RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
The policy landscape for naloxone distribution in four states highly impacted by fatal opioid overdoses
Bohler, R. M., Freeman, P. R., Villani, J., Hunt, T., Linas, B. S., Walley, A. Y., Green, T. C., Lofwall, M. R., Bridden, C., Frazier, L. A., Fanucchi, L. C., Talbert, J. C., & Chandler, R. (2023). The policy landscape for naloxone distribution in four states highly impacted by fatal opioid overdoses. Drug and alcohol dependence reports, 6, Article 100126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dadr.2022.100126
BACKGROUND: Expanding access to naloxone is one of the most impactful interventions in decreasing opioid-related mortality. However, state distribution rates of naloxone are insufficient to meet community need. The current study sought to better understand this gap by focusing on state policies that may facilitate or impede naloxone distribution in four states highly impacted by fatal opioid overdoses - Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio.
METHODS: We provide a descriptive analysis of the policy landscape impacting naloxone distribution through pharmacy and community channels in the four states participating in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS). Publicly available data and the expertise of the research team were used to describe each state's naloxone access laws (NALs), Medicaid coverage of naloxone, and community overdose education and naloxone distribution infrastructure. Data presented in this study represent the most current policy landscape through September 2022.
RESULTS: Variation exists between specific components of the NALs of each state, the structure of Medicaid coverage of naloxone, and the community distribution infrastructure networks. Massachusetts and New York have a statewide standing order, but other states use different strategies short of a statewide standing order to expand access to naloxone. Quantity limits specific to naloxone may limit access to Medicaid beneficiaries in some states.
CONCLUSION: States participating in the HCS have developed innovative but different mechanisms to ensure naloxone access. Policies were dynamic and moved towards greater access. Research should consider the policy landscape in the implementation and sustainability of interventions as well as the analysis of outcomes.
