The costs and consequences of three policy options for reducing heroin dependency

References

• Rydell C P, Everingham S S. Controlling cocaine: supply versus demand programs. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 1994
   Google Scholar
• Crane B D, Rivolo A R, Comfort G C. An empirical examination of counterdrug interdiction program effectiveness. Institute for Defense Analysis, Alexandria, VA 1997
   Google Scholar
• Manski C F, Pepper J V, Petrie C V. Assessment of two cost-effectiveness studies on cocaine control policy. National Academy Press, Washington, DC 1999
   Google Scholar
• Caulkins J P, Chiesa J, Everingham S S. Response to the National Research Council's Assessment of RAND's Controlling Cocaine Study, MR-1265. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 2000
   Google Scholar
• Tragler G, Caulkins J P, Feichtinger G. Optimal dynamic allocation of treatment and enforcement in illicit drug control. Op Res 2001; 49: 352–362
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulte C, Mouzos J, Makkai T. Drug use monitoring in Australia: 2004 annual report on drug use among police detainees. Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra 2005, AIC Research and Public Policy Series no. 65
   Google Scholar
• McCollister K E, French M T, Inciardi J A, Butzin C A, Martin S S, Hooper R M. Post-release substance abuse treatment for criminal offenders: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Quant Crim 2003; 19: 389–407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawken A. The economics of alternative sentencing: assessing the substance abuse and crime prevention act. RAND, Santa Monica, CA, 2006, Doctoral dissertation. RAND Graduate School
   Google Scholar
• Shanahan M, Lancsar E, Haas M, Lind B, Weatherburn D, Chen S. Cost-effectiveness analysis of the New South Wales adult drug court program. Eval Rev 2004; 28: 3–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren E, Viney R, Shearer J, Shanahan M, Wodak A, Dolan K. Value for money in drug treatment: economic evaluation of prison methadone. Drug Alcohol Depend 2006, [Epub ahead of print: available online 17 Feb 2006]
   Google Scholar
• Mauskopf J A, Paul J E, Grant D M, Stergachis A. The role of cost – consequence analysis in healthcare decision-making. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 277–288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McIntosh E, Donaldson C, Ryan M. Recent advances in the methods of cost – benefit analysis in healthcare: matching the art to the science. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15: 357–367
   Google Scholar
• Sindelar J L, Jofre-Bonet M, French M T, McLellan A T. Cost-effectiveness analysis of addiction treatment: paradoxes of multiple outcomes. Drug Alcohol Depend 2004; 73: 41–50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross J, Teesson M, Darke S. Twelve month outcomes of treatment for heroin dependence: findings form the Australian Treatment Outcome Study (ATOS). National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2003
   Google Scholar
• Holt T, Ritter A, Pahoki S, O'Keeffe B, Thomson N, Swan A. Australian Treatment Outcome Study: heroin, 12-month outcomes report: Victoria. Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre, Melbourne 2004
   Google Scholar
• Shanahan M, Havard A, Mills K, et al. Health services use and treatment costs over 12 months among heroin users: findings from the Australian Treatment Outcome Study (ATOS). National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2003
   Google Scholar
• Drummond M F, O'Brien B J, Stoddart G L, Torrance G W. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1997
   Google Scholar
• Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP). Report on government services 2003. Productivity Commission, Canberra 2004
   Google Scholar
• KPMG Consulting. Review of the Victorian prisons drug strategy. Victorian Department of Justice, Melbourne 1999
   Google Scholar
• Black E, Dolan K, Wodak A. Supply, demand and harm reduction strategies in Australian prisons: implementation, cost and evaluation. ANCD, Canberra 2004, ANCD Research Paper no. 9
   Google Scholar
• Inciardi J, Martin S, Butzin C, Hooper R, Harrison L. An effective model of prison-based treatment for drug-involved offenders. J Drug Issues 1997; 27: 261–278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin S S, Butzin C A, Inciardi J A. Assessment of a multistage therapeutic community for drug-involved offenders. J Psychoact Drugs 1995; 27: 109–116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson D D, Joe G W. A longitudinal evaluation of treatment engagement and recovery stages. J Subst Abuse Treat 2004; 27: 89–97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D, Rolfe A. Patterns of improvement after methadone treatment: 1 year follow-up results from the National Treatment Outcome Research Study. Drug Alcohol Depend 2000; 60: 275–286
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D, Treacy S. Outcomes after methadone maintenance and methadone reduction treatments: two year follow-up results from the National Treatment Outcome Research Study. Drug Alcohol Depend 2001; 62: 255–264
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gossop M, Marsden J, Stewart D, Kidd T. The National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS): 4 – 5-year follow-up results. Addiction 2003; 98: 291–303
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darke S, Kaye S, Ross J. Transitions between the injection of heroin and amphetamines. Addiction 1999; 94: 1795–1803
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lind B, Weatherburn D, Chen S. New South Wales Drug Court evaluation: cost-effectiveness. NSW Bureau of Statistics and Research, Sydney 2002
   Google Scholar
• Degenhardt L, Conroy E, Gilmour S, Collins L. The effect of a reduction in heroin supply in Australia upon drug distribution and acquisitive crime. BMJ 2005; 45: 2–24
   Google Scholar
• Dietze P, Fitzgerald J. Interpreting changes in heroin supply in Melbourne: droughts, gluts or cycles?. Drug Alcohol Rev 2002; 21: 295–303
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weatherburn D, Jones C, Freeman K, Makkai T. Supply control and harm reduction: lessons from the Australian heroin ‘drought’. Addiction 2003; 98: 83–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NEPOD Research Group. National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD): report of results and recommendations. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2001
   Google Scholar
• Clark N, Gospodarevskaya E, Harris A, Ritter A. Estimating the cost of heroin use in Victoria, final report. Premier's Drug Prevention Council, Melbourne 2003
   Google Scholar