title: The impact of dispensing fees on compliance with opioid substitution therapy: a mixed methods study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Opioid substitution therapy (OST) programs involve the dispensing of OST medicines to patients to address their dependence on heroin and/or other opioid substances. OST medicines are subsidised by the Australian government but patients need to pay the dispensing fees. This study explored opinions from OST patients and stakeholders about the potential impact of dispensing fees on compliance and OST program retention. Current and past experiences and the potential impact of OST dispensing fees were evaluated.
  
  
  METHODS
  Mixed methodology was used to obtain data from OST patients and stakeholders. This involved 1) interviews with OST stakeholders, 2) a focus group of OST patients and 3) surveys of OST patients in Perth, Australia, between June and August 2013.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The majority of the eight stakeholders declared cost as the factor mostly impacting on OST compliance. Almost all of the stakeholders commented that there was a positive correlation between time on the OST program and success in terms of relapse. Most stakeholders advocated for OST fees to contribute towards the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme Safety Net, and for fee subsidy. Focus group themes supported stakeholder interview findings. A total of 138 surveys were completed. Survey analysis illustrated a strong correlation between patient debt and impacted lifestyle: 82.4% (p < 0.001, Chi-square test) of the 138 survey participants stated that dispensing fees impacted significantly on patients' finances and lifestyle, specifically those patients with major debt. The cost of dispensing fees was identified by 46.3% (64/138) of survey participants as the biggest impacting factor on patient success. Logistic regression models showed that the cost of dispensing fees was also found to significantly influence both the occurrence of debt (57.7%, p < 0.0001) and lifestyle difficulties (80.0%, p = 0.0004).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Findings provided insight into OST patients' financial difficulties with data suggesting that dispensing fees are likely to have a negative impact on OST patients' compliance with therapy, retention in the OST program and lifestyle. Government sponsorship of the OST dispensing fees should be considered as sponsorship would potentially increase the retention rates of income-poor OST program recipients.
authors.forename: Alexandra
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Shepherd
authors.forename: Bianca
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Perrella
authors.affiliation: Curtin Health, Curtin University, Bentley, Perth, Western Australia 6845, Australia. l.hattingh@curtin.edu.au.
authors.forename: Hendrika Laetitia
authors.initials: HL
authors.lastname: Hattingh
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D017144:Focus Groups; D006801:Humans; D016015:Logistic Models; D008297:Male; D055118:Medication Adherence; D008875:Middle Aged; D016017:Odds Ratio; D058850:Opiate Substitution Treatment; D009293:Opioid-Related Disorders / Q000188:drug therapy*; D011306:Prescription Fees; D036301:Qualitative Research; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014904:Western Australia; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Addiction. 2010 Feb;105(2):335-42
references.pmid: 20078490
references.citation: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2004 May;12(2):147-55
references.pmid: 15122959
references.citation: Pharm World Sci. 2008 Dec;30(6):940-6
references.pmid: 18850299
references.citation: J Adv Nurs. 2001 Jul;35(1):97-107
references.pmid: 11442687
references.citation: BMC Psychiatry. 2013 Jul 16;13:190
references.pmid: 23865898
references.citation: Addiction. 2012 Mar;107(3):624-34
references.pmid: 21919988
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2010 Oct 1;111(3):235-40
references.pmid: 20627427
references.citation: J Subst Abuse Treat. 2010 Sep;39(2):141-9
references.pmid: 20598830
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Depend. 1984 Jul;13(4):395-9
references.pmid: 6479018
references.citation: Clin Nutr. 1993 Apr;12(2):75-80
references.pmid: 16843291
references.citation: AIDS Care. 2012;24(3):283-90
references.pmid: 21936718
references.citation: J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun;27(6):669-76
references.pmid: 22215271
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Rev. 2012 Nov;31(7):911-7
references.pmid: 22624529
references.citation: J Psychoactive Drugs. 2009 Sep;41(3):285-96
references.pmid: 19999682
references.citation: Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Feb;77(2):253-63
references.pmid: 23210630
references.citation: J Subst Abuse Treat. 1992;9(1):21-6
references.pmid: 1593661
references.citation: Health Econ Rev. 2012 Mar 29;2(1):3
references.pmid: 22828157
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011 Nov 1;118(2-3):259-64
references.pmid: 21546173
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2001 Aug 1;63(3):253-62
references.pmid: 11418229
references.citation: Psychol Med. 2011 Apr;41(4):771-8
references.pmid: 20550757
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2001 Feb 1;61(3):297-306
references.pmid: 11164694
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2013 Aug;91:94-100
references.pmid: 23849243
references.citation: AIDS Care. 2012;24(6):756-62
references.pmid: 22149005
references.citation: J Health Econ. 2010 May;29(3):388-403
references.pmid: 20338649
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Rev. 2005 Sep;24(5):411-8
references.pmid: 16298835
references.citation: Eur Addict Res. 2011;17(5):241-9
references.pmid: 21654177
references.citation: WMJ. 2004;103(4):20-6
references.pmid: 15481866
references.citation: J Behav Health Serv Res. 2005 Jan-Mar;32(1):43-60
references.pmid: 15632797
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 1995 Jan;85(1):83-8
references.pmid: 7832267
references.citation: Addiction. 1993 Jan;88(1):119-24
references.pmid: 8448501
references.citation: J Consult Clin Psychol. 2002 Apr;70(2):398-405
references.pmid: 11952198
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2013 Aug 13;13:747
references.pmid: 23938171
references.citation: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2009 Feb 1;100(1-2):115-21
references.pmid: 19054631