Write a draft of this article

Arguments on the Feasible Ways of Addressing Opioid Crisis in the US

Student Name

Institutional Affiliation

Date

Over the years, prescription opioids have been used in the treatment of cancer pain. However, in the past two decades, usage of opioid drugs has soared due to its use in treating chronic non-cancer pain (Cass, 2018). The increase in opioid use has led to consistent increases in addiction rates and overdose deaths among many communities in the United States. For instance, in 2010, 980 Ohioans died due to opioid overdose, while in 2016, the deaths increased to 3,495 (Cass, 2018), an indication that the opioid-related deaths will continue to soar in future. Apart from these deaths, opioid overdose was found to be a factor in the reduced life expectancy among the adults in the US since 1999 (Cass, 2018). A host of efforts that have been directed at abating the opioid crisis in US communities have failed. As a result, there have been many suggestions on how opioid crisis can be abated. While some studies propose practice of policy innovations to combat the opioid crisis, only a ban on manufacturing of opioid drugs can save the US communities from the opioid menace.

The proponents of policy innovations assert that policy innovations can lead to responsible opioid usage. According to Penm, MacKinnon, Boone, Ciaccia, McNamee, and Winstanley (2017), application of policy innovations can improve opioid safety among many communities of US. For instance, they assert that the step was taken by the Ohio State to establish Opioid Prescribing Guidelines for Treatment of Chronic Pain, Acute Care Facility Opioid Prescribing Guidelines, and the Opioid Prescribing Guidelines for Treatment of Acute Pain has helped in “promoting the responsible use of opioids” (Penm et al., 2017). In their view, According to Penm, MacKinnon, Boone, Ciaccia, McNamee, and Winstanley (2017), observe that the policy guidelines have helped prescribers to consider non-opioid therapies as first-line of treatment, including reducing the numbers of “pill mills.” Additionally, these authors say that the measures led to reduction in the deaths involving prescription opioids from 45% in 2011 to 22% in 2015 (Penm et al., 2017). Moreover, the number of people who “doctor shopped” the opioids decreased from 2205 to 720 in 2011 and 2015 respectively (Penm et al., 2017).

Other studies also affirm that policy innovations can reduce opioid-related mortality and morbidity. According to a study by Alexander, Frattaroli, and Gielen (2017), adoption of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs) by District of Columbia and other States like Ohio, opioid-related mortality and morbidity are likely to down by a huge margin. According to these authors, the program allows pharmacists to access PDMP data before prescribing opioid for use by a patient (Alexander et al., 2017). That way, there would be a great chance of promoting patient safety and health care quality. For example, Penm et al. (2017) opine that 70 percent of physicians believed that the PDMP reduced the volume of opioids that they prescribed while increasing their comfort level with such prescribing” (Alexander et al., 2017).

Health organizations also agree that promotion of innovative policies can prevent illegal access of opioid drugs by people. A white paper titled “Combating the Opioid Abuse Epidemic” by McKesson Corporation (2017), underpins the essence of enforcement as a feasible route towards compelling pharmacies to adopt electronic prescribing. According to the paper, the handwritten prescriptions as easily altered, forged, or diverted by patients who want access to opioids illegally. The white paper explores the possibility that Electronic prescribing would “help address the misuse and diversion of opioid medications” (McKesson Corporation, 2017). The paper further highlights the extent to which E-prescribing currently permitted in use in New York, Minnesota, and Maine, has led to a reduction in forged prescriptions, leading to fewer cases of unprescribed opioid use in these places, including “strengthening of the efficacy of PDMPs” (McKesson Corporation, 2017). Thus, these authors suggest that these measures need to be expanded across the entire US to help in combating the opioid crisis.

Whereas the arguments above indicate that only practicing policy innovation can combat opioid crisis, a permanent solution as the ultimate goal would most certainly remain elusive. The view there is pegged on the fact that the PDMP system has not been adopted by all pharmacies across the entire US. Therefore, it is less likely that this system will stop the problem of illegal access among the Ohioans. Only about 8% of pharmacies nationally employ the use of electronic prescribing (McKesson Corporation, 2017); which means that it is unlikely that illegal access of opioid drugs would be prevented in the short should the use of the PDMP system be made mandatory. As such, since policy innovations have failed to abate the opioid crisis, I wager that the manufacturing of opioid drugs and its use in the US would continue unless the indefinite ban is imposed. As long as manufacture of opioid drugs continues, the American community will continue experiencing opioid-related morbidity in the future.

The call to ban the manufacture of opioid drugs is also supported by groups among them, groups opposed to policy innovation. According to DeShazo, an article authored by Johnson, Eriator, and Rademeyer (2018), and titled “Backstories on the US Opioid Epidemic: Good Intentions Gone Bad, an Industry Gone Rogue, and Watch Dogs Gone to Sleep abating opioid crisis is not a promising solution in the prevailing circumstances. Johnson, Eriator, and Rademeyer (2018) also opine that opioid usage would have been nipped at the bud had regulators been tough on manufacturers. In their view, the long-term solution is to ban the production and use of opioid drugs indefinitely, citing that “drugs of abuse are so attractive to so many”, and that responsible use of those drugs like opioid can hardly be locked in statutes (DeShazo et al., 2018). As someone who has witnessed the scourge of opioids, I join those opposed to the production and use of opioids in the US and advocate for the adoption of alternative drugs like Naloxone in place of opioid.

In conclusion, the debate on how to abate the opioid crisis in among the communities of United States has never been settled. Most commentaries support the view that policy innovations are likely to alleviate the crisis. some scholars and health organizations have lobbied for the enactment of innovative policies that potentially promote responsible opioids use, reduce opioid supply, and support prevention of overdose. Penm et al. (2017) highlight the efficacy of an innovative policy in Ohio State which can yield the desired results. Alexander et al. (2017) that effective policy innovation, like enforcing the adoption of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs, has the ability to reduce opioid-related mortality and morbidity to a great extent. Moreover, the efficacy of innovative policies is also supported by McKesson Corporation (2017) that emphasized the need to enforce a policy that will make all pharmacies to employ the use of Electronic prescribing as a measure of addressing the diversion and misuse of opioid medications. In my view, for opioid crisis is to be abated, all stakeholders appreciate that potential gaps in legislation would still be exploited to the detriment of victims as such the ultimate solution lies with an outright ban of the opioid drugs. The view that addressing the scourge of opioid drugs can only be achieved through a complete ban has also been reaffirmed by DeShazo et al., (2018).

References

Alexander, G.C., Frattaroli, S., Gielen, A.C., (eds) (2017). The Opioid Epidemic: From Evidence to Impact. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.