Corey S Davis1,2, Brian J Piper3, Alex K Gertner4, Jason S Rotter4. 1. Network for Public Health Law, Los Angeles, California. 2. Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina. 3. Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, Pennsylvania. 4. Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the adoption of laws that limit opioid prescribing or dispensing is associated with changes in the volume of opioids distributed in states. METHODS: State-level data on total prescription opioid distribution for 2015-2017 were obtained from the US Drug Enforcement Administration. We included in our analysis states that enacted an opioid prescribing law in either 2016 or 2017. We used as control states those that did not have an opioid prescribing law during the study period. To avoid confounding, we excluded from our analysis states that enacted or modified mandates to use prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) during the study period. To estimate the effect of opioid prescription laws on opioid distribution, we ran ordinary least squares models with indicators for whether an opioid prescription law was in effect in a state-quarter. We included state and quarter fixed effects to control for time trends and time-invariant differences between states. RESULTS: With the exception of methadone and buprenorphine, the amount of opioids distributed in states fell during the study period. The adoption of opioid prescribing laws was not associated with additional decreases in opioids distributed. CONCLUSIONS: We did not detect an association between adoption of opioid prescribing laws and opioids distributed. States may instead wish to pursue evidence-based efforts to reduce opioid-related harm, with a particular focus on treatment access and harm reduction interventions.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the adoption of laws that limit opioid prescribing or dispensing is associated with changes in the volume of opioids distributed in states. METHODS: State-level data on total prescription opioid distribution for 2015-2017 were obtained from the US Drug Enforcement Administration. We included in our analysis states that enacted an opioid prescribing law in either 2016 or 2017. We used as control states those that did not have an opioid prescribing law during the study period. To avoid confounding, we excluded from our analysis states that enacted or modified mandates to use prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) during the study period. To estimate the effect of opioid prescription laws on opioid distribution, we ran ordinary least squares models with indicators for whether an opioid prescription law was in effect in a state-quarter. We included state and quarter fixed effects to control for time trends and time-invariant differences between states. RESULTS: With the exception of methadone and buprenorphine, the amount of opioids distributed in states fell during the study period. The adoption of opioid prescribing laws was not associated with additional decreases in opioids distributed. CONCLUSIONS: We did not detect an association between adoption of opioid prescribing laws and opioids distributed. States may instead wish to pursue evidence-based efforts to reduce opioid-related harm, with a particular focus on treatment access and harm reduction interventions.
Authors: David S Fink; Julia P Schleimer; Aaron Sarvet; Kiran K Grover; Chris Delcher; Alvaro Castillo-Carniglia; June H Kim; Ariadne E Rivera-Aguirre; Stephen G Henry; Silvia S Martins; Magdalena Cerdá Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Nabarun Dasgupta; Kathleen Creppage; Anna Austin; Christopher Ringwalt; Catherine Sanford; Scott K Proescholdbell Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-10-18 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Gery P Guy; Kun Zhang; Michele K Bohm; Jan Losby; Brian Lewis; Randall Young; Louise B Murphy; Deborah Dowell Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2017-07-07 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Stephen Crystal; Molly Nowels; Hillary Samples; Mark Olfson; Arthur Robin Williams; Peter Treitler Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2022-01-10 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Bradley D Stein; Flora Sheng; Erin A Taylor; Andrew W Dick; Mark Sorbero; Rosalie Liccardo Pacula Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-12-28 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Emma E McGinty; Mark C Bicket; Nicholas J Seewald; Elizabeth A Stuart; G Caleb Alexander; Colleen L Barry; Alexander D McCourt; Lainie Rutkow Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 51.598
Authors: Connie H Yan; Todd A Lee; Lisa K Sharp; Colin C Hubbard; Charlesnika T Evans; Gregory S Calip; Susan A Rowan; Jessina C McGregor; Walid F Gellad; Katie J Suda Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2022-02-26 Impact factor: 6.604
Authors: Keith Humphreys; Chelsea L Shover; Christina M Andrews; Amy S B Bohnert; Margaret L Brandeau; Jonathan P Caulkins; Jonathan H Chen; Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar; Yasmin L Hurd; David N Juurlink; Howard K Koh; Erin E Krebs; Anna Lembke; Sean C Mackey; Lisa Larrimore Ouellette; Brian Suffoletto; Christine Timko Journal: Lancet Date: 2022-02-02 Impact factor: 202.731
Authors: Magdalena Cerdá; Noa Krawczyk; Leah Hamilton; Kara E Rudolph; Samuel R Friedman; Katherine M Keyes Journal: Annu Rev Public Health Date: 2021-11-30 Impact factor: 21.981
Authors: Hao Zhang; Srikar Tallavajhala; Shashi N Kapadia; Philip J Jeng; Yuyan Shi; Hefei Wen; Yuhua Bao Journal: Med Care Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 3.178
Authors: Amalie K Kropp Lopez; Stephanie D Nichols; Daniel Y Chung; Daniel E Kaufman; Kenneth L McCall; Brian J Piper Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-05-07 Impact factor: 3.390