Jack Homer1, Wayne Wakeland2. 1. Homer Consulting, Barrytown, New York, USA. 2. Systems Science Graduate Program, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Abstract
Background: The U.S. opioid epidemic has caused substantial harm for over 20 years. Policy interventions have had limited impact and sometimes backfired. Experts recommend a systems modeling approach to address the complexities of opioid policymaking. Objectives: Develop a system dynamics simulation model that reflects the complexities and can anticipate intended and unintended intervention effects. Methods: The model was developed from literature review and data gathering. Its outputs, starting in 1990, were compared against 12 historical time series. Four illustrative interventions were simulated for 2020-2030: reducing prescription dosage by 20%, cutting diversion by 30%, increasing addiction treatment from 45% to 65%, and increasing lay naloxone use from 4% to 20%. Sensitivity testing was performed to determine effects of uncertainties. No human subjects were studied. Results: The model fits historical data well with error percentage averaging 9% across 201 data points. Interventions to reduce dosage and diversion reduce the number of persons with opioid use disorder (PWOUD) by 11% and 16%, respectively, but each of these interventions reduces overdoses by only 1%. Boosting treatment reduces overdoses by 3% but increases PWOUD by 1%. Expanding naloxone reduces overdose deaths by 12% but increases PWOUD by 2% and overdoses by 3%. Combining all four interventions reduces PWOUD by 24%, overdoses by 4%, and deaths by 18%. Uncertainties may affect these numerical results, but policy findings are unchanged. Conclusion: No single intervention significantly reduces both PWOUD and overdose deaths, but a combination strategy can do so. Entering the 2020s, only protective measures like naloxone expansion could significantly reduce overdose deaths.
Background: The U.S. opioid epidemic has caused substantial harm for over 20 years. Policy interventions have had limited impact and sometimes backfired. Experts recommend a systems modeling approach to address the complexities of opioid policymaking. Objectives: Develop a system dynamics simulation model that reflects the complexities and can anticipate intended and unintended intervention effects. Methods: The model was developed from literature review and data gathering. Its outputs, starting in 1990, were compared against 12 historical time series. Four illustrative interventions were simulated for 2020-2030: reducing prescription dosage by 20%, cutting diversion by 30%, increasing addiction treatment from 45% to 65%, and increasing lay naloxone use from 4% to 20%. Sensitivity testing was performed to determine effects of uncertainties. No human subjects were studied. Results: The model fits historical data well with error percentage averaging 9% across 201 data points. Interventions to reduce dosage and diversion reduce the number of persons with opioid use disorder (PWOUD) by 11% and 16%, respectively, but each of these interventions reduces overdoses by only 1%. Boosting treatment reduces overdoses by 3% but increases PWOUD by 1%. Expanding naloxone reduces overdose deaths by 12% but increases PWOUD by 2% and overdoses by 3%. Combining all four interventions reduces PWOUD by 24%, overdoses by 4%, and deaths by 18%. Uncertainties may affect these numerical results, but policy findings are unchanged. Conclusion: No single intervention significantly reduces both PWOUD and overdose deaths, but a combination strategy can do so. Entering the 2020s, only protective measures like naloxone expansion could significantly reduce overdose deaths.
Entities:
Keywords:
Opioid epidemic; fentanyl; historical time series; illicit market; naloxone; policy intervention; simulation model; system dynamics
Authors: Tse Yang Lim; Erin J Stringfellow; Celia A Stafford; Catherine DiGennaro; Jack B Homer; Wayne Wakeland; Sara L Eggers; Reza Kazemi; Lukas Glos; Emily G Ewing; Calvin B Bannister; Keith Humphreys; Douglas C Throckmorton; Mohammad S Jalali Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 12.779
Authors: Mohammad S Jalali; Emily Ewing; Calvin B Bannister; Lukas Glos; Sara Eggers; Tse Yang Lim; Erin Stringfellow; Celia A Stafford; Rosalie Liccardo Pacula; Hawre Jalal; Reza Kazemi-Tabriz Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Erin J Stringfellow; Tse Yang Lim; Keith Humphreys; Catherine DiGennaro; Celia Stafford; Elizabeth Beaulieu; Jack Homer; Wayne Wakeland; Benjamin Bearnot; R Kathryn McHugh; John Kelly; Lukas Glos; Sara L Eggers; Reza Kazemi; Mohammad S Jalali Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2022-06-24 Impact factor: 14.957
Authors: Pedro Mateu-Gelabert; Nasim S Sabounchi; Honoria Guarino; Courtney Ciervo; Kellie Joseph; Benjamin J Eckhardt; Chunki Fong; Shashi N Kapadia; Terry T K Huang Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-07-29