Faculty Bibliography

Prescription monitoring programs (PMPs), state-level databases that collect patient-specific prescription information at the time medications are dispensed, have been suggested as tools to address the overdose epidemic. We reviewed all laws in the United States (n = 25) that articulated the purposes PMPs are intended to serve. Attributes related to reducing abuse, misuse, and diversion of prescription medications appeared most commonly. Only 5 purpose statements mentioned the promotion of public health as goals of the PMP, and only 3 listed improving health care. None listed overdose prevention as a goal of the PMP.

The leading cause of adult injury death in the U.S.A. is drug overdose, the majority of which involves prescription opioid medications. Outside of the U.S.A., deaths by drug overdose are also on the rise, and overdose is a leading cause of death for drug users. Reducing overdose risk while maintaining access to prescription opioids when medically indicated requires careful consideration of how opioids are prescribed and dispensed, how patients use them, how they interact with other medications, and how they are safely stored. Pharmacists, highly trained professionals expert at detecting and managing medication errors and drug-drug interactions, safe dispensing, and patient counseling, are an under-utilized asset in addressing overdose in the U.S. and globally. Pharmacies provide a high-yield setting where patient and caregiver customers can access naloxone-an opioid antagonist that reverses opioid overdose-and overdose prevention counseling. This case study briefly describes and provides two US state-specific examples of innovative policy models of pharmacy-based naloxone, implemented to reduce overdose events and improve opioid safety: Collaborative Pharmacy Practice Agreements and Pharmacy Standing Orders.

BACKGROUND:State prescription monitoring programs (PMPs) purport to address the prescription opioid epidemic, but have evidenced limited effect on reducing opioid-related mortality. METHODS:We systematically reviewed publicly available, PMP web-based materials from December, 2012 to October, 2013, to assess the degree to which overdose prevention was articulated in state PMP goals, mission statement, and accessible educational materials. The sites and available resources of 47 state PMPs with a web presence were reviewed by two independent coders for use of "overdose" and related terms. Website materials were further coded to capture five general thematic orientations: supply reduction-therapeutic, supply reduction-punitive, demand reduction, public health/research, and harm reduction oriented in content. RESULTS:Twenty-nine of 47 (62%) PMPs did not address overdose or related terms in available online materials; six (12.8%) contained overdose-oriented messaging; and two included specific overdose prevention tools for providers. There were a median of three thematic orientations represented on the 18 state PMP websites mentioning only the term overdose, compared with a median of 4.5 thematic domains on the six PMP websites with overdose-oriented content. CONCLUSIONS:A more comprehensive, public health orientation for PMPs that explicitly and publicly articulates their application and role in overdose prevention may increase PMP effectiveness and use.

Opioid overdose is reversible through the timely administration of naloxone, which has been used by emergency medical services for decades. Law enforcement officers (LEOs) are often the first emergency responders to arrive at an overdose, but they are not typically equipped with naloxone. This is rapidly changing; more than 220 law enforcement agencies in 24 states now carry naloxone. However, rollout in some departments has been hampered by concerns regarding officer and agency liability. We systematically examined the legal risk associated with LEO naloxone administration. LEOs can be authorized to administer naloxone through a variety of mechanisms, and liability risks related to naloxone administration are similar to or lower than those of other activities in which LEOs commonly engage.

As conceptualized by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and its partners, a culture of health centers on a society in which health flourishes across all populations and sectors. Law, among other tools, is critical to advancing a culture of health across multiple arenas. In this manuscript, Network for Public Health Law colleagues illustrate how legal innovations at all levels of government contribute to societal health. Examples include modern laws that promote healthy and safe low-income housing, telemedicine reimbursement, paid sick and safe time, healthy food and beverages, reduced smoking rates, child vaccinations, universal pre-k, adolescents' healthy sleep, overdose prevention, and medical-legal partnerships.

Evidence-based practice (EBP) combines proven interventions with clinical experience, ethics, and client preferences to inform treatment and services. Although EBP is integrated into most aspects of social work and public health, at times EBP is at odds with social policy. In this article the authors explore the paradox of evidence-based policy using syringe access programs (SAP) as a case example, and review methods of bridging the gap between the emphasis on EBP and lack of evidence informing SAP policy. Analysis includes the overuse of morality policy and examines historical and current theories why this paradox exists. Action steps are highlighted for creating effective policy and opportunities for public health change. Strategies on reframing the problem and shifting target population focus to garner support for evidence-based policy change are included. This interdisciplinary understanding of the way in which these factors converge is a critical first step in moving beyond morality-based policy toward evidence-based policy.

BACKGROUND:North Carolina, like much of the U.S. South, is disproportionately affected by HIV and hepatitis. This persistently high disease burden may be driven in part by laws that criminalize the possession and distribution of syringes for illicit drug use. Legal change to decriminalize syringes may reduce infection rates in the state, but is unlikely absent support from law enforcement actors. METHODS:We analyzed the responses of 350 North Carolina law enforcement officers to a confidential, anonymous survey. The survey instrument collected data regarding self-reported needle-stick injury (NSI), blood borne disease risk perception and attitudes toward syringe decriminalization. RESULTS:82% of respondents reported that contracting HIV was a "big concern" for them. 3.8% of respondents reported ever receiving a job-related NSI, a rate of 36 NSI per 10,000 officer-years. Majorities of respondents reported positive views regarding syringe decriminalization, with approximately 63% agreeing that it would be "good for the community" and 60% agreeing that it would be "good for law enforcement." Black and female officers were significantly less likely to agree that on-the-job NSI was a "big concern" and significantly more likely to agree that it would be good for law enforcement. CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest that many North Carolina LEOs understand the public health benefits of syringe access programs and may be inclined to support syringe decriminalization legislation. Further research is indicated to determine the causes of observed differences in perceptions of bloodborne disease risk and attitudes toward syringe decriminalization by race and sex.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Fatal opioid overdose in the United States is at epidemic levels. Naloxone, an effective opioid antidote, is commonly administered by advanced emergency medical services (EMS) personnel in the prehospital setting. While states are rapidly moving to increase access to naloxone for community bystanders, the EMS system remains the primary source for out-of-hospital naloxone access. Many communities have limited advanced EMS response capability and therefore may not have prehospital access to the medication indicated for opioid overdose reversal. The goal of this research was to determine the authority of different levels of EMS personnel to administer naloxone for the reversal of opioid overdose in the United States, Guam, and Puerto Rico. METHODS:The authors systematically reviewed the scope of practice of EMS personnel regarding administration of naloxone for the reversal of opioid overdose. All relevant laws, regulations, and policies from the 50 U. S. states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico in effect in November 2013 were identified, reviewed, and coded to determine the authority of EMS personnel at four levels (in increasing order of training: emergency medical responders [EMRs], emergency medical technicians [EMTs], intermediate/advanced EMTs, and paramedics) to administer naloxone. Where available, protocols governing route and dose of administration were also identified and analyzed. RESULTS:All 53 jurisdictions license or certify EMS personnel at the paramedic level, and all permit paramedics to administer naloxone. Of the 48 jurisdictions with intermediate-level EMS personnel, all but one authorized those personnel to administer naloxone as of November 2013. Twelve jurisdictions explicitly permitted EMTs and two permitted EMRs to administer naloxone. At least five jurisdictions modified law or policy to expand EMT access to naloxone in 2013. There is wide variation between states regarding EMS naloxone dosing protocol and route of administration. CONCLUSIONS:Naloxone administration is standard for paramedic and intermediate-level EMS personnel, but most states do not allow basic life support (BLS) personnel to administer this medication. Standards consistent with available medical evidence for naloxone administration, dosing, and route of administration should be implemented at each EMS level of certification.