Methamphetamine is one of the most frequently used drugs worldwide. In Germany, methamphetamine use has greatly increased in recent years, presenting the rehabilitative treatment system with new challenges. In this study, we identified deficits and possibilities for optimization in the field of medical rehabilitation. A total of 39 interviews and two focus groups with experts along the treatment course of methamphetamine users were conducted. Our analyses indicate that methamphetamine users are more difficult to treat compared with patients who consume other drugs. They are more likely to be associated with problematic characteristics and behaviors than other rehabilitants. Several health care deficits were revealed: too short rehabilitation treatment, no specific or differentiated therapy concepts, lack of capacity for education and vocational training, lack of outpatient options, and insufficient facilities for parents and children. Findings indicate that inadequate rehabilitation is being provided for methamphetamine users in Germany, indicating a need to adapt treatment for this group.
BarbourR. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog?British Medical Journal, 322, 1115–1117. doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115
2.
BognerA.LittigB.MenzW. (Eds.). (2009). Experteninterviews: Theorie, Methoden, Anwendungsfelder [Expert interviews: Theory, methods, fields of application] (3. grundlegend überarbeitete Aufl.). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verl. für Sozialwiss.
3.
BrackinsT.BrahmN. C.KissackJ. C. (2011). Treatments for methamphetamine abuse: A literature review for the clinician. Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 24, 541–550. doi:10.1177/0897190011426557
4.
BrandH.SteppanM.KünzelJ.BraunB. (2014). Suchthilfe in Deutschland 2013: Jahresbericht der Deutschen Suchthilfestatistik (DSHS) [Addiction care in Germany 2013: Annual report of the German Addiction care statistics]. München: IFT Institut für Therapieforschung
5.
BrechtM.-L.GreenwellL.MayrhauserC.von AnglinM. D. (2006). Two-year outcomes of treatment for methamphetamine use. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 38(Suppl. 3), 415–426. doi:10.1080/02791072.2006.10400605
6.
BrechtM.-L.O’BrienA.MayrhauserC.von AnglinM. D. (2004). Methamphetamine use behaviors and gender differences. Addictive Behaviors, 29, 89–106. doi:10.1016/S0306-4603(03)00082-0
7.
BuxtonJ. A.DoveN. A. (2008). The burden and management of crystal meth use. Canadian Medical Association Journal [Journal de l’association Medicale Canadienne], 178, 1537–1539. doi:10.1503/cmaj.071234
8.
ChomchaiC.ChomchaiS. (2015). Global patterns of methamphetamine use. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 28, 269–274. doi:10.1097/YCO.0000000000000168
9.
CourtneyK. E.RayL. A. (2014). Methamphetamine: An update on epidemiology, pharmacology, clinical phenomenology, and treatment literature. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 143, 11–21. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.08.003
10.
CruickshankC. C.DyerK. R. (2009). A review of the clinical pharmacology of methamphetamine. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 104, 1085–1099. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02564.x
11.
CummingC.TroeungL.YoungJ. T.KeltyE.PreenD. B. (2016). Barriers to accessing methamphetamine treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 168, 263–273. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.10.001
12.
DarkeS.KayeS.McKetinR.DuflouJ. (2008). Major physical and psychological harms of methamphetamine use. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27, 253–262. doi:10.1080/09595230801923702
13.
DarkeS.TorokM.KayeS.RossJ.McKetinR. (2010). Comparative rates of violent crime among regular methamphetamine and opioid users: Offending and victimization. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 105, 916–919. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02872.x
14.
Deutsche Rentenversicherung: Bund(2015). Entwöhnungsbehandlung–Ein Weg aus der Sucht [Detoxification treatment: A way out of addiction]. Berlin : Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund.
15.
Die Drogenbeauftragte der Bundesregierung. (2015). Drogen- und Suchtbericht [Drug and addiction report]. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Gesundheit.
16.
Die Drogenbeauftragte der Bundesregierung. (2016). Drogen- und Suchtbericht [Drug and addiction report]. Berlin : Bundesministerium für Gesundheit.
17.
Die Drogenbeauftragte der Bundesregierung. (2017). Drogen- und Suchtbericht [Drug and addiction report]. Berlin : Bundesministerium für Gesundheit.
18.
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. (2010). Problem amphetamine and methamphetamine use in Europe. Luxembourg : Amt für Veröffentlichungen der Europäischen Union.
19.
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. (2015). European drug report 2015: Trends and developments. Luxembourg: Amt für Veröffentlichungen der Europäischen Union.
20.
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (2016). European drug report 2016: Trends and developments. Luxembourg: Amt für Veröffentlichungen der Europäischen Union g.
21.
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. (2017). European drug report 2017: Trends and developments. Luxembourg: Amt für Veröffentlichungen der Europäischen Union.
22.
FastD.KerrT.WoodE.SmallW. (2014). The multiple truths about crystal meth among young people entrenched in an urban drug scene: A longitudinal ethnographic investigation. Social Science & Medicine, 110, 41–48. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.029
GrantK. M.LeVanT. D.WellsS. M.LiM.StoltenbergS. F.GendelmanE.. . . BevinsR. A. (2012). Methamphetamine-associated psychosis. Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology: The Official Journal of the Society on Neuroimmune Pharmacology, 7, 113–139. doi:10.1007/s11481-011-9288-1
25.
Härtel-PetriR. (2016). Crystal-Meth als Herausforderung für das Suchthilfesystem—Klinische Empfehlungen [Crystal meth as a challenge for the addiction aid system: Clinical recommendations]. Suchttherapie, 17(1), 10–16. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1559657
26.
HelfferichC. (2011). Die Qualität qualitativer Daten: Manual für die Durchführung qualitativer Interviews [Quality of qualitative data: Manual for conducting qualitative interviews] (4th ed.). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
27.
HenninkM. M.KaiserB. N.MarconiV. C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough?Qualitative Health Research, 27, 591–608. doi:10.1177/1049732316665344
28.
HoffmannL.SchumannN.FankhaenelT.ThielC.KlementA.RichterM. (2016). Methamphetamine use in Central Germany: Protocol for a qualitative study exploring requirements and challenges in healthcare from the professionals’ perspective. BMJ Open, 6(6), Article e011445. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011445
29.
HoffmannL.SchumannN.RichterM. (2018). Methamphetaminkonsum in Mitteldeutschland: Eine qualitative Studie zu Konsumentengruppen und -motiven aus Expertensicht [Methamphetamine use in Central Germany: A qualitative study on consumer groups and motives from the experts’ perspective]. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, medizinische Psychologie, 68, 329–336. doi:10.1055/s-0043-118655
30.
LeeN. K.RawsonR. A. (2008). A systematic review of cognitive and behavioural therapies for methamphetamine dependence. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27, 309–317. doi:10.1080/09595230801919494
31.
MalterudK.SiersmaV. D.GuassoraA. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26, 1753–1760. doi:10.1177/1049732315617444
32.
ManningV.BestD.GarfieldJ. B. B.AllsopS.BerendsL.LubmanD. I. (2017). Money well-spent: Further evidence of improved outcomes for methamphetamine users following treatment. Drug and Alcohol Review, 36(2), E1–E3. doi:10.1111/dar.12410
33.
MaxwellJ. C. (2014). A new survey of methamphetamine users in treatment: Who they are, why they like “meth,” and why they need additional services. Substance Use & Misuse, 49, 639–644. doi:10.3109/10826084.2013.841244
34.
MaxwellJ. C.RutkowskiB. A. (2008). The prevalence of methamphetamine and amphetamine abuse in North America: A review of the indicators, 1992-2007. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27, 229–235. doi:10.1080/09595230801919460
35.
McKetinR.KotheA.BakerA. L.LeeN. K.RossJ.LubmanD. I. (2018). Predicting abstinence from methamphetamine use after residential rehabilitation: Findings from the Methamphetamine Treatment Evaluation Study. Drug and Alcohol Review, 37, 70–78. doi:10.1111/dar.12528
36.
McKetinR.KozelN.DouglasJ.AliR.VicknasingamB.LundJ.LiJ.-H. (2008). The rise of methamphetamine in Southeast and East Asia. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27, 220–228. doi:10.1080/09595230801923710
37.
McKetinR.LubmanD. I.LeeN. M.RossJ. E.SladeT. N. (2011). Major depression among methamphetamine users entering drug treatment programs. The Medical Journal of Australia, 195(3), S51–S55.
McKetinR.NajmanJ. M.BakerA. L.LubmanD. I.DaweS.AliR.. . . MamunA. (2012). Evaluating the impact of community-based treatment options on methamphetamine use: Findings from the Methamphetamine Treatment Evaluation Study (MATES). Addiction (Abingdon, England), 107, 1998–2008. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03933.x
40.
MeuserM.NagelU. (2009). Das Experteninterview—konzeptionelle Grundlagen und methodische Anlage [The expert interview: Conceptual basics and methodical approaches]. In PickelS.PickelG.LauthH.-J.JahnD. (Eds.), Lehrbuch. Methoden der vergleichenden Politik- und Sozialwissenschaft: Neue Entwicklungen und Anwendungen (1st ed., pp. 465–479). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-91826-6_23
41.
MilfordC.KrielY.NjauI.NkoleT.GichangiP.CorderoP.. . . SteynP. S. (2017). Teamwork in qualitative research: Descriptions of a multicountry team approach. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1): 1-10. doi:10.1177/1609406917727189
42.
MorseJ. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25, 1212–1222. doi:10.1177/1049732315588501
43.
MushanyuJ.NyabadzaF.StewartA. G. R. (2015). Modelling the trends of inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation for methamphetamine in the Western Cape province of South Africa. BMC Research Notes, 8, Article 797. doi:10.1186/s13104-015-1741-4
44.
NosykB.LiL.EvansE.HuangD.MinJ.KerrT.. . . HserY. I. (2014). Characterizing longitudinal health state transitions among heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine users. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 140, 69–77. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.03.029
45.
PerngparnU.LimanondaB.AramrattanaA.PilleyC.AreesantichaiC.TaneepanichskulS. (2011). Methamphetamine dependence treatment rehabilitation in Thailand: A model assessment. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand [Chotmaihet Thangphaet], 94, 110–117.
46.
PetitA.KarilaL.ChalminF. (2012). Methamphetamine addiction: A review of the literature. Journal of Addiction Research & Therapy, S1:006. doi:10.4172/2155-6105.S1-006
PrzyborskiA.Wohlrab-SahrM. (2014). Qualitative Sozialforschung: Ein Arbeitsbuch. [Qualitative social research: A workbook]. München: Walter de Gruyter.
49.
RawsonR. A. (2013). Current research on the epidemiology, medical and psychiatric effects, and treatment of methamphetamine use. Journal of Food and Drug Analysis, 21(4), S77–S81. doi:10.1016/j.jfda.2013.09.039
50.
RawsonR. A.McCannM. J.FlamminoF.ShoptawS.MiottoK.ReiberC.LingW. (2006). A comparison of contingency management and cognitive-behavioral approaches for stimulant-dependent individuals. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 101, 267–274. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01312.x
51.
RhodesS. D.HergenratherK. C.YeeL. J.KnipperE.WilkinA. M.OmliM. R. (2007). Characteristics of a sample of men who have sex with men, recruited from gay bars and Internet chat rooms, who report methamphetamine use. AIDS Patient Care and STDs, 21, 575–583. doi:10.1089/apc.2007.0002
52.
RollJ. M.PetryN. M.StitzerM. L.BrechtM. L.PeirceJ. M.McCannJ.. . . KelloggS. (2006). Contingency management for the treatment of methamphetamine use disorders. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 1993–1999. doi:10.1176/ajp.2006.163.11.1993
53.
SandelowskiM. (2010). What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing and Health, 33, 77–84. doi:10.1002/nur.20362
54.
SchmidtL. G. (Ed.). (2006). Evidenzbasierte Suchtmedizin: Behandlungsleitlinie substanzbezogene Störungen; mit 23 Tabellen [Evidence-based medical science of addiction. Treatment guideline substance-related disorders; including 23 tables]. Köln, Germany: Dt. Ärzte-Verl.
55.
SchulzM. (2012). Quick and easy!? Fokusgruppen in der angewandten Sozialwissenschaft. In SchulzM.MackB.RennO. (Eds.), Fokusgruppen in der empirischen Sozialwissenschaft: Von der Konzeption bis zur Auswertung [Focus groups in empirical social science: From conception to evaluation] (pp. 9–22). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-19397-7_1
56.
SchulzM.MackB.RennO. (Eds.). (2012). Fokusgruppen in der empirischen Sozialwissenschaft: Von der Konzeption bis zur Auswertung [Focus groups in empirical social science: From conception to evaluation]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
57.
SimpsonJ. L.GrantK. M.DalyP. M.KelleyS. G.CarloG.BevinsR. A. (2016). Psychological burden and gender differences in methamphetamine-dependent individuals in treatment. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 48, 261–269. doi:10.1080/02791072.2016.1213470
58.
SteinkeI. (2013). Gütekriterien qualitativer Forschung [Quality criteria of qualitative research]. In FlickU.von KardorffE.SteinkeI. (Eds.), Rowohlts Enzyklopädie: Vol. 55628. Qualitative Forschung: Ein Handbuch (pp. 319–331). Hamburg: Rowohlt.
59.
TongA.SainsburyP.CraigJ. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19, 349–357. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
60.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2014). World drug report 2014. Vienna, Austria: United Nations publication.
61.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2015). World drug report 2015. Vienna, Austria: United Nations publication.
62.
VearrierD.GreenbergM. I.MillerS. N.OkanekuJ. T.HaggertyD. A. (2012). Methamphetamine: History, pathophysiology, adverse health effects, current trends, and hazards associated with the clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine. Disease-a-Month, 58(2), 38–89. doi:10.1016/j.disamonth.2011.09.004
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
