Breaking the deadlock over an Australian trial of injectable opioid maintenance

Wayne D Hall, Jo Kimber and Richard P Mattick
Med J Aust 2002; 176 (2): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2002.tb04289.x
Published online: 21 January 2002

Injectable heroin maintenance has been advocated as a form of treatment for opioid dependence that would attract, and retain in treatment, addicts who have either not sought treatment or who have failed at other forms of treatment, including methadone maintenance. Advocates of heroin maintenance argue that it would increase the proportion of addicts in treatment and reduce heroin use, drug-related crime, and deaths due to overdose.1

  • Wayne D Hall1
  • Jo Kimber2
  • Richard P Mattick3

  • 1 Office of Public Policy and Ethics, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, St Lucia, QLD.
  • 2 National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales.



The authors would like to thank Professor George Bigelow, Professor Jerry Jaffe, and Dr Deborah Zador for their comments on an earlier draft of this article.

Competing interests:

None declared.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.