English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Aims  To examine perceptions of extended‐release (XR) buprenorphine injections among people who regularly use opioids in Australia.    Design  Cross‐sectional survey prior to implementation. XR‐buprenorphine was registered in Australia in November 2018.    Setting  Sydney, Melbourne and Hobart.  Participants  A total of 402 people who regularly use opioids interviewed December 2017 to March 2018.    Measurements  Primary outcome concerned the proportion of participants who believed XR‐buprenorphine would be a good treatment option for them, preferred weekly versus monthly injections and perceived advantages/disadvantages of XR‐buprenorphine. Independent variables concerned the demographic characteristics and features of current opioid agonist treatment (OAT; medication‐type, dose, prescriber/dosing setting, unsupervised doses, out‐of‐pocket expenses and travel distance).    Findings  Sixty‐eight per cent [95% confidence interval (CI) = 63–73%] believed XR‐buprenorphine was a good treatment option for them. They were more likely to report being younger [26–35 versus > 55 years; odds ratio (OR) = 3.16, 95% CI = 1.12–8.89;  P  = 0.029], being female (OR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.04–2.69;  P  = 0.034), < 10 years school education (OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.12–3.12;  P  = 0.016) and past‐month heroin (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.15–2.85;  P  = 0.006) and methamphetamine use (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.20–3.01;  P  = 0.006). Fifty‐four per cent reported no preference for weekly versus monthly injections, 7% preferred weekly and 39% preferred monthly. Among OAT recipients ( n  = 255), believing XR‐buprenorphine was a good treatment option was associated with shorter treatment episodes (1–2 versus ≥ 2 years; OR = 3.93, 95% CI = 1.26–12.22;  P  = 0.018), fewer unsupervised doses (≤ 8 doses past‐month versus no take‐aways; OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.27–0.93;  P  = 0.028) and longer travel distance (≥ 5 versus < 5 km; OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.20–3.65;  P  = 0.009). Sixty‐nine per cent reported ‘no problems or concerns’ with potential differences in availability, flexibility and location of XR‐buprenorphine.    Conclusions  Among regular opioid users in Australia, perceptions of extended‐release buprenorphine as a good treatment option are associated with being female, recent illicit drug use and factors relating to the (in)convenience of current opioid agonist treatment.

Perceptions of extended‐release buprenorphine injections for opioid use disorder among people who regularly use opioids in Australia