跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(100.28.132.102) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/06/21 22:20
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:秦文鎮
研究生(外文):Wen-Cheng Chin
論文名稱:美沙冬替代療法對於海洛因成癮者藥物濫用信念及社會功能之成效分析
論文名稱(外文):The Effectiveness of Methadone Maintenance Treatment on Beliefs toward Drug Abuse and Social Function among Heroin Addicts
指導教授:張永源張永源引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yong-Yuan Chang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:高雄醫學大學
系所名稱:醫務管理學研究所碩士在職專班
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:醫管學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2009
畢業學年度:97
語文別:中文
論文頁數:132
中文關鍵詞:海洛因成癮藥物濫用信念社會功能美沙冬替代療法
外文關鍵詞:heroin addictionbeliefs toward drug abussocial functionMethadone Maintenance Treatment
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:783
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
背景:
台灣近年來愛滋病感染人數急遽增加,自民國73年至民國96年12底止,台灣地區感染愛滋病毒的通報個案數累積已超過1萬5千人,其中藥癮者佔38.54%,居所有危險因子的首位。經分析原因發現,海洛因(heroin)藥癮者共用針具是感染愛滋病毒的主因。爲因應愛滋疫情擴大,行政院衛生署於民國94年12月開始推動「毒品病患愛滋減害試辦計畫」,美沙冬替代療法(Methadone Maintenance Treatment)得以由國外引進台灣。惟愛滋疫情雖已獲初步控制,但海洛因成癮的危害絕不止愛滋疫情之失控,毒品於治安、經濟、社會及家庭之影響,其衝擊層面不亞於愛滋病,甚至帶來更嚴重的後果。值此美沙冬替代療法甫於國內施行之初,社會及輿論對其治療概念尚一知半解,恐會影響我國毒品防制政策之執行。故本研究對美沙冬替代療法之成效進行探討及分析,並提出建議,以供相關單位參考。
目的:
探討海洛因成癮者之藥物濫用信念偏差及社會適應功能障礙,並分析美沙冬替代療法之成效。
方法:
採類實驗設計(quasi-experimental design)的研究方法進行,共分兩組,介入組為自民國96年1月至96年12月間於某區域醫院精神科門診接受美沙冬替代療法之海洛因成癮者,比較組為自民國96年1月至96年12月間因違反毒品危害防制條例於某地檢署接受保護管束處分之海洛因成癮者。先以Microsoft Excel 2000將資料編碼建檔,根據研究架構與研究假設進行統計及分析,探討海洛因成癮者之特殊人口學特徵包括:年齡層、教育程度、婚姻狀況及就業狀況,特殊之藥物濫用行為包括藥物濫用史及前科次數等。兩組分別以濫用藥物信念量表及社區生活適應量表進行前測及後測,前後測間隔時間為三個月。濫用藥物信念量表部份,依總分及「效果期待」、「自貶依毒」、「低估毒癮」三個分量表進行前後測組內比較分析。社區生活適應量表部份,依總分及「人際關係」、「成就表現」、「時間分配」、「家庭生活」、「性格適應」進行前後測組內比較分析,並比較介入組與比較組兩組間的差異,以分析美沙冬替代療法之成效。統計分析方法是以統計套裝軟體SPSS for Windows 12.0 中文版進行描述性統計及推論性統計。
結果:
本研究以海洛因成癮者為研究樣本,共蒐集了81人為介入組樣本,34人為比較組樣本,其中介入組有14人比較組有13人因問卷塡答資料缺漏、重複答題或未完成問卷後測者排除,總計有效樣本介入組共計67人,比較組共計21人。介入組之平均開始使用海洛因年齡為25.25±6.07歲,比較組為28.05±10.93歲;介入組之平均海洛因使用年數為11.40±6.15年,比較組為12.57±4.72年;介入組之平均毒品前科次數為1.97±1.54次,比較組為4.00±2.15次。兩組之基本人口學特徵及藥物濫用史經檢定無明顯差異,惟兩組之毒品前科數具顯著性差異,故於統計推論過程中以控制該變項的方式進行。介入組與比較組分別以配對樣本t檢定(paired t test)檢定各組前後測之信念得分變化。效果期待信念:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.480。自貶依毒信念:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.355。低估毒癮信念:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.940。濫用藥物信念總分:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.511。於社區生活適應部份:人際關係:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.506。成就表現:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.658。時間分配:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.803。家庭生活:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.083。性格適應:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.366。社區生活適應總分:介入組p<0.0001,比較組p=0.740。介入組與比較組之組間比較以重複量數雙因子變異數分析(repeated measures two-way ANOVA)進行組間前後測交互作用統計分析,其結果於濫用藥物信念部份,p<0.0001,顯示美沙冬替代療法之介入,可改善海洛因成癮者之藥物濫用信念偏差,濫用藥物信念的三個分量表部份:效果期待信念(p<0.0001),自貶依毒信念(p<0.0001),低估毒癮信念(p<0.0001)。於社區生活適應部份,p=0.001,顯示美沙冬替代療法之介入,可改善海洛因成癮者之社會適應功能,社區生活適應量表的五個題項部份:人際關係(p=0.240),成就表現(p=0.010),時間分配(p=0.001),家庭生活(p=0.006),性格適應(p=0.014)。
結論與建議:
研究結果顯示:海洛因成癮者通常都從年輕時即開始使用毒品,一旦成癮,其使用年數往往超過10年,且海洛因成癮後戒除不易,極易復發,個案常有多次毒品前科。海洛因成癮者所面對的生理、心理障礙及其對整體社會國家所產生之公衛、經濟及治安的衝擊層面甚廣。建議我國之健保政策應將藥癮之治療納入給付項目,導正社會大眾對藥癮疾病的誤解,減少對藥癮者的排斥,避免因過度研究藥癮的道德問題而引起對立,並持續編列預算補助「美沙冬替代療法」,以降低進入治療的門檻及提高治療的普及率為目標,提供藥癮者可近性高的諮詢及治療平台。研議以「美沙冬替代療法」作為毒品犯之緩刑及假釋的強制司法處遇措施,設置「毒品處遇法庭」,推動「以社區為基礎」之毒品戒治模式,以提高戒治成效,並減少國家資源的浪費,以期建立遠離毒害的健康社會。
Background:
An increasing number of people have become infected with HIV/AIDS in recent years. Between 1984 and 2007, more than 15,000 AIDS cases were reported. Among them, cases related to drug addiction accounted for 38.54%, making it the number one risk factor. Analysis reveals that heroin addicts who share needles comprise the majority of people becoming infected with HIV. To tackle the spread of AIDS, the Department of Health (DOH) in December 2005 launched a “Pilot Program of AIDS Harm Reduction to Drug Abuser” and introduced Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT). Though we are now able to control the spread of AIDS to a certain extent, the harm caused by heroin addiction is no less devastating than losing the battle against AIDS. The impact that drugs have on public security, the economy, society and families is no less than that of AIDS, with even worse consequences. MMT is still new to Taiwan, and the fact that most people are unfamiliar with this treatment may have a negative impact on the implementation of the country’s drug policies. Consequently, this study discusses and analyzes the effectiveness of MMT, with suggestions put forward for reference by relevant government agencies.

Objective:
This study discusses and analyzes irrational beliefs toward heroin addicts and their social function disability, as well as the effectiveness of MMT.

Methods:
The study was conducted using a quasi-experimental design. The subjects were divided into two groups – intervention and comparison groups. Those in the intervention group (G1) were heroin addicts receiving MMT at the psychiatric outpatient department of a regional hospital between January and December of 2007, and those in the comparison group (G2) were heroin addicts in the custody of a district prosecutors’ office in the same period for violating the drug abuse prevention statute. Our first step was to code data and create files using Microsoft Excel 2000. Then we compiled statistics and analyzed them based on our study framework and hypotheses to identify the drug addicts’ special demographic attributes, such as age, level of education, marital and employment statuses, and drug abuse behavior such as drug abuse history and previous convictions. Two separate questionnaires were filled out by subjects in both groups to quantify their beliefs toward drug abusing and social function at the beginning and the end of three-month period. The questionnaire for quantifying the subjects’ beliefs toward drug abuse comprises three parts – expectancy, self-abasement with drug dependence and underestimation of drug addiction. Results obtained at the beginning and end of three-month period of the same group were compared and analyzed. And the questionnaire for quantifying the subjects’ social function consists of five parts – interpersonal relations, achievements, time allocation, family life and flexibility. Results obtained at the beginning and end of three-month period of the same group were also compared and analyzed. In addition, results obtained from the two groups were compared to find out their differences in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the MMT. In this study, the Chinese version of the statistics application SPSS 12.0 for Windows was used to compile descriptive and deductive statistics.

Results:
There were 81 subjects in G1 and 34 in G2. 14 questionnaires handed in by subjects in G1 and 13 by those in G2 were considered invalid and excluded from the study, leaving 67 valid questionnaires in G1 and 21 in G2. The average age at which the subjects began using heroin was 25.25±6.07 in G1 and 28.05±10.93 in G2, for an average of 11.40±6.15 and 12.57±4.72 years, respectively. The average number of previous conviction per subject was 1.97±1.54 in G1 and 4.00±2.15 in G2. There are no obvious differences between the two groups in terms of demographic attributes and drug abuse history. However, an examination of previous convictions reveals a noticeable difference between them. Consequently, the variable was placed under control throughout the deduction process. Paired t test was utilized in both groups to measure the difference in the points scored between the beliefs toward drug abuse questionnaires filled out at the beginning and end of three-month period. In terms of beliefs toward drug abuse, the results are: expectancy – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.480; self-abasement with drug dependence – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.355; and underestimation of drug addiction – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.940, with the combined score being G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.511. As far as social function are concerned, the results are: interpersonal relations – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.506; achievements – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.658; time allocation – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.803; family life – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.083; and flexibility – G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.366, with the combined score being G1: p<0.0001, G2: p=0.740. In addition, repeated measure two-way ANOVA was used to analyze the interaction between the two groups with questionnaires filled out at the beginning and end of each period. In terms of beliefs toward drug abuse, the score is: p<0.0001, indicating that subjects receiving MMT suffered less from beliefs toward drug abusing. The results obtained from the three parts of this questionnaire are: expectancy – p<0.0001, self-abasement with drug dependence – p<0.0001, and underestimation of drug addiction – p<0.0001. As far as social function are concerned, the score is p=0.001, indicating that subjects receiving MMT can improve their social function. The results obtained from the five parts of this questionnaire are: interpersonal relations – p=0.240, achievements – p=0.010, time allocation – p=0.001, family life – p=0.006, and flexibility – p=0.014.

Conclusions and Suggestions:
According to the study results, most of them began using drugs when they were young.Those who became addicted had used drugs for more than ten years. Once becoming addicted to heroin, it is very difficult to abstain. Even those who manage to abstain are prone to relapse, resulting in multiple drug convictions.Heroin addicts are faced with many physical and psychological problems, which have wide-ranging impacts on public hygiene, economy and security of society in general.It is suggested that the national health insurance pays for the treatment of drug addiction.The public should be educated to eliminate their misunderstandings about drug addiction and reduce the repulsion experienced by drug addicts. Efforts should be made to avoid paying too much attention to the ethical issues surrounding drug addiction to avoid polarization. The government should also continue to subsidize MMT in order to lower the threshold for the treatment and allow more drug abusers to receive MMT. A platform should be established to provide drug abusers with friendly consultations and caring treatment. The government is advised to consider obtaining drug offenders’ consent to receive MMT as a condition of granting probation or parole. It is also advised to set up drug courts and promote a community-based drug abstinence model in order to improve abstinence effectiveness, reduce waste of resources and establish a healthy society far away from drug hazards.
目 錄
頁次
致 謝…………………………………………………………………………………..…I
摘 要…………………………………………………………………………………....III
Abstract…………………………………………………………………..………………VI
目 錄…………………………………………………………………………………….X
圖目錄………………………………………………………………………………..…XII
表目錄……………………………………………………………………………….…XIII
第一章 緒論………………………………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究背景與動機………………………………………………………1
第二節 研究重要性……………………………………………………………4
第三節 研究目的………………………………………………………………6
第四節 預期貢獻………………………………………………………………7
第五節 名詞解釋………………………………………………………………8
第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………………………………..12
第一節 海洛因成癮者之人口學特徵及藥物濫用史與再犯情形…………..12
第二節 海洛因成癮者之藥物濫用信念……………………………………..16
第三節 海洛因成癮者之社會適應功能……………………………………..20
第四節 美沙冬替代療法於海洛因成癮者之治療成效……………………..25
第三章 材料與方法……………………………………………………………………..30
第一節 研究概念架構………………………………………………………..30
第二節 研究假設……………………………………………………………..32
第三節 研究設計與流程……………………………………………………..33
第四節 研究樣本與資料來源………………………………………………..36
第五節 研究工具與研究變項………………………………………………..37
第六節 統計分析……………………………………………………………..40
第四章 結果……………………………………………………………………………..42
第一節 研究樣本基本人口學特徵、藥物濫用史及毒品前科數之
描述性統計…………………………………………………………..42
第二節 研究樣本藥物濫用信念偏差之統計分析結果……………………..47
第三節 研究樣本社會生活適應之統計分析結果…………………………..52
第四節 美沙冬替代療法對於海洛因成癮者藥物濫用信念偏差
及社會適應功能成效之統計分析結果……………………………..59
第五章 討論……………………………………………………………………………..65
第一節 研究方法之討論……………………………………………………..65
第二節 海洛因成癮者人口學特徵及藥物濫用史與再犯情形之討論……..68
第三節 美沙冬替代療法於海洛因成癮者治療成效之討論………………..72
第四節 研究限制及未來研究方向…………………………………………..80
第六章 結論與建議……………………………………………………………………..83
第一節 結論…………………………………………………………………..83
第二節 建議…………………………………………………………………..84
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………………………95
壹、中文部分………………………………………………………………………95
貳、英文部分……………………………………………………………………..100
附錄A 海洛因成癮美沙冬替代性治療病患同意書……….………………………..108
附錄B 量表使用同意書……………………………………………………………...110
附錄C 替代療法初診評估表………………………………………………………...111
附錄D 濫用藥物信念量表…………………………………………………………...115
附錄E 社區生活適應量表…………………………………………………………...117





























圖目錄
頁次
圖1-1 本國籍愛滋病毒感染者歷年通報人數..............................................................3
圖1-2 歷年精神醫療院所通報常見濫用藥物種類趨勢圖..........................................3
圖3-1 研究概念架構圖................................................................................................31
圖3-2 研究流程圖........................................................................................................35
圖4-1 兩組效果期待信念得分變化............................................................................48
圖4-2 兩組自貶依毒信念得分變化............................................................................49
圖4-3 兩組低估毒癮信念得分變化............................................................................50
圖4-4 兩組濫用藥物信念總分變化............................................................................51
圖4-5 兩組人際關係得分變化....................................................................................53
圖4-6 兩組成就表現得分變化....................................................................................54
圖4-7 兩組時間分配得分變化....................................................................................55圖4-8 兩組家庭生活得分變化....................................................................................56
圖4-9 兩組性格適應得分變化....................................................................................57
圖4-10 兩組社區生活適應總分變化............................................................................58
圖4-11 兩組濫用藥物信念前後測交互作用剖面圖....................................................62
圖4-12 兩組社區生活適應前後測交互作用剖面圖....................................................63


























表目錄
頁次
表1-1 台灣地區本國籍感染人類免疫缺乏病毒者依危險因子統計表......................2
表3-1 研究設計............................................................................................................33
表4-1 研究樣本基本人口學特徵之描述性統計(連續變項)....................................43
表4-2 研究樣本基本人口學特徵之描述性統計(類別變項)....................................43
表4-3 研究樣本之藥物濫用史與毒品前科數之描述性統計....................................44
表4-4 研究樣本基本人口學屬性及藥物濫用史與毒品前科數之檢定....................46
表4-5 研究樣本效果期待信念之描述性統計及檢定................................................48
表4-6 研究樣本自貶依毒信念之描述性統計及檢定................................................49
表4-7 研究樣本低估毒癮信念之描述性統計及檢定................................................50
表4-8 研究樣本濫用藥物信念總分之描述性統計及檢定........................................51
表4-9 研究樣本人際關係之描述性統計及檢定........................................................53
表4-10 研究樣本成就表現之描述性統計及檢定........................................................54
表4-11 研究樣本時間分配之描述性統計及檢定........................................................55
表4-12 研究樣本家庭生活之描述性統計及檢定........................................................56
表4-13 研究樣本性格適應之描述性統計及檢定........................................................57
表4-14 研究樣本社區生活適應總分之描述性統計及檢定........................................58
表4-15 研究樣本濫用藥物信念之描述性統計及組內檢定........................................60
表4-16 研究樣本社區生活適應之描述性統計及組內檢定........................................61
表4-17 研究樣本濫用藥物信念前後測之組間交互作用檢定....................................62
表4-18 研究樣本社區生活適應前後測之組間交互作用檢定....................................63
表5-1 研究目的、研究假設與結果之對照表............................................................79
壹、中文部份
1.王華富、朱正聲(2007)。東亞地區毒品犯罪趨勢發展與國際合作。研考雙月刊,31(6),60-71。
2.任全鈞、李思賢(2007)。台灣地區藥癮愛滋收容人:現況、處遇與挑戰。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,8,205-236。
3.任海傳(2004)。國家安全與犯罪防制之研究-以查緝毒品犯罪為例。展望與探索,2(11),46-76。
4.行政院衛生署疾病管制局(2006)。毒品病患愛滋減害試辦計畫書。
5.行政院衛生署疾病管制局(2007)。美沙冬替代療法治療指引。
6.行政院衛生署疾病管制局(2009)。98年度愛滋防治替代治療補助計畫書。
7.行政院衛生署疾病管制局網站(2008)。http://www.cdc.gov.tw。
8.行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局網站(2008)。http://www.nbcd.gov.tw。
9.行政院法務部網站(2008)。http://www.moj.gov.tw。
10.行政院衛生署、法務部、教育部、外交部(2008)。九十七年反毒報告書。
11.行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局(2008)。新興藥物濫用防制研討會。台北。2008.9.22-23。
12.江振亨(2004)。藥物濫用受刑人生涯發展歷程之研究。教育與心理研究,27(3),527-554。
13.江振亨、林瑞欽(2000)。認知行為團體療法對濫用藥物者輔導成效之研究。犯罪學期刊,5,277-310。
14.江淑娟、張景瑞、孫效儒、陳炯旭、詹宏裕、陳為堅(2006)。男海洛因勒戒犯之再犯率的危險因子。台灣精神醫學,20(1),32-43。
15.江惠民(2007)。我國之毒品問題防制及對策。研考雙月刊,31(2),14-24。
16.呂豐足(2005)。台灣地區毒品犯罪與矯治政策之探討。中央警察大學警學叢刊,36(1),239-260。
17.李樹人(2006)。毒品病患愛滋減害計畫本益比。衛生報導,128,20-22。
18.余育斌、許華孚(2005)。藥物濫用少年與其社會網絡之互動要素分析:以明陽中學收容少年為例。犯罪學期刊,8(1),65-97。
19.吳秀貞、林珊汝(2007)。國際社會之毒品問題防制發展趨勢。研考雙月刊,31(6),1-13。
20.林明傑(2008)。藥物濫用者有無繼續施用傾向量表之量化修正研究。犯罪學期刊,11(1),45-74。
21.林盈慧(2001)。戒毒經驗之社會建構。碩士論文。嘉義:國立中正大學心理學研究所。
22.林瑞欽(2007)。藥物濫用者復發危險因子與保護因子之分析研究。行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局。
23.林瑞欽、黃秀瑄(2005)。海洛因成癮者濫用藥物信念與用藥渴求信念初探。犯罪學期刊,7(2),29-66。
24.林健陽、柯雨瑞(2000)。毒品除罪化及其對「犯罪矯治」之影響。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,1,63-112。
25.林健陽、柯雨瑞(2003)。國內外毒品戒治模式分析。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,4,75-98。
26.林健陽、黃啟賓(2002)。毒品矯治與成效策略之探討。中央警察大學學報,39,291-322。
27.林健陽、賴擁連(2002)。台灣地區毒品犯戒治處遇效能之實證研究。公共事務評論,3(10),37-68。
28.林健陽、陳玉書、廖有祿、曹文光(2001)。「毒品危害防制條例」施行後毒品犯罪者矯治成效之研究。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,2,101-124。
29.周子敬、廖福村、洪千惠(2007)。民間戒癮機構中毒品戒治相關因素之探討-以台灣晨曦會為例。中央警察大學警學叢刊,38(2),27-52。
30.周孫元(2008)。美沙冬替代療法治療海洛因成癮之成效及影響治療持續性之相關因子探討。97年度行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局科技研究計畫研究報告。
31.胡海國(1991)。精神醫學診斷手冊。台北:國立台灣大學醫學院出版委員會。
32.胡萃玲(1996)。藥癮復原者的藥癮歷程及相關要素之分析研究。碩士論文。台北:國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所。
33.唐心北(2008)。影響美沙冬替代療法留置(存)率之相關因素與介入策略之探討。97年度行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局科技研究計畫研究報告。
34.高梁58度(2007)。亡國進行曲-號角響起。觀察台灣海洛因政策的部落格,http://blog.udn.com/teddyteddy2。
35.楊士隆(2006)。病患、病犯與罪犯之毒癮戒治模式成本與效益評估。95年度行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局科技發展計畫成果報告。
36.楊士隆(2007)。建立我國藥物濫用人口之資料交換與共享資料庫平台之看法。研考雙月刊,31(6),72-83。
37.楊靖慧(2006)。台灣愛滋病流行現況與防治政策。感染控制雜誌,16(1),17-23。
38.張伯宏(2006)。提升毒品戒治成效之實證研究。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,7,285-308。
39.張宏浩、賴麗華、唐麗慧、黃旐濤、陳國東(2001)。以經濟學觀點探討非法性藥物濫用之危險因子與預防措施。臺灣公共衛生雜誌,20(6),423-432。
40.張明永(2008)。藥癮患者使用美沙冬替代療法之留存因素探討。97年度行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局科技研究計畫研究報告。
41.張智雄、柯雨瑞(2005)。毒品強制戒治處遇成效與再犯影響之研究。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,6,247-276。
42.張嫚純(2007)。藥癮文化及其對愛滋感染之影響。社區發展季刊,119,182-192。
43.陳爲堅(2007)。非法藥物之鑑驗分析及流行病學調查。研考雙月刊,31(6),25-37。
44.郭文正(2006)。安非他命及海洛因使用者之藥物使用行為與信念分析。諮商輔導學報-高師輔導所刊,15,35-68。
45.陳泉錫(2008)。建立毒品成癮者單一窗口服務-毒品防制政策之策略規劃建議。研考雙月刊,32(1),66-76。
46.韋若蘭(2002)。成年濫用藥物者自我控制、非理性信念與再濫用藥物意向之研究。碩士論文。嘉義:國立中正大學犯罪防治研究所。
47.韋海浪(2006)。海洛因成癮者接受美沙冬替代療法之短期戒癮效果。碩士論文。台北:國立陽明大學醫務管理研究所。
48.許淑雲、王俊毅、江大雄、楊欣田、廖宏恩、林玠民、高昆裕(2007)。靜脈注射藥癮者感染愛滋病毒之危險行為探討。疫情報導,23(10),549-560。
49.程冠豪(2005)。成年海洛因濫用者衝動性、用藥信念、用藥渴求與復發意向關係之研究。碩士論文。嘉義:國立中正大學犯罪防治研究所。
50.董淑鈴(2000)。成年女性藥物濫用者復發歷程及其相關因素之研究。碩士論文。高雄:國立高雄師範大學輔導研究所。
51.詹中原、張筵儀(2007)。我國縣市政府毒品危害防制中心之機制建構-全球治理體系之比較分析。研考雙月刊,31(6),84-94。
52.詹德杰(2003)。濫用藥物犯行認知基模之萃取研究。碩士論文。嘉義:國立中正大學犯罪防治研究所。
53.潘昱萱、黃秀瑄、潘虹妮、林瑞欽(2008)。海洛因濫用者復發與康復歷程研究。中央警察大學學報,45,227-258。
54.薛瑞元(2007)。發展本土戒治醫療專業處遇方案-社區追蹤治療模式與社區藥癮復健治療模式之比較。研考雙月刊,31(6),49-59。
55.謝淑芬(2008)。美沙冬替代療法的支持服務工作。社區發展季刊,264-276。
56.劉民和(2008)。我國戒毒政策之探討。財團法人基督教晨曦會、財團法人屏東縣私立基督教沐恩之家。
57.鄭幼民(2004)。我國新興毒品犯罪現況分析。明新學報,30,15-31。
58.鄭幼民(2004)。海峽兩岸毒品犯罪現況分析。探索與展望,2(6),90-106。
59.駱宜安(1990)。毒品、社會與犯罪。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,1,45-62。
60.顏正芳(2002)。應用動機引發治療和認知行為應對技巧訓練以預防藥物濫用行為之復發:建立適用於短期觀察勒戒藥癮個人之心理治療模式。91年度行政院衛生署管制藥品管理局科技研究發展計畫研究報告。


















貳、英文部份
1.Amato, L., Minozzi, S., Davoli, M., Vecchi, S., Ferri, M.M., Mayet, S.(2008).Psychosocial combined with agonist maintenance treatments versus agonist maintenance treatment alone for treatment of opioid dependence.Cochrane Detabase Syst Rev.(4):CD004147.
2.Amato, L., Minozzi, S., Davoli, M., Vecchi, S., Ferri, M.M., Mayet, S.(2008).Psychosocial and pharmacological treatments versus pharmacological treatments for opioid detoxification.Cochrane Detabase Syst Rev.(4):CD005031.
3.American Psychiatric Association(2000).Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental disorder-IV-TR,Washington,DC.
4.Beck, A.T., Wright, F.D., Newman, C.F., Liese, B.S.(1993).Cognitive Therapy of Substance Abuse.New York:The Guilford Press.
5.Bell, J., Burrell, T., Indig, D., Gilmour, S.(2006).Cycling in and out of treatment;participation in methadone treatment in NSW,1990-2002.Drug and Alcohol dependence,81,55-61.
6.Booth, R.E., Corsi, K.F., Mikulich-Gilbertson, S.K.(2004).Factors associated with methadone maintenance treatment retention among street-recruited injection drug users.Drug Alcohol Depend,74(2),177-85.
7.Brackbill, R.M., MacGowan, R.J., Rugg, D.(1997).HIV infection risks,behaviors and methadone treatment:client-reported HIV infection in a follow-up study of injecting drug users in New England.Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse,22(3),397-411.
8.Brink, W.v.d.(2006).Evidenced-Based Treatment of Opioid-Dependent Patients.Can J Psychiatry,51(10),635-646.
9.Chen, K.T., Chen, C.J., Fagot-Campagna, A., Narayan, M.(2001).Tobacoo,betal quit,alcohol,and illicit drug use among 13- to 35-year-olds in I-Lan,rural Taiwan:prevalence and risk factors.American Journal of Public Health,91,1130-4.
10.Chilcoat, H.D., Anthony, J.C.(1996).Impact of parent monitoring on initiation of drug use through late childhood.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,35,91-100.
11.Chou, L.C., Ho, C.Y., Chen, C.Y., Chen,W.J.(2006).Truancy and illicit drug use among Adolescents surveyed via street out-reach.Addictive Behaviors,31,149-154.
12.Chou, P., Liou, M.Y., Hsiao, M.L., Chang, H.J.(1999).Time trend of substance use among adolescent students in Taiwan,1991-1996.Journal of the Formosan Medical Association,98,827-31.
13.Chutuape, M.A., Silverman, K., Stitzer, M.L.(1998).Survey Assessment of Methadone Treatment Services as Reinforcers.Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse,24(1),1-16.
14.Connock, M., Juarez-Garcia, A., Jowett, S., Frew, E., Liu, Z., Taylor, R.J., Smith, A., Day, E., Lintzeris, N., Roberts, T., Burls, A., Taylor, R.S.(2007).Methadone and buprenorphine for the management of opioid dependence:a systematic review and economic evaluation.Health Technol Assess,11(9),1-171,iii-iv.review.
15.Corsi, K.F., Lehman, W.K., Booth, R.E.(2009).The effect of methadone maintenance on positive outcomes for opiate injection drug users.J Subst Abuse Treat,Jan 14.
16.Field, R.(1998).Drugs in perspective.Personalized look at substance use and abuse.Director,FACES,Family and addiction conferences and education/counseling services,Washington.1998.
17.Franken, I.H.A.(2003).Drug craving and addiction:Integrating psychological and neuro-psychopharmacological approaches.Progress in Neuro-psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry,27,563-579.
18.Fugelstad, A., Stenbacka, M., Leifman, A., Nylander, M., Thiblin, I.(2007).Methadone maintenance treatment:the balance between life-saving treatment and fatal poisonings.Addiction,102,406-412.
19.Gary, J.A.(1990).Brain systems that mediate both emotion and cognition.Cognition and Emotion,4,269-288.
20.Gerra, G., Ferri, M., Polidori, E., Santoro, G., Zaimovic, A., Sternieri.(2003).Long-term methadone maintenance effectiveness:psychosocial and pharmacological variables.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment,25,1-8.
21.Gold, M.S.(1997).The neurobiology of addictive disorder:the role of dopamine,endorphin,and serotonin.In Miller, N.S.(Ed.)The principles and practice of addications in psychiatry(pp. 57-78).Philadelphia:W.B. Saunders Company.
22.Greenwald, M.K.(2002).Heroin Craving and Drug Used in Opioid-Maintained Volunteers:Effects of Methadone Dose Variations.Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology,10(1),39-46.
23.Gruber, V.A., Delucchi, K.L., Keilstein, A., Batki, S.L.(2008).A randomized trial of 6-month methadone maintenance with standard or minimal counseling versus 21-day methadone detoxification.Drug and Alcohol Dependence,94,199-206.
24.Grüsser, S.M., Thalemann, C.N., Platz, W., Gölz, J., Partecke, G.(2006).A new approach to preventing relapse in opiate addicts:A psychometric evaluation.Biological Psychology,71,231-235.
25.Hartel, D.M., Schoenbaum, E.E.(1998).Methadone treatment protects against HIV infection:two decades of experience in the Bronx,New York City.Public Health Rep,113 Suppl 1:107-15.
26.Heimer, R., Catania, H., Newman, R.G., Zambrano, J., Brunet, A., Ortiz, A.M.(2006).Methadone maintenance in prison:Evaluation of a pilot program in Puerto Rico.Drug and Alcohol Dependence,83,122-129.
27.Heinz, A.J., Epstein, D.H., Schroeder, J.R., Singleton, E.G., Heishman, S.J., Preston, K.L.(2006).Heroin and cocaine craving and use during treatment:Measurement validation and potential relationships.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment,31,355-364.
28.Iguchi, M.Y., Bux, DA.Jr., Lidz, V., French, J.F., Baxter, R.C., Platt, J.J.(1996).Changes in HIV risk behavior among injecting drug users:the impact of 21 versus 90 days of methadone detoxification.AIDS,10(14),1719-28.
29.Kapadia, F., Vlahov, D., Donahoe, R.M.(2005).The role of substance abuse in HIV disease progression:reconciling differences from laboratory and epidemiologic investigations.Clin Infect Dis,41,1027-34.
30.King, V.L., Kidorf, M.S., Stoller, K.B., Schwartz, R., Kolodner, K., Brooner, R.K.(2006).A 12-month controlled trial of methadone medical maintenance integrated into an adaptive treatment model.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment,31,385-393.
31.Kwiatkowski, C.F., Booth, R.E.(2001).Methadone maintenance as HIV risk reduction with street-recruited injecting drug users.J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr,26(5),483-9.
32.Laudet, A.B., Magura, S., Vogel, H.S., Kinght, E.(2000).Recovery challenges among dually diagnosed individuals.Journal of substance abuse treatment,18,321-329.
33.Llorente, J.M., Gomez, C.F., Fraile, M.G., Perez, I.V.(1998).Psychological and behavioural factors associated with relapse among heroin abusers treated in therapeutic communities.Addictive Behaviors,23(2),155-169.
34.Lubman, D.I., Allen, N.B., Peters, L.A., Deakin, J.F.(2007).Electrophysiological evidence of the motivational salience of drug cues in opiate addiction.Psychol Med,37(8),1203-9.
35.Lubman, D.I., Allen, N.B., Peters, L.A., Deakin, J.F.(2008).Electrophysiological evidence that drug cues have greater salience than other affective stimuli in opiate addiction.J Psychopharmacol,22(8),836-42.
36.Lubman, D.I., Yücel, M., Kettle, J.W., Scaffidi, A., Mackenzie, T., Simmons, J.G., Allen, N.B.(2009).Responsiveness to drug cues and natural rewards in opiate addiction:associations with later heroin use.Arch Gen Psychiatry.66(2).205-13.
37.Marlatt, G.A.(1985).Cognitive factors in the relapse process.In Marlatt, G.A., Gordon, J.R.(Eds)Repalse Prevention:Maintenance Strategies in the Treatment of Addictive Behaviors(pp.128-200).New York:The Guildford Press.
38.McMurphy, S., Shea, J., Switzer, J., Turner, B.J.,(2006).Clinic-based Treatment for Opioid Dependence:A Qualitative Inquiry.Am J Health Behav,30(5),544-554.
39.Merrill, J.O., Jackson, T.R., Schulman, B.A., Saxon, A.J., Awan, A., Kapitan, S., Carney, M., Brumback, L.C., Donovan, D.(2005).Methadone Medical Maintenance in Primary Care:An Implementation Evaluation.J Gen Intern Med,20,344-349.
40.Metrebian, N., Shanahan, W., Wells, B., Stimson, G.V.(1998).Feasibility of prescribing injectable heroin and methadone to opiate-dependent drug users:associated health gains and harm reductions.Med J Aust.168(12),596-600.
41.Nation Office on Drug and Crime.(2007).World Drug Report.
42.Nobel, A., Best, D., Man, L.H., Gossop, M., Strang, J.(2002).Self-detoxifaction attempts among methadone maintenance patients-What methods and what success? Addictive Behaviors,27,575-584.
43.Papageorgiou, C., Rabavilas, A., Liappas, I., Stefanis, C.(2003).Do obsessive-compulsive patients and abstinent heroin addicts share a common psychophysiological mechanism?Neuropshchobiology,47(1),1-11.
44.Pirastu, R., Fais, R., Messina, M., Bini, V., Spiga, S., Falconieri, D., Diana, M.(2006).Impairment decision-making in opiate-dependent subjects:Effect of pharmacological therapies.Drug and Alcohol Dependence,83,163-168.
45.Powell, J., Dawe, B.S., Richard, D., Gossop, M., Marks, I., Strang, J., Gray, J.(1993).Can opiate addicts tell as about their relapse risk?Subjective predictors of clinical prognosis.Addictive Behaviors,18,473-490.
46.Rivers, P.A., Dobalian, A., Oyana, T.J., Bae, S.(2006).Socioeconomic Determinants of Planned Methadone Treatment.Am J Health Behav.,30(5),451-459.
47.Rolls, E.T.(1999).The Brain and Emotion.New York:Oxford University Press.
48.Schütz, C.G., Rapiti, E., Vlahov, D., Anthony, J.C.(1994).Suspected determinants of enrollment into detoxification and methadone maintenance treatment among injecting drug users.Drug Alcohol Depend.36(2),129-38.
49.Schwartz, R.P., Jaffe, J.H., Highfield, D.A., Callaman, J.M., O’Grady, K.E.(2007).A Randomized controlled trial of interim methadone maintenance:10-Month follow-up.Drug and Alcohol Dependence,86,30-36.
50.Sees, K.L., Delucchi, K.L., Masson, C., Rosen, A., Clark, H.W., Robillard, H., Banys, P., Hall, S.M.(2008).Methadone maintenance vs 180-day psychosocially enriched detoxification for treatment of opioid dependence:a randomized controlled trial.JAMA,283(10),1303-10.
51.Serpelloni, G., Carrieri, M.P., Rezza, G., Morganti, S., Gomma, M., Brinkin, N.(1994).Methadone treatment as a determinant of HIV risk reduction among injecting drug users:a nested case-control study.AIDS Care,6(2),215-20.
52.Shi, J., Zhao, L.Y., Epstein, D.H., Zhang, X.L., Lu, L.(2007).Lone-term methadone maintenance reduces protracted symptoms of heroin abstinence and cue-induced craving in Chinese heroin abusers.Pharmacology,Biochemistry and Behavior,87(1),141-5.
53.Simoens, S., Ludbrook, A., Metheson, C., Bond, C.(2006).Pharmaco-economics of community maintenance for opiate dependence:A review of evidence and methodology.Drug and Alcohol Dependence,84,28-39.
54.Sorensen, J.L., London, J., Heitzmann, C., Gibson, D.R., Morales, E.S., Dumontet, R., Acree, M.(1994).Psychoeducational group approach:HIV risk reduction in drug users.AIDS Educ Prev,6(2),95-112.
55.Stark, K., Müller, R., Bienzle, U., Guggenmoos-Holzmann, I.(1996).Methadone maintenance treatment and HIV risk-taking behaviour among injecting drug users in Berlin.J Epidemiol Community Health,50(5),534-7.
56.Stein, M.D., Mulvey, K.P., Plough, A., Samet, J.H.(1998).The functioning and well being of persons who seek treatment for drug and alcohol use.Journal of substance abuse,10(1),75-84.
57.Thiede, H., Hagan, H., Murrill,C.S.(2000).Methadone treatment and HIV and hepatitis B and C risk reduction among injectors in the Seattle area.J Urban Health,77(3),331-45.
58.United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.(2007).World Drug Report.
59.Vlahov, D., O’Driscoll, P., Mehta, S.H., Ompad, D.C., Gern, R., Galai, N., Kirk, G.D.(2007).Risk factors for methadone outside treatment programs:implications for HIV treatment among injection drug users.Addiction,102(5),771-7.
60.Walter, M., Wiesbeck, G.A., Bloch, N., Aeschbach, S., Olbtich, H.M., Seifritz, E., Dürsteler-MacFarland, K.M.(2008).Psychobiological responses to drug cues before and after methadone intake in heroin-dependent patients:A pilot study.European Neuropsychopharmacology,18,390-393.
61.Weatherburn, D., Lind, B.(2001).Street-level drug law enforcement and entry into methadone maintenance treatment.Addiction,96,577-587.
62.Witkiewitz, K., Marlatt, G.A.(2005).Relapse prevention for alcohol and drug problems.Marlatt, G.A.and Donovan, D.M.(edt).Relapse Prevention:Maintenance Strategies in the Treatment of Addictive Behaviors.Second Edition,New York:The Guidford Press.
63.Zijlstra, F., Veltman, D.J., Booij, J., van den Brink, W., Franken, I.H.(2009).Neurobiological substrates of cue-elicited craving and anhedonia in recently abstinent opioid-dependent males.Drug Alcohol Depend.99(1-3),183-92.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 1. 王華富、朱正聲(2007)。東亞地區毒品犯罪趨勢發展與國際合作。研考雙月刊,31(6),60-71。
2. 1. 王華富、朱正聲(2007)。東亞地區毒品犯罪趨勢發展與國際合作。研考雙月刊,31(6),60-71。
3. 2. 任全鈞、李思賢(2007)。台灣地區藥癮愛滋收容人:現況、處遇與挑戰。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,8,205-236。
4. 2. 任全鈞、李思賢(2007)。台灣地區藥癮愛滋收容人:現況、處遇與挑戰。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報,8,205-236。
5. 3. 任海傳(2004)。國家安全與犯罪防制之研究-以查緝毒品犯罪為例。展望與探索,2(11),46-76。
6. 3. 任海傳(2004)。國家安全與犯罪防制之研究-以查緝毒品犯罪為例。展望與探索,2(11),46-76。
7. 12. 江振亨(2004)。藥物濫用受刑人生涯發展歷程之研究。教育與心理研究,27(3),527-554。
8. 12. 江振亨(2004)。藥物濫用受刑人生涯發展歷程之研究。教育與心理研究,27(3),527-554。
9. 13. 江振亨、林瑞欽(2000)。認知行為團體療法對濫用藥物者輔導成效之研究。犯罪學期刊,5,277-310。
10. 13. 江振亨、林瑞欽(2000)。認知行為團體療法對濫用藥物者輔導成效之研究。犯罪學期刊,5,277-310。
11. 15. 江惠民(2007)。我國之毒品問題防制及對策。研考雙月刊,31(2),14-24。
12. 15. 江惠民(2007)。我國之毒品問題防制及對策。研考雙月刊,31(2),14-24。
13. 16. 呂豐足(2005)。台灣地區毒品犯罪與矯治政策之探討。中央警察大學警學叢刊,36(1),239-260。
14. 16. 呂豐足(2005)。台灣地區毒品犯罪與矯治政策之探討。中央警察大學警學叢刊,36(1),239-260。
15. 17. 李樹人(2006)。毒品病患愛滋減害計畫本益比。衛生報導,128,20-22。