having been taken in the last
24–72 hours: see the drug clearance times chart below. It gives no indication
as to the quantity of drugs being used nor evidence as to how long the
client has been using those drugs. And as it is widely known among drug
users that a urine screen for drugs will be part of the assessment procedure
they will generally ensure that the result is ‘opiate positive’.
The taking of a urine
sample as part of the assessment procedure can easily convey to the client
a message of distrust. It is therefore important to stress its role as
a safeguard for the prescribing programme and as corroboration of the
history given at assessment, rather than as a way of catching people out.
Confirming
that methadone is being taken
This is
an important part of the reason for testing urine for clients who can
take their methadone home, and again forms useful documentary evidence
against accusations of irresponsible prescribing.
Because methadone
is a long-acting drug which is metabolised over a period of days, false
negative urine screens are rare in clients who are taking their medication
regularly – and should therefore be taken seriously and repeated as a
further safeguard.
Confirmation that
methadone is being taken requires a sample to be positive for both methadone
and methadone metabolites.

Discouraging
illicit/additional drug use
The extent
to which the drug screening of urine samples deters illicit drug use is
debatable, especially if the clients can predict when they are likely
to be tested.
Although there are
individual cases in which urinalysis can be helpful the extensive literature
search carried out by Ward et al91
failed to find any studies that could demonstrate a reliable link between
urinalysis (as part of a methadone maintenance programme) and reduced
illicit drug use.
Assessing
illicit/additional drug use
However
if someone can stop using for a few days prior to urine tests on a regular
basis then they probably have a degree of control over their drug use.
The issues around occasional drug use can therefore be addressed and systems
that rely on urinalysis alone may miss this altogether.
If the client cannot
stop using other drugs, even when they know a urine test is imminent,
it is likely that they have not got much control over their drug use and
this is an issue which needs addressing.
Informing
treatment decisions
Urine screen
results are commonly used to inform clinical decisions such as:
- Allowing take-home
doses
- Increasing or decreasing
the number of days’ take-home doses allowed
- Dose increases
- Dose reductions
- Removal from prescribing
programmes.
However it is important
that if a drug screen result is to be used in clinical decision making
it is not the only indicator that is used.

Providing
information to support research into prescribing programmes
Urine testing
can give an indication for research purposes as to the illicit drug use
of people receiving methadone, although its limitations (see above) mean
that it is difficult to produce methodologically-sound conclusions on
the basis of drug screening the urine of clients.
Because of this the
interpretation of results may well depend on whether the reader is a drug
user, drug worker, doctor, service funder, politician or researcher and
whether or not they are hostile to or supportive of prescribing services.
Drawbacks
of urinalysis
The research
that has been carried out into the efficacy of urine testing has been
unable to demonstrate that it is a reliably effective way of monitoring
drug use. A therapeutic, open and trusting relationship in which the client
is not afraid to disclose the true picture of their drug use is likely
to produce a more accurate and productive indication of drug-using patterns.90
However used in conjunction with a therapeutic relationship, psychological
and other treatments, urinalysis may be useful in encouraging clients
to meet appropriate goals related to controlling and reducing their illicit
drug use.
The experience of
many workers is that the more heavily methadone prescribing is policed,
and the more the feeling of ‘them and us’ grows, the more ingenious the
dodges become to avoid getting caught.
The ‘them and us’
syndrome can be countered through careful explanation of the test and
the rationale for it. Most clients accept that some people are motivated
to get methadone simply to sell it and that it is legitimate for services
to use objective measures from time to time to check that they are providing
an appropriate service. Clients also accept that many seek treatment to
maximise drug consumption and that workers need objective tools to help
determine what the real patterns of drug use are.
There are a number
of ways clients can avoid getting a urinalysis result that is unfavourable,
such as:
- Bringing in someone
else’s urine in a small container kept under the arm (to keep it warm)
- Getting someone
else in the toilets to provide a sample
- Adding water to
the sample to dilute any unwanted metabolites.
The only reliable
way of avoiding these is to supervise the production of the sample. This
is a demeaning procedure for both client and staff member. However if
the benefits are clear it may be worth while.
Typical
drug clearance times
There is room
on the chart below for you to fill in the values your pathology lab gives
you according to the tests they perform, although they are unlikely to
be much different from the values given.
Always remember that
drug clearance times vary according to the:
- Dose of the drug
taken
- Sensitivity of
the tests used
- Ph value of the
urine: more acidic urine tends to produce shorter clearance times
- Combination of
drugs used: for instance stimulants increase the metabolic rate and
therefore reduce drug clearance times.
Hair
analysis
The hair can
act as a ‘chemical tape recorder’, providing a record of drugs taken.
It can be analysed centimetre by centimetre giving a clear picture of
drug use over a period of months.
Hair analysis is commercially
available in the UK. For most services it will complement rather than
compete with urinalysis as it is rather expensive for routine use.
It is particularly
valuable in:
- Monitoring people
who are stable on methadone maintenance and who are seen only occasionally
- Assessing patients
whose drug-using history is doubtful
- Monitoring levels
of drug use over the long term.
Drug
clearance times chart
| Drug |
Time
after which a urine screen will show negative |
| Methadone |
2-4
days |
| Heroin |
1-2
days |
| Diazepam
and other benzodiazepines |
2-4
days |
| Cocaine |
1-2
days |
| Amphetamine |
1-2
days |
| MDMA
(ecstasy) |
2-4
days |
| LSD |
1-3
days |
| Cannabis |
4-28
days |
Pros
and cons of urine and hair analysis
| Urinalysis |
Hair
analysis |
| Open
to deception and evasion |
Deception
proof (but clients can present with all their hair cut off!) |
| Supervising
sample production is demeaning |
Civilised
procedure |
| Indicates
drug use over past few days |
Indicates
drug use over past few months, month by month |
| Insensitive
to low levels of use |
Sensitive
to low levels of use |
| Insensitive
to occasional use |
Sensitive
to occasional use |
| Qualitative |
Quantitative
– allows comparison of drug use month by month |
| Tester
potentially at risk of infection |
No
risk of infection |
| Results
can be accessed quickly |
Delayed
results |
| Inexpensive |
Expensive |
‘Manipulation’
The history
of drug users being seen as manipulative by health professionals is rooted
in past conflicts between drug users and the medical establishment over
drugs. For a long time doctors have had control over the commodity that
can be the single most important thing in the life of a drug user. Society’s
strong disapproval of the non-medical use of certain drugs, coupled with
the historical desire of doctors to retain control of supply, has meant
that control has been very tight.
Everyone who wants
something will try different stratagems in order to get it – and the more
they want it the more inventive they are inclined to be in the devices
they employ. Furthermore if a strategy (however socially unacceptable)
has worked once it is likely to be repeated.
It is not so long
since the only way any doctor could be persuaded to write an opiate prescription
for an ‘addict’ was if s/he was made to believe that the person genuinely
wanted to give up drug use forever, and that the only thing that would
help was a detoxification to help with the initial withdrawals. Clearly
in these circumstances anyone who wanted a prescription, regardless of
their true intentions, knew that their only hope was to spin the old ‘I
want to get off’ yarn. The failure of these ‘detoxes’ has been a formative
experience for many doctors.
With the advent of
more flexible prescribing this problem has been reduced. Most drug services
have found that any increase in flexibility and understanding is met with
a corresponding reduction in ‘manipulative’ strategies to obtain the desired
treatment.
The limit to flexibility
is that the prescribing must not increase drug-related harm. Drug users
may still employ techniques to persuade the providers of treatment to
do things that will not be helpful to them.
However opportunities
for manipulation with its resulting friction and dissatisfaction will
be minimised if we:
- Are clear and realistic
about our treatment aims
- Communicate effectively
with our colleagues
- Have clear written
agreements with our clients
- Encourage our clients
to have an overt agenda
- Try and offer appropriate
and effective treatment.
Terminating
treatment
Methadone is
not a treatment that works for everyone. In addition to people who are
too chaotic in their drug use to meet the requirements made by prescribing
programmes there will always be the occasional person succeeding in getting
a methadone prescription who:
- Is not suited for
treatment
- Convinces the assessor
to prescribe more methadone than is necessary
- Gives a fictitious
history to receive an inappropriate treatment duration
- Is unable to achieve
any of the treatment goals.
It is often easier
to identify these clients after they have been started on a prescribing
programme rather than before and the review procedures should take this
into account.
Treatment may be terminated
if:
- It is doing more
harm than good – with no prospect of this changing
- There has been
a serious breach of contract e.g. violence towards staff
- There have been
repeated breaches of contract e.g. non attendance at appointments.
Termination of treatment
is a serious step, especially if there may be a return to high-risk behaviours
as a result. Prescribing staff must be certain that it is a necessary
intervention.
It is important that
the criteria for removal from methadone prescribing are understood by
all concerned and that they are applied fairly and without discrimination.
Where possible clients should receive verbal and written warnings prior
to removal from treatment. Other options that fall short of permanent
removal, such as suspension of prescribing, may be considered.
Where possible entry
criteria for returning to methadone treatment, including the earliest
date a referral will be considered, should be made clear to the client.
Benzodiazepines
Use of benzodiazepines
is, for many heroin users, part of the opiate-using culture. They are
seen as relatively benign drugs that can be taken without withdrawal effects.
This may be because benzodiazepine withdrawals could be mistaken for opiate
withdrawals.
Benzodiazepines are
sometimes used by opiate users to help them sleep, although often in doses
far in excess of the normal therapeutic range. They are also used during
the day when the user has no intention of sleeping to achieve the following
effects:
- Creating a feeling
of not being part of the rest of the world
- Causing complete
amnesia of the time spent intoxicated
- Increased confidence
- Feeling ‘drunk’
- Potentiating the
effects of alcohol
- Reducing the severity
of opiate withdrawal symptoms.
The relationship between
benzodiazepines and methadone is twofold:
- Requests for methadone
prescription are frequently accompanied by a request for a concurrent
benzodiazepine prescription
- People on methadone
will often continue to use illicit benzodiazepines when they have stopped
using illicit opiates.
The main problems
are that:
- The therapeutic
value of benzodiazepines in terms of sleep promotion is lost after only
2–4 weeks of treatment
- When taken in excess
they can cause chaotic, high-risk behaviour with memory loss of events
while intoxicated
- Their use contributes
to higher levels of HIV/hepatitis risk behaviour
- The withdrawal
syndrome – which includes agoraphobia and panic attacks – can be distressing
and trigger further drug use.
As they are not controlled
drugs it may not be possible for services to arrange dispensing of any
less than a week’s supply at a time - and there is often a high risk of
them all being consumed in the first 24 hour period. It is therefore difficult
to prescribe benzodiazepines using the rationale of harm reduction.
Methadone prescribing
services that operate a non-benzodiazepine prescribing policy may:
- Be at less risk
from accusations of irresponsible prescribing
- Reduce requests
for benzodiazepines
- Promote discussion
and insight into benzodiazepine use
but they will not
meet the needs of people with genuine benzodiazepine dependency or be
able to take advantage of the short-term therapeutic benefits when their
use is clinically indicated.
Many clients are willing
to ‘trade’ their benzodiazepine request for extra methadone. A regime
of 5mg methadone for 10mg temazepam/5mg diazepam to a maximum of 25% above
the assessed methadone need, based on opiate use alone, is used by some
services. This is not always appropriate and is thought by some to be
flawed in terms of logic, especially as methadone will have little or
no effect on benzodiazepine withdrawals. Some services offer a diazepam
detox running alongside methadone treatment for the first few weeks to
give people a realistic chance of coming off.
If a client remains
adamant that they need prescribed benzodiazepines it is reasonable to
start the methadone prescribing and to require them to remain in treatment
for a period of extended assessment prior to a decision being made on
prescribing benzodiazepines.
Recreational
drug use
Most people
on methadone prescriptions continue to take other drugs in addition to
their methadone, particularly cannabis.
The test which needs
to be applied is not that of abstinence but rather of the treatment aims.
If the additional drug use is not compromising the treatment aims then
it should not jeopardise the continuation of prescribing. If it is threatening
the treatment aims then the care plan may need to be adjusted in order
to achieve those aims before termination of treatment is considered. Problematic
additional opiate use is discussed in the next section: Prescribing for
groups with special needs: People who ‘use on top’.
It is important that
prescribing services are clear among themselves and with clients on what
the treatment aims are and what the response will be to recreational drug
use.
Problem
alcohol use
A significant
minority of people on methadone prescriptions have a concurrent alcohol
dependence. Alcohol and methadone potentiate each other and thus the risks
of overdose are greatly increased when people are drinking heavily in
addition to using methadone. Alcohol is thought to be a contributing factor
in many of the methadone overdoses.
Some clients alternate
between opiates and alcohol and for these people methadone is often helpful
because while on methadone alcohol consumption falls or stops. It is those
who have a dual dependency that present the biggest problems to prescribing
services.
Additional services
that may be offered to reduce risk and increase appropriateness of treatment
include:
- Supervised consumption
of methadone
- Breathalysing prior
to dispensing of methadone
- Hospital or community
alcohol detoxification prior to commencement of (or during) methadone
treatment
- Liver function
tests and other health investigations
- Concurrent dispensing
of disulfiram (Antabuse) – started in hospital to reduce risks
- Discussion of alcohol
consumption as a specific item on the care plan
- Residential rehabilitation.
Worker
supervision and support
Clinical supervision
is a key issue in providing effective methadone prescribing services.
Opiate users present in many different ways and present unique challenges
in the needs they have.
In order to offer
an equitable, consistent and sustainable service clinicians must have
access to supervision which allows them to discuss both the clinical and
personal issues that are raised for them in their work.
Clinicians involved
in working with opiate users also benefit from the support and opportunities
to develop practice through:
- Conferences
- Regional drug workers
fora
- Special interest
groups
- Journal clubs
- Specialist training.
Transfer
from injectable to oral methadone
There are a
number of reasons why both the clinician and the client may want to transfer
from a prescription of oral and injectable methadone to oral only. These
include:
- Vein damage being
exacerbated by continued injection
- A desire to move
away from illicit drug-using patterns
- Pressure from partner
or family
- Recognition that
stopping injecting is a precondition to successful detox
- Agency or purchaser
policy requires everyone on methadone treatment to receive oral methadone.
The transfer from
injectable to oral methadone can be a very difficult and slow process
which is one of the reasons many services choose not to prescribe injectables
and instead try and stabilise clients on oral methadone from the start.
The process is one
of a negotiated reduction in the injectable portion of the prescription
and a simultaneous increase in the oral portion. Sometimes this process
can be made easier by increasing the oral portion of the prescription
by a little more than the reduction in the injectable methadone. For instance
a client on 1x10mg ampoule per day may be given an extra 15–20mg oral
methadone to replace it.
During this process
it is important to check injecting sites regularly and encourage the client
to use counselling and psychological support services.
Sometimes, as with
detox, the best approach is to agree with the client prior to any changes
that the process is an experiment, with the option to return to the original
dose/route remaining open. This removes the pressure on both worker and
client to see the process in terms of sucess or failure and for clients
to resist change for fear they might be giving something up forever.
The transfer is more
likely to be successful (in terms of avoiding a relapse to injecting illicit
drugs) if it takes place in gradual steps. For people with a long history
of injecting, full transfer to oral medication can take up to two years.
Towards the end of the process, when nearly all the ampoules have been
‘converted’ into oral methadone, the client may continue to have one injecting
day per script cycle, and this final phase can be the longest. Relapses
need to be expected and dealt with as learning experiences.
 |