Implications of Managed Care for Methadone Treatment: Findings From Five Case Studies in New York State

References 

1. Ball JC, Ross A. The effectiveness of methadone maintenance treatment. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1991;
2. Bradley CJ, French MT, Rachal JV. Financing and cost of standard and enhanced methadone treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 1994;2:433–442
3. Condelli WS, Dunteman GH. Exposure to methadone programs and heroin use. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 1993;19(1):65–78
4. Deren S, Randell J. The vocational rehabilitation of substance abusers. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling. 1990;21(2):4–6
5. Dunlap LJ, French MT. A comparison of two methods for estimating the costs of drug abuse treatment. Journal of Maintenance in the Addictions. 1998;1:29–44
6. Finnigan, M. (1996). Societal outcomes and cost savings of drug and alcohol treatment in the State of Oregon. Report prepared for the Office of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs, Oregon Department of Human Resources, and Governor's Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs, Salem, Oregon.
7. French MT, Bradley CJ, Calingaert B, Dennis ML, Karuntzos GT. Cost analysis of training and employment services in methadone treatment. Evaluation and Program Planning. 1994;17:107–120
   • CrossRef
8. French MT, Zarkin GA. Effects of drug abuse treatment on legal and illegal earnings. Contemporary Policy Issues. 1992;10:98–110
9. Gerstein, D.R., Johnson, R.A., Harwood, H.J., Fountain, D., Suter, N., & Malloy, K. (1994). Evaluating recovery services: The California Drug and Alcohol Treatment Assessment (CALDATA) general report (Chapter 4, pp. 61–90). Report submitted to the State of California Department of Alcohol and Drug Problems.
10. Harwood, H.J., Hubbard, R.L., Collins, J.J., & Rachal, J.V. (1988). The costs of crime and the benefits of drug abuse treatment: A cost-benefit analysis using TOPS data. In C.G. Leukefeld & F.M. Feins (Eds.), Compulsory treatment of drug abuse: Research and clinical practice, NIDA Research Monograph No. 86. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
11. Hubbard RL, Marsden ME, Rachal JV, Harwood HJ, Cavanaugh ER, Ginzburg HM. Drug abuse treatment (A national study of effectiveness). Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press; 1989;
12. New York State Department of Health. (1994). Health Care Financing Agency 1115. Waiver application submitted by New York State.
13. New York State Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services. (1996). Requirements for the operation of methadone substance abuse programs. Mental Hygiene Law, Part 1040, pp. 87–100.
14. Selwyn PA, Budner NS, Wasserman WC, Arno PS. Utilization of on-site primary care services by HIV-seropositive and seronegative drug users in a methadone maintenance program. Public Health Reports. 1993;108:492–500
15. Simpson DD, Sells SB. Effectiveness of treatment for drug abuse (An overview of the DARP research program). Advances in Alcohol and Substance Abuse. 1982;2:7–29
16. United Hospital Fund . The impact of welfare reform. Currents: Medicaid and Managed Care. 1996;1(3):1,4
17. Zarkin GA, Dunlap LJ. Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program–Short Form (DATCAP–SF). Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute; 1996;
18. Zarkin, G.A., Dunlap, L.J., French, M.T., & Condelli, W.S. (1997). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of long-term methadone treatment: Findings from key studies. Final report prepared for KOBA Associates, Inc. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute.