↓ Skip to main content

Preference of methadone maintenance patients for the integrative and decentralized service delivery models in Vietnam

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Preference of methadone maintenance patients for the integrative and decentralized service delivery models in Vietnam
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12954-015-0063-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bach Xuan Tran, Long Hoang Nguyen, Huong Thu Thi Phan, Linh Khanh Nguyen, Carl A. Latkin

Abstract

Integrating and decentralizing services are essential to increase the accessibility and provide comprehensive care for methadone patients. Moreover, they assure the sustainability of a HIV/AIDS prevention program by reducing the implementation cost. This study aimed to measure the preference of patients enrolling in a MMT program for integrated and decentralized MMT clinics and then further examine related factors. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 510 patients receiving methadone at 3 clinics in Hanoi. Structured questionnaires were used to collect data about the preference for integrated and decentralized MMT services. Covariates including socio-economic status; health-related quality of life (using EQ-5D-5 L instrument) and HIV status; history of drug use along with MMT treatment; and exposure to the discrimination within family and community were also investigated. Multivariate logistic regression with polynomial fractions was used to identify the determinants of preference for integrative and decentralized models. Of 510 patients enrolled, 66.7 and 60.8 % preferred integrated and decentralized models, respectively. The main reason for preferring the integrative model was the convenience of use of various services (53.2 %), while more privacy (43.5 %) was the primary reason to select stand-alone model. People preferred the decentralized model primarily because of travel cost reduction (95.0 %), while the main reason for not selecting the model was increased privacy (7.7 %). After adjusting for covariates, factors influencing the preference for integrative model were poor socioeconomic status, anxiety/depression, history of drug rehabilitation, and ever disclosed health status; while exposure to community discrimination inversely associated with this preference. In addition, people who were self-employed, had a longer duration of MMT, and use current MMT with comprehensive HIV services were less likely to select decentralized model. In conclusion, the study confirmed the high preference of MMT patients for the integrative and decentralized MMT service delivery models. The convenience of healthcare services utilization and reduction of geographical barriers were the main reasons to use those models within drug use populations in Vietnam. Countering community stigma and encouraging communication between patients and their societies needed to be considered when implementing those models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 140 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 44 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 16%
Psychology 20 14%
Social Sciences 16 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 47 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 December 2015.
All research outputs
#6,858,921
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#631
of 920 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,006
of 272,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#20
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 920 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 272,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.