Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32554171›Full record

ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2020

Implementation and enforcement of state opioid prescribing laws.

Elizabeth M Stone, Lainie Rutkow, Mark C Bicket, Colleen L Barry, G Caleb Alexander, Emma E McGinty

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth M StoneJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: estone@jhu.edu.
Lainie RutkowJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: lrutkow@jhu.edu.
Mark C BicketJohns Hopkins School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: bicket@jhmi.edu.
Colleen L BarryJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: cbarry@jhu.edu.
G Caleb AlexanderJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: galexan9@jhmi.edu.
Emma E McGintyJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: bmcginty@jhu.edu.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Mental Health Services and Systems Training ProgramT32MH109436 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Matthew Eisenberg, Elizabeth A. Stuart · 2017 to 2026
$1.7M
An Evaluation of State Laws Intended to Curb High-Risk Opioid PrescribingR01DA044987 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MCGINTY, EMMA ELIZABETH, RUTKOW, HELAINE · 2017 to 2020
$1.6M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA044987NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH109436
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn response to the role overprescribing has played in the U.S. opioid crisis, in the past decade states have enacted four main types of laws to curb opioid prescribing: mandatory prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) enrollment laws requiring clinicians to register with a PDMP; mandatory PDMP query laws requiring clinicians to check a PDMP prior to prescribing opioids; pill mill laws regulating pain management clinics; and opioid prescribing cap laws limiting the dose/duration of opioid prescriptions. While 47 states now have one or more of these laws in place, little is known about implementation and enforcement strategies, facilitators, and barriers.

methodsFrom November 2017 to February 2019, we interviewed 114 professionals involved in state opioid prescribing law implementation and enforcement in 20 states and identified common themes.

resultsImplementation efforts focused on awareness campaigns and targeted training of key front-line implementers. Enforcement strategies included active, complaint-based, and automated strategies. Collaboration across agencies and stakeholders, particularly health agencies and law enforcement, was identified as an important facilitator of implementation and enforcement. Two key interrelated barriers were identified: the complexity of state opioid prescribing laws in terms of which providers, patients, and prescriptions they applied to, and IT infrastructure.

conclusionDespite differing approaches, our findings suggest similar barriers to implementation and enforcement across state opioid prescribing laws. Strategies are needed to ease implementation and enforcement of laws that apply only to specific sub-sets of providers, patients, or prescriptions and address issues of access and data utilization of the PDMP.

Indexed as

EnforcementImplementationOpioidPolicy

Identifiers

PMID32554171
PMCPMC7371528
OpenAlexW3035047230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.