CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 273Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 111 of the 115 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What we know, and don't know, about the impact of state policy and systems-level interventions on prescription drug overdose

Open access
Haegerich, Tamara M., Paulozzi, Leonard J., Manns, Brian J., Jones, Christopher M.·2014·Drug and Alcohol Dependence
DOI 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.10.001PMC PMC6557270
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Drug overdose deaths have been rising since the early 1990s and is the leading cause of injury death in the United States. Overdose from prescription opioids constitutes a large proportion of this burden. State policy and systems-level interventions have the potential to impact prescription drug misuse and overdose.Methods We searched the literature to identify evaluations of state policy or systems-level interventions using non-comparative, cross-sectional, before-after, time series, cohort, or comparison group designs or randomized/non-randomized trials. Eligible studies examined intervention effects on provider behavior, patient behavior, and health outcomes.Results Overall study quality is low, with a limited number of time-series or experimental designs. Knowledge and prescribing practices were measured more often than health outcomes (e.g., overdoses). Limitations include lack of baseline data and comparison groups, inadequate statistical testing, small sample sizes, self-reported outcomes, and short-term follow-up. Strategies that reduce inappropriate prescribing and use of multiple providers and focus on overdose response, such as prescription drug monitoring programs, insurer strategies, pain clinic legislation, clinical guidelines, and naloxone distribution programs, are promising. Evidence of improved health outcomes, particularly from safe storage and disposal strategies and patient education, is weak.Conclusions While important efforts are underway to affect prescriber and patient behavior, data on state policy and systems-level interventions are limited and inconsistent. Improving the evidence base is a critical need so states, regulatory agencies, and organizations can make informed choices about policies and practices that will improve prescribing and use, while protecting patient health.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.10.001

Cites

111 of 111 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 115 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Brason, 2013, Project Lazarus: an innovative community response to prescription drug overdose, N.C. Med. J., 74, 259
  2. Florida Medicaid, 2005. Medicaid prescribed drug spending control program initiatives: quarterly report January 1–March 31, 2005. Tallahassee, FL.
  3. Ma, 2004, Drug take back in Hawaii: partnership between the University of Hawaii Hilo College of Pharmacy and the Narcotics Enforcement Division, Hawaii J. Med. Public Health, 73, 26
  4. Sacciccio, 2011, Costs of prescription drug abuse in the medicare part D program. Testimony before the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Haegerich, T. M., Paulozzi, L. J., Manns, B. J., & Jones, C. M.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
Corresponding author
Haegerich, Tamara M.
ORCID
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
145
Pages
34-47
ISSN
0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.10.001
PMC
PMC6557270
OpenAlex
W2035786417
Cited by
272
References
115
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 54 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 22
FWCI
5.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (CC999999)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
prescription drug overdose, prescription opioid misuse, state policy, system-level interventions, prescription drug monitoring programs, naloxone distribution, clinical guidelines, inappropriate prescribing, overdose response, patient education, health outcomes, provider behavior
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Clinical Trials as Topic, Cross-Sectional Studies, Health Policy, Humans, United States, Cohort Studies, Prescription Drugs, Inappropriate Prescribing, Drug Overdose

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review