H. Westley Clark

Bio: H. Westley Clark is an academic researcher from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. The author has contributed to research in topics: Substance abuse & Health care. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 42 publications receiving 2024 citations. Previous affiliations of H. Westley Clark include San Francisco VA Medical Center & Santa Clara University.

European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction

Abstract: INTRODUCTION The issue of social rehabilitation and reintegration (hereafter social reintegration2) is mentioned under the third strategy target of the EU Action Plan 2000–2004. The third EU strategy target is to 'substantially increase the number of successfully treated addicts', and point 3.1.3.4 instructs that 'Member States [are] to ensure that adequate attention is paid to social and professional rehabilitation and reintegration of former addicts'. However, social reintegration is also linked to social exclusion, which is mentioned in chapter 2 of the EU Action Plan, where it is stated that 'the EMCDDA [is] to develop indicators on drug-related crime, the availability of illicit drugs (including at street level) and drug-related social exclusion'. For the EMCDDA, social reintegration comes under strategy target four – that is, as a response to social exclusion – however, target two is clearly also relevant. Social exclusion is often perceived as a cause of problem drug use, although many see it as a consequence of problem drug use. We will not elaborate on this further here, except to note that social exclusion and problem drug use are two phenomena that are very closely interlinked and that social reintegration is a possible response to both. The EMCDDA Programme 2, 'Analysis of responses', set out to identify how social reintegration is understood in each Member State and to map the availability of social reintegration facilities in Member States according to these national perceptions. It became evident at an early stage that this would be a complex task, involving extensive data collection, as national reports generally provided insufficient data on this specific subject. eight countries turned out to be difficult to map and so, in February 2002, the EMCDDA launched a call for tender for a project, 'Mapping social reintegration services in EU countries'. 3 The aim of this project was to describe the state of the art of social reintegration in the following eight countries: The research specifications, to investigate 'the state of the art of social reintegration', suggested that the following should be identified for each of the eight countries: 1 Other contributors will be mentioned in the respective chapters. 2 Our country studies so far have shown that the term 'rehabilitation' is used ambiguously across Europe – from low-threshold refuges, to normal treatment, to actual reintegration into society. For this reason, we shall use the term 'social reintegration' in this report, as this is used much more …

Methadone maintenance therapy versus no opioid replacement therapy for opioid dependence

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Methadone maintenance was the first widely used opioid replacement therapy to treat heroin dependence, and it remains the best-researched treatment for this problem. Despite the widespread use of methadone in maintenance treatment for opioid dependence in many countries, it is a controversial treatment whose effectiveness has been disputed. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) compared with treatments that did not involve opioid replacement therapy (i.e., detoxification, offer of drug-free rehabilitation, placebo medication, wait-list controls) for opioid dependence. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases up to Dec 2008: the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, EMBASE, PubMED, CINAHL, Current Contents, Psychlit, CORK [www. state.vt.su/adap/cork], Alcohol and Drug Council of Australia (ADCA) [www.adca.org.au], Australian Drug Foundation (ADF-VIC) [www.adf.org.au], Centre for Education and Information on Drugs and Alcohol (CEIDA) [www.ceida.net.au], Australian Bibliographic Network (ABN), and Library of Congress databases, available NIDA monographs and the College on Problems of Drug Dependence Inc. proceedings, the reference lists of all identified studies and published reviews; authors of identified RCTs were asked about other published or unpublished relevant RCTs. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled clinical trials of methadone maintenance therapy compared with either placebo maintenance or other non-pharmacological therapy for the treatment of opioid dependence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Reviewers evaluated the papers separately and independently, rating methodological quality of sequence generation, concealment of allocation and bias. Data were extracted independently for meta-analysis and double-entered. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review, all were randomised clinical trials, two were double-blind. There were a total number of 1969 participants. The sequence generation was inadequate in one study, adequate in five studies and unclear in the remaining studies. The allocation of concealment was adequate in three studies and unclear in the remaining studies. Methadone appeared statistically significantly more effective than non-pharmacological approaches in retaining patients in treatment and in the suppression of heroin use as measured by self report and urine/hair analysis (6 RCTs, RR = 0.66 95% CI 0.56-0.78), but not statistically different in criminal activity (3 RCTs, RR=0.39; 95%CI: 0.12-1.25) or mortality (4 RCTs, RR=0.48; 95%CI: 0.10-2.39). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Methadone is an effective maintenance therapy intervention for the treatment of heroin dependence as it retains patients in treatment and decreases heroin use better than treatments that do not utilise opioid replacement therapy. It does not show a statistically significant superior effect on criminal activity or mortality.

Office of National Drug Control Policy: a scientist in drug policy in Washington, DC.

Abstract: This essay describes how a basic scientist was thrust into the epicenter, the political cauldron of our national drug control policy, and how the experience altered her professional trajectory and perspective.