RESUMO
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.
RESUMO
Background: In 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services released guidelines allowing waiver-eligible providers seeking to treat up to 30 patients to be exempt from waiver training (WT) and the counseling and other ancillary services (CAS) attestation. This study evaluates if states and the District of Columbia had more restrictive policies preventing adoption of the 2021 federal guidelines. Methods: First, the Westlaw database was searched for buprenorphine regulations. Second, state medical, osteopathic, physician assistant, nursing boards, and single state agencies (SSA) were surveyed to assess for the WT and CAS requirements and if they were discussing the 2021 guidelines. Results were recorded and compared by state and waiver-eligible provider types. Results: The Westlaw search revealed seven states with regulations requiring the WT and ten states requiring CAS. Survey results showed ten state boards/SSAs required WT for at least one waiver-eligible practitioner type and eleven state boards/SSAs required CAS. In some states, the WT and CAS requirements only applied in special circumstances. Eleven states had discrepancies between the Westlaw and survey results among three waiver-eligible provider types. Conclusions: Despite the 2021 federal change intended to increase access to buprenorphine, several states had regulations and/or provider boards and SSAs that were not supportive. Now, the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act of 2022 eliminated the federal x-waiver requirement to prescribe buprenorphine. However, these states may continue to have barriers to treatment access despite the MAT Act. Strategies to engage states with these restrictive policies are needed to improve buprenorphine treatment capacity.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The opioid crisis has put an increasing strain on US states over the last two decades. In response, all states have passed legislation to implement a portfolio of policies to address the crisis. Although effects of some of these policies have been studied, research into factors associated with state policy adoption decisions has largely been lacking. We address this gap by focusing on factors associated with adoption of naloxone access laws (NAL), which aim to increase the accessibility and availability of naloxone in the community as a harm reduction strategy to reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We used event history analysis (EHA) to identify predictors of the diffusion of naloxone access laws (NAL) from 2001, when the first NAL was passed, to 2017, when all states had adopted NAL. A variety of state characteristics were included in the model as potential predictors of adoption. RESULTS: We found that state adoption of NAL increased gradually, then more rapidly starting in 2013. Consistent with this S-shaped diffusion process, the strongest predictor of adoption was prior adoption by neighboring states. Having a more conservative political ideology and having a higher percentage of residents who identified as evangelical Protestants were associated with later adoption of NAL. CONCLUSION: States appear to be influenced by their neighbors in deciding whether and when to adopt NAL. Advocacy for harm reduction policies like NAL should take into account the political and religious culture of a state.