Misuse of buprenorphine maintenance treatment since introduction of its generic forms: OPPIDUM survey
Article first published online: 23 NOV 2011
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
Volume 21, Issue 2, pages 184–190, February 2012
How to Cite
Nordmann, S., Frauger, E., Pauly, V., Orléans, V., Pradel, V., Mallaret, M., Thirion, X. and Micallef, J. (2012), Misuse of buprenorphine maintenance treatment since introduction of its generic forms: OPPIDUM survey. Pharmacoepidem. Drug Safe., 21: 184–190. doi: 10.1002/pds.2263
- Issue published online: 25 JAN 2012
- Article first published online: 23 NOV 2011
- Manuscript Accepted: 12 SEP 2011
- Manuscript Revised: 4 JUL 2011
- Manuscript Received: 23 DEC 2010
- post-marketing surveillance;
- generic form;
- OPPIDUM survey;
- opioid maintenance treatment
The purpose of the study was to compare, using data from Observation of Illicit Psychotropic Substances or Non-medical Used Medications (OPPIDUM) surveys, first, the profile of buprenorphine users and their modalities of buprenorphine use from 2006 to 2008 and, second, two subgroups: brand-name and generic buprenorphine users in 2008.
OPPIDUM is an annual, nationwide, multicentric, cross-sectional survey, including buprenorphine users followed in specialised centres dedicated to drug dependence. The evolution of the profile during three consecutive years (2006, 2007 and 2008) was analysed using Cochran-Armitage test for trend. A multivariate regression analysis was used to identify the factors associated with the use of generic compared with brand-name buprenorphine in 2008.
In OPPIDUM, 1311 individuals used buprenorphine in 2006, 1688 in 2007 and 1696 in 2008. The proportion of users of generic buprenorphine increased from 4.2% in 2006 to 31.7% in 2008. From 2006 to 2008, a decrease in intravenous use and higher than recommended dosage, with an increase in occupation, have been observed. According to the multivariate analysis, factors associated with being generic buprenorphine user compared with brand-name buprenorphine user in 2008 were younger age, more education, absence of use of alcohol with buprenorphine, absence of heroin and/or cocaine use and absence of nasal route for buprenorphine.
Three years after the launch of the buprenorphine generic, the health professionals' and buprenorphine users' perception of generic can still change. Additionally, the long-term impact of generic medications with abuse potential has not yet been studied. Thus, continued monitoring of buprenorphine is needed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.