Enhancing and Leveraging the West Virginia's Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) for Public Health Surveillance and Clinical Decision Making: A Case Study.

West Virginia has struggled with an overdose epidemic for many years and continues to have the highest overdose death rate in the nation. However, through successful collaboration between the West Virginia Board of Pharmacy and the West Virginia Department of Health via its Violence and Injury Prevention Program, West Virginia has improved data quality, enhanced program development and implementation, and developed strategies to address the overdose epidemic. This multiagency collaboration plays an important role in addressing the overdose epidemic and promotes lasting interagency relationships. One strategy is overcoming barriers to maximizing and utilizing the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, or PDMP. This strategy allows for a better understanding of a patient's prescription history and ensures safer prescribing practices. In addition, this strategic partnership facilitates the use of PDMP data for epidemiologic studies and public health surveillance, which results in sustainable analyses and dissemination of actionable data that are now driving public health action in West Virginia.

Facilitators, barriers and lessons learnt from the first state-wide naloxone distribution conducted in West Virginia.

BACKGROUND: Overdose education and naloxone distribution programmes are known to reduce opioid-related deaths. A state-wide naloxone distribution effort of 8250 rescue kits was undertaken by government, community and university partners in West Virginia in 2016-2017. The purpose of this study was to discern the barriers, facilitators and lesson learnt from implementing this endeavour in a rural state with the highest opioid overdose fatality rate in the US. METHODS: Structured interviews (n=26) were conducted among both internal and external stakeholders. Those who participated were >18 years of age and were the lead representative from agencies that either received naloxone (ie, external stakeholders) or helped implement the distribution (ie, internal stakeholders). The interviews followed standardised scripts and lasted approximately 40 min. Sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed. Qualitative content analysis was performed by two researchers to determine themes surrounding facilitators or barriers to programme implementation. RESULTS: The primary facilitators reported by stakeholders included collaborative partnerships, ease of participating in the programme, being established in prevention efforts, demand for naloxone and the need for personal protection from overdose. The primary barriers identified by stakeholders included bureaucracy/policy/procedures of their organisation or agency, stigma, logistical or planning issues, problems with reporting, lack of communication post distribution and sustainability. Numerous lessons were learnt. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the implementation of the programme in 87 organisations, including law enforcement and fire departments, the impact of facilitators outweighed that of barriers. These findings may inform others planning to conduct a similar, large-scale project.