Buprenorphine

Conclusion: Evidence from trials and observational studies suggest that treatment retention is better for methadone than for sublingual buprenorphine. Comparative evidence on other outcomes examined showed few statistically significant differences and was generally based on small numbers of studies. These findings highlight the imperative for interventions to improve retention, consideration of client-centred factors (such as client preference) when selecting between methadone and buprenorphine, and harmonisation of data collection and reporting to strengthen future syntheses.

Conclusion: Based on our analysis, patients using <20 g of kratom/d could be initiated on opioid agonist therapy with 4/1 mg-8/2 mg buprenorphine-naloxone/d, while patients using kratom doses >40 g/d could be initiated with 12/3 mg-16/4 mg of buprenorphine-naloxone/day.

Conclusion: Overall 26 RCTs involving 848 dogs were included. Tramadol administration probably results in a lower need for rescue analgesia versus no treatment or placebo [moderate CoE; relative risk (RR): 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.26-0.85; I2 = 0%], and may result in a lower need for rescue analgesia versus buprenorphine (low CoE; RR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.20-1.24), codeine (low CoE; RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.16-3.41) and nalbuphine (low CoE; RR: 0.05; 95% CI: 0.00-0.72). However, tramadol administration may result in an increased requirement for rescue analgesia versus methadone (low CoE; RR: 3.45; 95%

Conclusion: The induction phase onto methadone treatment and the time immediately after leaving treatment with both drugs are periods of particularly increased mortality risk, which should be dealt with by both public health and clinical strategies to mitigate such risk. These findings are potentially important, but further research must be conducted to properly account for potential confounding and selection bias in comparisons of mortality risk between opioid substitution treatments, as well as throughout periods in and out of each treatment.