Search results

The COVID-19 pandemic, and the measures implemented to control it, collided with another public health emergency – the opioid crisis – with dire consequences. In October of 2017, the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services declared the opioid crisis a public health emergency. That declaration has been renewed several times, including during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the latest renewal set to go into effect on July 4, 2022. The overlap of individual, environmental, and social risk factors for substance use disorder (SUD) and COVID-19 present major challenges to those working as part of the response to both pandemics. The severity of the implications of this dual pandemic – an estimated 100,000 people in the United States died from a drug overdose during the first year of the pandemic – make this an area of the pandemic response where lessons learned had to be rapidly implemented to save lives. Identifying ways in which those lessons can be expanded to other populations at risk, including those with other pre-existing mental disorders, will be important to reducing the inequitable impacts of the pandemic on mental health.

Purpose – To compare the histories of two opioid medications that are pharmacologically similar but subject to contrasting regulations in their use in treatment of opiate dependence in the United States – methadone and buprenorphine – in order to analyze the role of racial imagery and racial politics in the legalization and clinical promotion of their use.

Methodology/approach – Historical methods of archival analysis of published articles and unpublished governmental records were used in researching methadone. Ethnographic methods of participant observation and semistructured interviews were used in researching buprenorphine.

Findings – Contrasting uses of racial imagery played a major role in shaping the current regulatory differences between the two treatments. The association of methadone with black and Latino heroin users has contributed to its increased federal regulation, while the association of buprenorphine with white, middle class prescription opioid users enabled its use in deregulated private physicians’ offices.

Originality/value of paper – Advocates of biomedicalization of behaviors and conditions thought of as social or moral, such as addiction, argue that biomedicalization reduces the stigma of the condition and imply that, in turn, it also reduces the racial inequalities associated with the condition. This study of the biomedicalization of treatment for opioid dependence indicates that the very process of biomedicalization depended on heightened racial imagery associated with each treatment and ultimately intensified, rather than reduced, the stigma of addiction for black and Latino low-income patients.

The acceleration of Opioid deaths over the last decade has made it a serious national public health crisis. Alabama has not been immune to this epidemic, with dramatically increased age-adjusted drug overdose death rates. These increases have occurred in a state with limited resources for Opioid health prevention, treatment, and recovery services. This chapter introduces the term “o-CHIL” in order to better understand the multi-factorial layers of intertwining health injustices (in the plural) experienced in Alabama’s communities and their embedded public libraries. It highlights the complexities in Opioid consumer health information literacies, the culturally situated dimensions of the Opioid crisis in Alabama, and the uniquely relevant consumer health literacies in its public libraries. Findings are based on an empirical assessment of representative information support services identified in February 2020 on the websites of the 230 public libraries listed as members of the Alabama Public Library Service. The exploratory study applies website content analysis to identify seven examples of information offerings and to class offerings into three categories: (1) information sources (collections, resources); (2) information policy and planning (assigned Opioid-related role, strategic representation); and (3) connections (internal, external, news and events). The discussion potentially provides new directions, approaches, and opportunities to build collaborations of sharing within Alabama’s network of public libraries and beyond for them to better serve their local and regional communities impacted by the Opioid crisis.

Public libraries are respected local institutions that connect community members to credible information and services, and support lifelong learning. The nature of these libraries means that they are open to all, including individuals who may be experiencing a physical or mental health crisis. A critical way that libraries in the United States are now supporting their communities is by leveraging their assets and their mission to respond to the opioid crisis. These responses have ranged from providing access to information and resources on addiction, prevention, treatment, and recovery support, to training staff and the public to use the drug naloxone to help reverse overdoses. Public libraries have found allies in this work in community organizations including nonprofits and public health departments, and are often working together with these partners toward common goals to bring about collective impact.

Through their programming efforts in response to the opioid crisis, public libraries are also demonstrating the ability to support the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) identified by the United Nations (UN) as a call to action for the global community. These goals include ensuring healthy lives, equitable education and lifelong learning, and decent work and economic growth. Public libraries are actively supporting people in their efforts to improve their lives and the lives of those around them. It is important and valuable work, and truly necessary for a functioning society.

In this chapter, I explore connections between institutional and personal narratives of treating chronic pain with prescription opioids.

I explore how stories told in a Food and Drug Administration public hearing construct moral boundaries around different kinds of pain patients and justify a label change intended to reduce prescribing of opioids to people with chronic pain. I then examine how personal narratives, acquired through interviews with chronic pain patients who rely on opioids, both conform to and challenge the institutional narratives told in the hearing and work as subversive stories. Additionally, I consider how institutional and personal narratives of chronic pain shed light on intersections and conflicts between the medical and social models of disability.

The “invisible disability” experience of chronic pain highlights the complex entanglement between the struggles associated with impairment emphasized by the medical model, and those stemming from cultural and structural barriers emphasized by the social model.

I conclude with a discussion of the methodological value of examining narratives such as those of chronic pain and disability at multiple levels of social life. This study contributes to efforts to broaden disability discourse to include experiences such as chronic pain that are poorly represented in disability scholarship.

This is the second in a series of papers focused on alcohol and substance abuse rehabilitation centers. Centers face the ongoing challenge of validating outcomes to meet the burden of evidence for insurance companies. In the first paper, data mining was used to establish baseline patterns in treatment success rates, for the Futures: Palm Beach Rehabilitation Center, that have a direct impact on a client’s ability to receive insurance coverage for treatment programs. In this paper, we examine 2016 outcomes and report on facility efficacy, alumni progression and sobriety, and forecast treatment success rates (short and long term) in support of client insurability. Data collection has been standardized and includes admissions data, electronic medical records data, satisfaction survey data, post-discharge survey data, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) data, and demographic data. Clustering, partitioning, ANOVA, stepwise regression and stepwise Logistic regression are applied to the data to determine statistically significant drivers of treatment success.

Neuroscientific technologies have begun to change the ways in which we understand, respond to, and treat drug addiction. According to addiction researchers, neuroscience marks a new era because of its potential to locate the causes of addiction within the brain and to treat addiction through altering neurochemistry. However, little is known about how addiction neuroscience and new neurochemical treatments shape individuals' experience of addiction and constitute new arrangements of knowledge and power that shape subjectivity and governance. This chapter addresses these domains by drawing on an analysis of scientific literature about addiction neuroscience and qualitative interviews with people being treated for addiction with buprenorphine, a pharmaceutical treatment for opioid dependence. The chapter charts four major themes in the addiction neuroscience literature (pleasure and the limbic system, rationality and the role of the prefrontal cortex, theories of plasticity, and the role of volition) and explores how each of these is incorporated, adapted, or rejected by individuals being treated for addiction with a pharmaceutical. This analysis demonstrates how neuroscientific ideas are mediated by the lived experiences of those being treated under a neuroscientific model. It also suggests that while neuroscientific interventions, like pharmaceuticals, shape the experience of those being treated for addiction, so too do many other forces, including social circumstances, moral frameworks, the drive for autonomy, and the quest to be “normal.”

Acute and chronic pain affects more Americans than heart disease, diabetes, and cancer combined. Conservative estimates suggest the total economic cost of pain in the United States is $600 billion, and more than half of this cost is due to lost productivity, such as absenteeism, presenteeism, and turnover. In addition, an escalating opioid epidemic in the United States and abroad spurred by a lack of safe and effective pain management has magnified challenges to address pain in the workforce, particularly the military. Thus, it is imperative to investigate the organizational antecedents and consequences of pain and prescription opioid misuse (POM). This chapter provides a brief introduction to pain processing and the biopsychosocial model of pain, emphasizing the relationship between stress, emotional well-being, and pain in the military workforce. We review personal and organizational risk and protective factors for pain, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, optimism, perceived organizational support, and job strain. Further, we discuss the potential adverse impact of pain on organizational outcomes, the rise of POM in military personnel, and risk factors for POM in civilian and military populations. Lastly, we propose potential organizational interventions to mitigate pain and provide the future directions for work, stress, and pain research.

Do physician perceptions of patient “deservingness” factor into the decision to prescribe opioid analgesics? Using a data set of 398 physicians randomly selected from the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) membership list, we explore how a range of patient social context variables influence a physician's decision to prescribe opioids for three conditions: ankle fracture, back pain, and migraine headache. Being hurt running from the police, former and current drug or alcohol use, and frequent emergency room (ER) visits reduce the likelihood of opioid prescription. Having a reliable relationship with a primary care provider and being injured in a ladder fall or intramural collegiate basketball game increase the likelihood of opioid prescription. Factor analyses for each of the three conditions reveal two scales: socially stigmatizing characteristics and socially accepted characteristics. Discussion centers on what places people at risk for inadequate pain control. Our work contributes to the expanding literature on social conditions as a fundamental cause of illness.