Study | Measure | Control Group | Intervention Group | Statistical Test or Model | p-value | Estimate of Effect | Direction of Effect | Overall Effect Direction |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(S7) Cunningham et al., 2022 [75] | Retention in treatment at 90 daysa | 42.9%b | 68.0%c | Chi square or Fisher exact test | < 0.05 | NR | Favours intervention | Positive |
(S9) Farid et al., 2022 [77] | “Retention” | 68.1%d | (a) 72.9% (b) 82.7% (c) 87.3%e | NR | NR | NR | Favours intervention | Positive |
(S11) Garg et al., 2022 [79] | Immediate changef in weekly prevalence of treatment discontinuation following intervention among clients stable on OAT | NA | NA | Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model | 0.93 | Step change: -0.01% (95% CI -0.14–0.12%) | Favours intervention | Mixed |
Gradual changeg in weekly prevalence of treatment discontinuation following intervention among clients stable on OAT | NA | NA | Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model | 0.72 | Slope change: 0.00% (95% CI -0.01–0.02%) | No difference | ||
Immediate changef in weekly prevalence of treatment discontinuation following intervention among clients not stable on OAT | NA | NA | Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model | 0.82 | Step change: -0.31% (-3.04–2.43%) | Favours intervention | ||
Gradual changeg in weekly prevalence of treatment discontinuation following intervention among clients not stable on OAT | NA | NA | Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model | 0.63 | Slope change: 0.04% (95% CI: -0.12–0.20%) | Favours control | ||
(S13) Gomes et al., 2022 [81] | OAT discontinuationh among people receiving daily methadone at baseline | 63.6% per person-yeari | 51.0% per person-yearj | Cox proportional-hazards model | < 0.05* | Weighted HR: 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72–0.90) | Favours intervention | Positive |
OAT discontinuationh among people receiving 5–6 take-home doses of methadone at baseline | 19.6% per person-yeari | 14.1% per person-yearj | Cox proportional-hazards model | < 0.05* | Weighted HR: 0.72 (95% CI 0.62–0.84) | Favours intervention | ||
OAT discontinuationh among people receiving daily buprenorphine/naloxone at baseline | 93.2% per person-yeari | 85.1% per person-yearj | Cox proportional-hazards model | ≥ 0.05* | Weighted HR: 0.91 (95% CI 0.68–1.22) | Favours intervention | ||
OAT discontinuationh among people receiving 5–6 take-home doses of buprenorphine/naloxone at baseline | 30.8% per person-yeari | 26.0% per person-yearj | Cox proportional-hazards model | ≥ 0.05* | Weighted HR: 0.85 (95% CI 0.70–1.01) | Favours intervention | ||
(S15) Hoffman et al., 2022 [83] | Treatment discontinuation among people in treatment < 90 days | 13%k | 26%l | Wilcoxon rank sum test; Pearson's Chi-squared test | 0.047 | NR | Favours control | Negative |
Treatment discontinuation among people in treatment 90–180 days | 9.4%k | 19%l | Wilcoxon rank sum test; Pearson's Chi-squared test | 0.090 | NR | Favours control | ||
Treatment discontinuation among people in treatment > 180 days | 11%k | 12%l | Wilcoxon rank sum test; Pearson's Chi-squared test | 0.7 | NR | Favours control | ||
Odds of treatment discontinuation per percentage point in take-home dosing above expectedm | NR | NR | Random effects logistic regression model | 0.003 | Adjusted OR: 0.97 (95% CI 0.95, 0.99) | Favours intervention | ||
(S26) Nguyen et al., 2021 [94] | 60-day retention among new intakes | 63%k | 69%l | Two-tailed t-test | 0.26 | NR | Favours intervention | Positive |
(S31) Roy et al., 2023 [99] | Treatment disruptions among stably treated clientsn at 1 week post-initial pandemic period | 1.3%k | NR | Segmented regression interrupted time series model | < 0.05 | Relative change from baseline trend: (a) Disruptions ≥ 7 days: -12.6 (95% CI: -16.6,-8.5) (b) Disruptions ≥ 14 days: -9.7 (95% CI: -15.1,-4.3) (c) Disruptions ≥ 28 days: -11.6 (95% CI: -14.7,-8.5) | Favours intervention | Positive |
Treatment disruptions among stably treated clientsn at 26 weeks post-initial pandemic period | 1.0%k | NR | Segmented regression interrupted time series model | < 0.05 | Relative change from baseline trend: (a) Disruptions ≥ 7 days: -17.0 (95% CI: -19.4,-14.6) (b) Disruptions ≥ 14 days: -10.2 (95% CI: -15.7,-4.8) (c) Disruptions ≥ 28 days: -15.5 (95% CI: -18.9,-12.1) | Favours intervention | ||
Treatment disruptions among stably treated clientsn at 52 weeks post-initial pandemic period | 0.6%k | NR | Segmented regression interrupted time series model | < 0.05 | Relative change from baseline trend: (a) Disruptions ≥ 7 days: -21.6 (95% CI: -25.6,-17.7) (b) Disruptions ≥ 14 days: -10.8 (95% CI:-16.3,-5.3) (c) Disruptions ≥ 28 days: -27.3 (95% CI:-33.0,-21.6) | Favours intervention |