nati<strong>on</strong>al quality standards for medical treatment has started later than in o<strong>the</strong>rcountries. The Federal Act <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong> Quality of Health-care Services (GQG; BGBl I2004/179) effective as of 1 January 2005 provides <strong>the</strong> legal framework for <strong>the</strong>advancement of systematic quality research. The Act provides that quality standardsfor <strong>the</strong> delivery of health-care services be developed, in cooperati<strong>on</strong> with <strong>the</strong> relevantstakeholders, in particular <strong>the</strong> health-care professi<strong>on</strong>als involved as well as patients.Then <strong>the</strong> Federal Minister for Health may ei<strong>the</strong>r issue Federal Quality Guidelines (BQLL)which recommend <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> resulting quality standards or adopt a binding Decreestipulating <strong>the</strong>ir use as Federal Quality Directives (BQRL). The standards must permitnati<strong>on</strong>wide implementati<strong>on</strong> across sectors and professi<strong>on</strong>s, and must be in line with<strong>the</strong> general principles of health promoti<strong>on</strong> and transparency as well as <strong>the</strong> state of <strong>the</strong>art of medicine and experience with regard to effectiveness and efficiency. In order toperform this task, in 2007 BIQG was established, an institute specialising in healthcarequality, as a business unit of GÖG, a nati<strong>on</strong>al research and planning institute forhealth care in Austria.Since September 2007, BIQG has focused <strong>on</strong> providing a basis for producing qualitystandards. Internati<strong>on</strong>al experience and recommendati<strong>on</strong>s were used as input forpreparing a metaguideline (GÖG under preparati<strong>on</strong>), which defines <strong>the</strong> process ofdrawing up guidelines. According to <strong>the</strong> Metaguideline for Methods of Developing andImplementing Quality Guidelines, organisati<strong>on</strong>s may propose <strong>the</strong>mes for FederalQuality Guidelines or Directives. These <strong>the</strong>mes are weighted and ranked in a definedprioritisati<strong>on</strong> process and eventually guidelines are drawn up <strong>on</strong> behalf of <strong>the</strong> FederalMinistry of Health or <strong>the</strong> Federal Health Agency (BGA). In additi<strong>on</strong>, it is possible to fileapplicati<strong>on</strong>s for recogniti<strong>on</strong> of papers as Federal Quality Directives (e.g., if a medicalsociety or associati<strong>on</strong> has already produced a quality standard): in this case, it isverified in an accreditati<strong>on</strong> procedure whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> formal criteria for Federal QualityDirectives are met. At present, six <strong>the</strong>mes are being reviewed. In order to draw up aFederal Quality Guideline or Directive <strong>on</strong> addicti<strong>on</strong> treatment, it would be necessary topropose this <strong>the</strong>me for fur<strong>the</strong>r examinati<strong>on</strong>.Both BQLL and BQRL quality standards specify a certain path of acti<strong>on</strong> and decisi<strong>on</strong>makingwith regard to treatment and care services and recommend proven, effectiveinstruments and procedures, departure from which is admissible or may even berequired in well-founded cases. Any deviati<strong>on</strong>s should adequately be documented,however. Ei<strong>the</strong>r type of standard (BQLL and BQRL) is produced by multidisciplinaryteams in a systematic procedure, with decisi<strong>on</strong>s based <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sensus. Different to o<strong>the</strong>rmember states of <strong>the</strong> EU, in Austria <strong>the</strong> focus is not solely placed <strong>on</strong> medicaltreatment, but o<strong>the</strong>r services are also included. Any existing medical, care or treatmentstandards are taken into c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> as source standards if <strong>the</strong>ir quality meets <strong>the</strong>defined criteria.100 © GÖG/ÖBIG, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Report</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Drug</strong> Situati<strong>on</strong> <strong>2010</strong>
Apart from <strong>the</strong> process of guideline producti<strong>on</strong>, which still is in its early stages, alsoo<strong>the</strong>r acti<strong>on</strong>s have been undertaken in Austria to enhance or ensure <strong>the</strong> quality ofmedical treatment. In <strong>the</strong> specific case of substituti<strong>on</strong> treatment for patients addictedto opioids, a regulati<strong>on</strong> has existed for many years already, adopted for reas<strong>on</strong>s ofquality assurance and as a resp<strong>on</strong>se to safety and health policy c<strong>on</strong>cerns. The firstordinance (an internal decree with instructi<strong>on</strong>s by <strong>the</strong> Minister for Health to <strong>the</strong> healthauthorities and public health officers resp<strong>on</strong>sible for <strong>the</strong> supervisi<strong>on</strong> of oral opioidsubstituti<strong>on</strong> treatment) was issued in 1987. In accordance with <strong>the</strong> principle of lastresort provided under <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>n Narcotic <strong>Drug</strong>s Act, it was not permitted to prescribeoral substituti<strong>on</strong> medicati<strong>on</strong>s for <strong>the</strong> sole reas<strong>on</strong> of severe, treatment-resistantaddicti<strong>on</strong> to opiates: it had to be established in every individual case that any o<strong>the</strong>rform of treatment was extremely unlikely to bring about <strong>the</strong> desired results. Only after<strong>the</strong> adopti<strong>on</strong> in 1998 of <strong>the</strong> Narcotic Substances Act was substituti<strong>on</strong> treatmentexplicitly recognised by law as <strong>on</strong>e of several possible forms of treatment. In 2007 <strong>the</strong>aforementi<strong>on</strong>ed ordinance was replaced by a decree which also lays down a bindingframework for attending doctors (GÖG/ÖBIG 2007b as well as Chapters 1.1 and 5.1). Afur<strong>the</strong>r decree was issued according to which <strong>the</strong> delivery of substituti<strong>on</strong> treatmentservices requires <strong>the</strong> attending doctors’ completi<strong>on</strong> of fur<strong>the</strong>r training in OST(GÖG/ÖBIG 2006 as well as Chapter 1.1 and 5.1).In Austria, c<strong>on</strong>sensus papers drawn up in cooperati<strong>on</strong> with, and initiated by, experts orprofessi<strong>on</strong>al associati<strong>on</strong>s have frequently been drawn up in order to promote uniformstandards of treatment. These c<strong>on</strong>sensus papers are typically based <strong>on</strong> practicalexperience, while scientific evidence tends to be taken into account <strong>on</strong>ly indirectly andnot in a systematic way. If scientific publicati<strong>on</strong>s (e.g. Fischer/Kayer 2006, Busch et al.2007) or guidelines (e.g., from Germany) are available when c<strong>on</strong>sensus papers areprepared, <strong>the</strong>y will be c<strong>on</strong>sidered for <strong>the</strong> paper, however. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, Austrianexperts in turn have also been asked to c<strong>on</strong>tribute to guidelines drawn up in o<strong>the</strong>rcountries or by internati<strong>on</strong>al organisati<strong>on</strong>s (see Chapter 7.2). Many experts argue thatit is reas<strong>on</strong>able to draw <strong>on</strong> practical experience as an essential source of knowhow forpreparing c<strong>on</strong>sensus papers, as years of daily work indeed provide an invaluable basisof evidence which, in a complex process of careful decisi<strong>on</strong>-making, also take intoaccount <strong>the</strong> individual situati<strong>on</strong> of addicted patients (ÖGABS 2009). According to <strong>the</strong>seexperts, <strong>the</strong> drawback of relying <strong>on</strong> a scientific evidence base is that it primarilyc<strong>on</strong>siders <strong>the</strong> results of clinical trials published in high ranking journals, and <strong>the</strong>c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s under which such studies are carried out often differ from actual practice.Moreover, in this c<strong>on</strong>text <strong>on</strong>e has to bear in mind that <strong>the</strong> results or recommendati<strong>on</strong>sfrom o<strong>the</strong>r countries are influenced by <strong>the</strong> drug policies and also possible restricti<strong>on</strong>sin those countries and cauti<strong>on</strong> has to be exercised when translating such findings too<strong>the</strong>r countries. This particularly applies to substituti<strong>on</strong> treatment delivered to peopleaddicted to opioids, because in Austria a wider range of medicati<strong>on</strong>s may beprescribed than in o<strong>the</strong>r countries.Chapter 11 / History, Methods and Implementati<strong>on</strong> of Nati<strong>on</strong>al Treatment Guidelines 101
- Page 1:
Report on the Drug
- Page 4 and 5:
ISBN-13 978-3-85159-153-8Owner, edi
- Page 6 and 7:
PreventionThe trend towards drawing
- Page 8 and 9:
hardly known. This makes it impossi
- Page 10 and 11:
6 Health Correlates and Consequence
- Page 12 and 13:
Tables and FiguresTablesTable 6.1Ta
- Page 14 and 15:
Table A22Table A23Table A24Table A2
- Page 16 and 17:
Figure 9.1Figure 9.2Figure 9.3Figur
- Page 19:
Part ANew Developmentsand Trends
- Page 22 and 23:
The amendment to the Narcotic Drugs
- Page 24 and 25:
deaths (see GÖG/ÖBIG 2009b) conti
- Page 26 and 27:
In the reporting period, no new dev
- Page 28 and 29:
2.1 Drug use in the general populat
- Page 30 and 31:
The quitting rate 3 is considerably
- Page 32 and 33:
Figure 2.2Experience of cannabis us
- Page 34 and 35:
described on the individual website
- Page 36 and 37:
ehaviour is elevated for children i
- Page 38 and 39:
theme of the Gesunde Gemeinden (hea
- Page 40 and 41:
party scenes are relevant settings.
- Page 42 and 43:
support if needed. The project is i
- Page 44 and 45:
approximations and have to be inter
- Page 46 and 47:
Figure 4.22-sample CRC estimates wi
- Page 48 and 49:
5 Drug-related Treatment: Treatment
- Page 50 and 51:
2010, now 50 doctors are entitled t
- Page 52 and 53:
patients for inpatient treatment al
- Page 54 and 55:
Map 5.2Specialised providers of out
- Page 56 and 57:
cooperation structures linking the
- Page 58 and 59:
events are organised, and on the ot
- Page 60 and 61:
5.3 Characteristics of treated clie
- Page 62 and 63:
play the most important role in the
- Page 64 and 65:
existing treatment system who do no
- Page 66 and 67: 5.4 Trends of clients in treatmentA
- Page 68 and 69: Figure 5.7First substitution treatm
- Page 70 and 71: 6 Health Correlates and Consequence
- Page 72 and 73: Table 6.1Data on hepatitis B, hepat
- Page 74 and 75: ange from affective disorders (e.g.
- Page 76 and 77: Figure 6.1Share of directly drug-re
- Page 78 and 79: In the EMCDDA working group on coho
- Page 80 and 81: 7 Responses to Health Correlates an
- Page 82 and 83: 7.2 Prevention and treatment of dru
- Page 84 and 85: distribution of condoms) is provide
- Page 86 and 87: information on the risks of additio
- Page 88 and 89: While smaller shares of women state
- Page 90 and 91: Map 8.1Specialised providers of inp
- Page 92 and 93: The Lighthouse housing project of M
- Page 94 and 95: empowerment that had been aimed at,
- Page 96 and 97: handling of drugs: Section 27 of th
- Page 98 and 99: also shows regarding prison sentenc
- Page 100 and 101: Stadtpark, and Westbahnhof station.
- Page 102 and 103: mation on final convictions because
- Page 104 and 105: practitioners and psychiatrists). I
- Page 106 and 107: 10 Drug MarketsThe substance most f
- Page 108 and 109: head shop in Graz (Styria) in Augus
- Page 110 and 111: (from 2005 to 2008, the correspondi
- Page 113: Part BSelected Issues
- Page 118 and 119: Also, both at federal and provincia
- Page 120 and 121: Table 11.1, continuedTitle and year
- Page 122 and 123: Plans for new guidelines and standa
- Page 124 and 125: 12 Cost of Drug-related TreatmentTh
- Page 126 and 127: centres so far (Schweizer Haus Hade
- Page 128 and 129: greatest percentage of the respecti
- Page 130 and 131: (e.g., days of hospital stay becaus
- Page 133 and 134: BibliographyAPA 2010. AIDS 2010. Wi
- Page 135 and 136: EMCDDA 2000. Treatment demand indic
- Page 137 and 138: Haas, S. (2005). Problembewusste Fr
- Page 139 and 140: Pont, J.; Wool, R. (2006). Ein Leit
- Page 141 and 142: VIVID 2010. Jahresbericht 2009. VIV
- Page 143 and 144: Personal Communications(alphabetica
- Page 145 and 146: Caritas Marienambulanz. Drug relate
- Page 147 and 148: Low threshold service Ganslwirt(Ver
- Page 149 and 150: Viennese pilot project “Pregnancy
- Page 151 and 152: Lower Austria: Fachstelle für Such
- Page 153 and 154: Caritas Innsbruckhttp://www.caritas
- Page 155 and 156: Otto-Wagner-Spital — Drogeninstit
- Page 157: AnnexA. Tables, MapB. List of Abbre
- Page 161 and 162: Table A1Overview of selected genera
- Page 163 and 164: Table A2, continuedStudy(author(s),
- Page 165 and 166: Table A5Number of directly drug-rel
- Page 167 and 168:
Table A7Distribution of directly dr
- Page 169 and 170:
Table A11Distribution of reports of
- Page 171 and 172:
Table A15Final convictions under th
- Page 173 and 174:
Table A18Seizures of narcotic drugs
- Page 175 and 176:
Table A22Persons starting drug trea
- Page 177 and 178:
Table A24Persons starting drug trea
- Page 179 and 180:
Table A26Persons starting drug trea
- Page 181 and 182:
Table A29Current health problems of
- Page 183 and 184:
The programme plus is implemented i
- Page 185 and 186:
Proven regional interventions run f
- Page 187 and 188:
Table A34Austrian population statis
- Page 189:
Annex BList of Abbreviations
- Page 192 and 193:
HCVHCV-AbHCV-RNAHIVICD-10IFESISDISP
- Page 195 and 196:
List of Standard Tables of 2010 and
- Page 197:
© Gesundheit Österreich GmbHStube