Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-09T15:56:30.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lessons Learned from the Expansion of Naloxone Access in Massachusetts and North Carolina

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Corey S. Davis ,
Alexander Y. Walley  and
Colleen M. Bridger
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

States are rapidly modifying law and policy to increase access to the opioid antidote naloxone, and the provision of naloxone rescue kits (NRK) for use in the event of overdose is becoming increasingly common. As of late 2014 the majority of states had passed laws increasing naloxone access, and nearly as many have modified emergency responder scope of practice protocols to permit Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) and law enforcement officers to administer the medication. While the text of these laws is generally similar, their implementation varies among states.

This article outlines experiences and lessons learned from two diverse states, Massachusetts and North Carolina. In Massachusetts naloxone access initiatives were well underway before formal legislative action occurred, while in North Carolina the passage of a naloxone access law served as a catalyst for the creation of new programs and facilitated the scale-up of existing ones. In both states legislative action was necessary to permit the prescription and dispensing of naloxone to the friends and family members of people who use opioids, a key legal change.

Type
JLME Supplement
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 43 , Issue S1 , Spring 2015 , pp. 19 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Walley, A. Y. Doe-Simkins, M. Quinn, E. Pierce, C. Xuan, Z. Ozonoff, A., “Opioid Overdose Prevention with Intranasal Naloxone among People Who Take Methadone,” Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 44, no. 2 (2013): 241–247; Doe-Simkins, M. Quinn, E. Xuan, Z. Sorensen-Alawad, A. Hackman, H. Ozonoff, A. et al., “Overdose Rescues by Trained and Untrained Participants and Change in Opioid Use among Substance-Using Participants in Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution Programs: A Retrospective Cohort Study,” BMC Public Health 14 (2014): 297, available at <http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471–2458/14/297> (last visited February 3, 2015); Lagu, T. Anderson, B. J. Stein, M., “Overdoses among Friends: Drug Users Are Willing to Administer Naloxone to Others,” Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 30, no. 2 (2006): 129–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, C. S. Southwell, J. K. Niehaus, V. R. Walley, A. Y. Dailey, M. W., “Emergency Medical Services Naloxone Access: A National Systematic Legal Review,” Academic Emergency Medicine 1, no. 10 (2014): 1173–1177; Davis, C. S., “Legal Interventions to Reduce Overdose Mortality: Naloxone Access and Overdose Good Samaritan Laws,” Network for Public Health Law, 2014, available at <https://www.networkforphl.org/_asset/qz5pvn/network-naloxone-10-4.pdf> (last visited February 3, 2015); Davis, C. Webb, D. Burris, S., “Changing Law from Barrier to Facilitator of Opioid Overdose Prevention,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 41, no. 1, Supp. (2013): 33–36.Google Scholar
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94c, Sec. 34A; Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94c, Sec. 19(d), 2012.Google Scholar
Mass. Gen. Law Ann. 94C § 19B (2014); Macquarrie, B., “Governor Declares an Emergency on Opiate Abuse,” Boston Globe, March 27, 2014.Google Scholar
Davis, C. S. Ruiz, S. Glynn, P. Picariello, G. Walley, A. Y., “Expanded Access to Naloxone among Firefighters, Police Officers, and Emergency Medical Technicians in Massachusetts,” American Journal of Public Health 104, no. 8 (2014): e7–e9.Google Scholar
Walley, A. Y. Xuan, Z. Hackman, H. H. Quinn, E. Doe-Simkins, M. Sorensen-Alawad, A. et al., “Opioid Overdose Rates and Implementation of Overdose Education and Nasal Naloxone Distribution in Massachusetts: Interrupted Time Series Analysis,” BMJ 346 (2013): f174, available at <http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f174> (last visited February 3, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albert, S. Brason, F. W. II Sanford, C. K. Dasgupta, N. Graham, J. Lovette, B., “Project Lazarus: Community-Based Overdose Prevention in Rural North Carolina,” Pain Medicine 12, Supp. 2 (2011): S77–S85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90–106.2.Google Scholar
North Carolina Medical Board, Approved Medications for Credentialed EMS Personnel (2014).Google Scholar
Davis, C. S. Johnston, J. de Saxe Zerden, L. Clark, K. Castillo, T. Childs, R., “Attitudes of North Carolina Law Enforcement Officers toward Syringe Decriminalization,” Drug and Alcohol Dependence no. 144 (2014): 265–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coffin, P. O. Sullivan, S. D., “Cost-Effectiveness of Distributing Naloxone to Heroin Users for Lay Overdose Reversal,” Annals of Internal Medicine 158, no. 1 (2013): 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar