Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:We sought to collect and characterize all laws governing the operation of prescription monitoring programs (PMPs), state-level databases that collect patient-specific prescription information, which have been suggested as a tool for reducing prescription drug overdose fatalities. METHODS:We utilized a structured legal research protocol to systematically identify, review, and code all PMP statutes and regulations effective from 1998 through 2011. These laws were then abstracted along eleven domains, including reporting provisions, data sharing, and data access. RESULTS:PMP characteristics vary greatly among states and across time. We observed an increase in the types and frequency of data required to be reported, the types of individuals permitted to access PMP data, and the percentage of PMPs authorized to proactively identify outlier prescribers and patients. As of 2011, 10 states required PMPs to report suspicious activity to law enforcement, while only 3 required reporting to the patient's physician. None required linkage to drug treatment or required all prescribers to review PMP data before prescribing. Few explicitly address data retention. CONCLUSIONS:State PMP laws are heterogeneous and evolving. Future studies of PMP effectiveness should take these variations into account.

Naloxone is a medication that reverses respiratory depression from opioid overdose if given in time. Paramedics routinely administer naloxone to opioid overdose victims in the prehospital setting, and many states are moving to increase access to the medication. Several jurisdictions have expanded naloxone administration authority to nonparamedic first responders, and others are considering that step. We report here on policy change in Massachusetts, where several communities have equipped emergency medical technicians, law enforcement officers, and firefighters with naloxone.

Opioid overdose is the leading cause of accidental injury death in the United States, taking the lives of over 16,000 Americans every year. Many of those deaths are preventable through the timely provision of naloxone, a drug that reliably and effectively reverses opioid overdose. However, that drug is often not available where and when it is needed, due in large part to laws that pre-date the overdose epidemic. Preliminary evidence suggests that amending those laws to encourage the prescription and use of naloxone will reduce opioid overdose deaths, and a number of states have done so in the past several years. Since legal amendments designed to facilitate naloxone access have no documented negative effects, can be implemented at little or no cost, and have the potential to save both lives and resources, states that have not passed them may benefit from doing so.

Since its inception in September 2010, the Network for Public Health Law has responded to hundreds of public health legal technical assistance claims from around the country. Based on a review of these data, a series of major trends in public health practice and the law are analyzed, including issues concerning: the Affordable Care Act, tobacco control, emergency legal preparedness, health information privacy, food policy, vaccination, drug overdose prevention, sports injury law, public health accreditation, and maternal breastfeeding. These and other emerging themes in public health law demonstrate the essential role of law and practice in advancing the public's health.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Improving access to sterile injection equipment is a key component in community-based infectious disease prevention. Implementation of syringe access programs has sometimes been complicated by community opposition and police interference. CASE DESCRIPTION/METHODS:In 2006, the Delaware legislature authorized a pilot syringe exchange program (SEP). A program designed to prevent, monitor, and respond to possible policing and community barriers before they had a chance to effect program implementation and operation. A program designed to prevent, monitor, and respond to these barriers was planned and implemented by a multidisciplinary team of legal practitioners and public health professionals. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:We report on an integrated intervention to address structural barriers to syringe exchange program utilization. This intervention employs community, police and client education combined with systematic surveillance of and rapid response to police interference to preempt the kinds of structural barriers to implementation observed elsewhere. The intervention addresses community concerns and stresses the benefits of syringe exchange programs to officer occupational safety. CONCLUSIONS:A cohesive effort combining collaboration with and educational outreach to police and community members based on the needs and concerns of these groups as well as SEP clients and potential clients helped establish a supportive street environment for the SEP. Police-driven structural barriers to implementation of public health programs targeting populations engaged in drug use and other illicit behavior can be addressed by up-stream planning, prevention, monitoring and intervention strategies. More research is needed to inform the tailoring of interventions to address police-driven barriers to HIV prevention services, especially among marginalized populations.

Assessing social risks has proven difficult for IRBs. We undertook a novel effort to empirically investigate social risks before an HIV prevention trial among drug users in Thailand and China. The assessment investigated whether law, policies and enforcement strategies would place research subjects at significantly elevated risk of arrest, incarceration, physical harm, breach of confidentiality, or loss of access to health care relative to drug users not participating in the research. The study validated the investigator's concern that drug users were subject to serious social risks in the site localities, but also suggested that participation in research posed little or no marginal increase in risk and might even have a protective effect. Our experience shows that it is feasible to inform IRB deliberations with actual data on social risks, but also raises the question of whether and when such research is an appropriate use of scare research resources.