Final Social Action Plan-Opioid Crisis Bill

Introduction 

The United States experiences the effects of opioids which appear to be the most deadly drug in history. Across the country, the opioid is claiming more and more lives every day especially among the youths with the age of below 50 years. The growing opioid epidemic together with the increased drug overdose has become the leading causes of death killing people exceeding the number of deaths that result from traffic road accidents and other outbreaks in the country. According to Laxmaiah et al., (2012) the number of Opioid deaths recorded in America exceeds the entire deaths that originated from Vietnam and the Korean War. The increased threats of the opioid epidemic have drawn attention for many of the states to develop policies and action plan that focus on curbing the adverse effects of the rising use of Opioids. If the action plan is not put in place, there is a possibility that there will be more than 2,700 deaths in Illions thus adding to the number of deaths of the epidemic disease (Rudd, 2016). The causes and effects o from the Opioid prescription calls for a need of developing an action plan that will make it possible to reduce the prescription from 7 to three days. 

Risks for using opioids 

It is until people become aware of the adverse effects associated with an opioid prescription that they will be in a position to understand the reason behind the action plan calling for a need of reducing the opioid prescription to three days. Opioids consist of several substances that are believed to cause adverse effects on the lives of people thus becoming an epidemic in the United States. For example, Opioid includes materials such as heroin and pain-relieving drugs like oxycodone, hydrocodone, morphine, and fentanyl. Given the nature and usage of opioids, it is undeniable that these substances result in several adverse effects such as addiction and deaths making it an epidemic in the United States (Rudd et al., 2016). 

According to Nelson & Perrone, (2012) Opioids are addictive and prescribing the substance for seven days increases the risk associated with the drug. Though it is beneficial to patients and therapists, seven days is an extended period, and this may make it difficult for the patient to live without the substance after being discharged from the prescription. In addition to addiction, there have been arguments that a chronic disease can develop together with addiction making difficult for victims to survive without the use of such substances. In this case, the individual can develop an increasing much tolerance and decreasing effect for increased intake of the opioids. The symptom characterizes this condition that an individual will consistently find it difficult to stop using the opioids because of fear of the negative symptoms. Physical tolerance can occur to the human’s body after two to three days after the individual has been exposed to opioid therapy. This information indicates that the current proposed treatment for seven days increases the likelihood for an individual to develop opioid addiction symptoms. 

Opioids are deadly a risk that occurs when a victim is exposed to the use of opioids for a prolonged period. Whenever an individual makes use of opioids for medical purpose and develops an opioid use disorder, there is a possibility that it will affect the person’s respiratory system. The condition worsens in a situation where a therapist combines opioids with other substances such as benzodiazepines which increase the possibility of experiencing a fatal overdose. In most cases, such materials are believed to affect the respiratory system of an of an individual and death results from the fact that it will prevent breathing (Darts et al., 2015). Since addiction becomes the overall source of such problems, reducing the number of days for opioid prescription indicates that there will be a low probability for people to develop adverse effects associated with opioid treatment. The central argument is that people tend to use opioids to treat a particular chronic disorder accompanied by pain. As a result, the action plan will provide alternatives to such individuals and offer a limited prescription of some opioid up to the level expected to cause little adverse effects to the people of the United States. 

Causes of the epidemic Opioids 

The increased Opioids epidemic originates from the rate and the number of opioids prescribed to patients with pain over the last decades. According to Darts et al., (2015), Opioids have been used as a pain relievers substance in the United States since the year 1999. Though there is an advantage for using this prescription, excessive use of the opioids has several adverse effects which have resulted in several adverse effects. Since the establishment of opioid as a successful substance for treating people with pains, the use of opioid has almost quadrupled in the United States which has been fueled by the increased pressures and pharmaceutical campaigns to reduce the risks associated with opioids while encouraging the healthcare providers to improve the prescription of opioids for patients. In response, health therapists increased the rate of orders recording approximately a quarter billion prescriptions for in the year 2013 (Cicero & Ellis, 2015). The effects of increased use of opioids reflect the high rate of deaths and addiction experienced in the entire United States. 

Risks such as opioid use disorder overdose and also deaths increase with the increased rate of prescribing opioids for medical purposes. The Congress recorded more than 72,000 deaths associated with opioids in the year 2017 recording a number that is higher than that associated with traffic accidents and natural disasters (Rudd, 2016). Though the initial purpose for using opioid is to reduce severe pain, excessive use of this substance leads to increased use of other material such as Heroin for non-medical purposes. Many people who use heroin had exposure to opioids, but they turned to heroin because of its availability and affordability. Accordingly, there is a likelihood that an individual who has ever been exposed to heroin treatment is 40 times likely to get involved in heroin as 80% of the total users of heroin agree that they are addicted to heroin confirming the dangers of exposing a person to extensive use of opioids (Cicero & Ellis, 2015). The high rate of opioid prescription has paved the way for other substances such as fentanyl to street heroin other harmful drugs, thus, increasing the risk of misuse. 

The decision to reduce the maximum number of days an individual should be exposed to opioid prescription considers the benefits that patients with chronic diseases receive from an opioid therapist. The medications are significantly essential for patients with acute and chronic pains. Unless there is a provision of alternatives, reducing the supply and use of opioids will be compromising the healthcare of a majority of such patients. In effect, many of the people will turn to the use of several other drugs such as heroin without the instructions of the medical practitioner thus doubling the rate and addiction and deaths associated with an opioid prescription in the United States. Overdosing of an illicit drug may prove to cause more harm that opioids but the establishment of alternative approach can approach a viable one. For example, the treatment approach will focus on ensuring that there is an establishment of methadone and counselling and recovery support centers that will take the initiative of handling and monitoring behavioral change of a patient after being discharged from the hospital facilities. 

Possible alternatives for Opioid prescription 

The United States legislation has funded a program that focuses on establishing a possible option designed to replace the currently practiced opioid medicine for individuals with chronic diseases (O’Donnel et al., 2017). The legislation has doubled the number of funds designed to support the patients and community Act in an attempt to create alternative solutions to chronic diseases rather than the epidemic opioid. This program is expected to produce a breakthrough in treating addiction by, and many several interventions that discourage the use of illicit drugs in the country and curbing over prescription. The bill passed by the United States Congress will be beneficial to several states such as Ohio and Illinois where the effects of opioids have significantly been experienced. The funds will also be used in establishing long-term treatment and recovery centers and also helps to stop the inflow of deadly synthetic substances such as fentanyl shipped from other nations to the United States. 

The achievements can be attained through the health and human service transformation program (Cicero & Ellis, 2015). The primary objective of this approach is to ensure that there are behavioural health changes, especially on the mental health and substance use. The emphasize of the transformation approach will be using the prevention and public health which targets the wellbeing of all people in the community ensuring that there is minimized chances for people in the society to be addicted to the use of opioids. Additionally, physicians and patients will be encouraged to make decisions about a particular prescription based on the evidence thus considering the adverse effects that would arise from the over-prescription of opioids. In most cases, patients and therapists have a believe that opioids are the best approaches through which patients with chronic pains can treat and they engage in the treatment approach without examining and predicting the possible outcomes for using opioids for a particular period. It becomes difficult for a person to avoid addiction and death risks associated with the use of opioids (Beletsky & Davis, 2017). If people receive the opioids treatment approach with the first three days, they will be eligible for receiving further treatment and monitoring from trained families and community members who can offer support to such individuals. 

The legislation has nothing bad to either the patients or the physicians. The reason behind the law is to reduce the overdose of opioids by prescribing strict measures. There is estimation that the United States has more than 25,000 non-medical people who prescribe patients to opioids and they are believed to be some of the factors contributing to the epidemic opioids in the United States (Cicero & Ellis, 2015). The process will be valid through the drug overdose prevention law where every individual is supposed to receive direction of medical treatments from qualified medical personnel. Several approaches need to be put in place to strengthen the existence of the law and make it effective. For example, a majority of the patients and non-medical experts who decide to use the opioids in their local settings try to respond to emergencies that will take several times before reaching the medical centers. They turn out to offer the services to patients in an attempt of relieving the chronic pains thus calling for a need of developing an alternative approach for handling emergencies. 

Illinois has enacted an emergency medical service access law (PA-97-638) which ensures that people experiencing an overdose or the seeking alternative medical attention for another person can have access to opioids within a specified period (Gray & Moore, 2017). The rationale of this approach is to ensure that there is a reduction in the adverse effects associated with overdose of opioids and increases the ability of people to take dosage within a particular limitation. This program is in line with the proposed transformation in the current health system that focuses on addressing challenges facing behavioural health disorders by connecting them to families and community members after discharge from the health facilities. The proposed approaches for helping people with opioid disorder include the medication-assisted treatment. In this case, people will be expected to restructure intake, as well as discharge and pre-discharge procedures in the United States correctional facilities to ensure that people continue with alternative medication at the community level after completion of the maximum three days for an opioid prescription. 

In an attempt of ensuring the effectiveness of the proposed program, the United States has applied different strategies to implement the possible alternative for addressing the opioid epidemic in the country. For instance, there is an establishment of increase prescription monitoring program designed to be used by providers (Rudd, 2016). The rationale of this approach is to ensure that there are state electronic databases where an individual can control the substances prescribed by a technician in the hospital or pharmacy. Through this process, there is an indication that people will be a reduction in drug misuse, overdose, and diversification. In a situation where a patient is undergoing through multiple opioid prescriptions, they are particularly at high risk of developing an addiction. Through the application of prescription monitoring program, informs physicians about an individual who is at the risk of developing an opioid use disorder from those who are likely to benefit from opioid intervention. In effect, the process is effective in monitoring the behaviour of patients thus helping physicians to decide on a particular prescription based on evidence. 

Alternatively, the United States health department can easily cope with the proposed reduction of opioid prescription by prescribing patients through the education and prescribing guidelines. In most cases, therapists prescribe opioid medication with little training thus giving inappropriate prescription for a particular disorder (Gray & Moore, 2017. For instance, they may end up giving opioids to people with opioid use disorder for a maximum of seven days without the medical justification of the effects that such prescriptions are likely to cause to the human body. In other cases, they may end up giving the wrong combination of substances which may turn out to cause severe impacts on the patients. There are several established programs and institutions such as the American Pain Society and the Federation of State Medical Boards where medical experts can get further training and understand the dangers associated with over-prescription of opioids. If prescribers are informed with adverse effects of opioid, they will strictly develop the attitude for minimizing the prescriptions to a maximum of three days rather than seven days. 

Effective reduction of the misuse of opioids calls for the need of creating awareness about the effects of prescribing opioids both in schools and at family levels (O’Donnell et al., 2017). The current seven days prescription of opioids by therapists to patients has been a fundamental reason as to why there are increased cases of risks of death and addiction to patients. In most cases, patients fail to complete their dosage, and they share it with friends and family members unaware of the risks associated with the usage of such drugs. Though the decision of reducing the prescription to three days faces a lot of criticisms from the public, the education program will enlighten the opponents and create sense about the problems they are likely to develop resulting from the use of dosage not prescribed by the doctors. For instance, more than 40,000 teens in the United States use non-medical prescribed dosage indicating that opioids affect a large number of youths (Nelson & Perrone, 2012). For a successful approach towards curbing the adverse effects of opioids, there is a need of developing an education program that focuses on educating all members of the society about such risks. However, there is a need for focusing on the youths who are the vulnerable groups for an opioid epidemic. 

Though opioids result in the creation of opioid use disorder among individuals who have increased access to such treatments, the reduction of opioid therapy from seven to three days accompanied by the establishment of increased access will reduce the effects associated with the development of OUD. Through this approach, the proposed medication-assisted treatment will gain support by creating new drugs such as buprenorphine which is essential in helping people manage the disorder so that they can recover from the problem caused by the continuous intake of opioids friends (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011). The effectiveness of this approach occurs from the fact that such drugs are similar to those for treating diabetes. In effect, the patient will not be in a position to develop addiction since they are not addictive substances. In situations where they are stabilized, the individual develops a normal life, and there are little effects, and the patient can regain normal behaviours and thoughts that do not show signs of an opioid disorder. The benefits associated with the access to care approach and alternative drugs guarantees that reduction of opioids prescription to three days will not have significant harm to either the patients or physicians. 

Limiting access to opioids prescription to three days from the current seven days is accompanied by creating openness to information and resources to all people in the United States. There is a high chance that majority of the people affected by the use of opioids originates from non-medical experts who share opioid drugs with friends (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011). In some occasions, people who develop OUD often develop stigma and feelings of shame and embarrassment which make it challenging to seek medical intervention for that particular disorder. As a result, educating the public and creating spreading information about symptoms of OUD as a chronic disease encourages such people to seek medical attention from experts. In effect, there will a reduction in stigma, and increased access to evidence-based treatment thus reducing the impacts of opioid drugs. It will be easier for people to regain their life and interact with family members under the reduction of excessive use of opioids accompanied to increased information on the effects of opioid use disorder. 

Conclusion 

Opioid epidemic originates from over prescription of such substances to patients with chronic pains, but its adverse effects call for a need a need for intervention from both state and central government. In most cases, patients prescribed to opioids has a probability of developing an addiction to such substances a circumstance which forces such people to continue acquiring opioids or its substitutes from the streets. This decision exposes people to the risk of developing other diseases such as opioid use disorder. Prescription of opioids to a maximum of seven days claims the lives of many Americans each year making opioids an epidemic in the country. The government through the legislative body can reduce these effects by enacting policies designed to limit the usage of opioids among the citizens. The US government through Congress has developed alternative solutions to addressing this epidemic issue by almost doubling the allocation of funds to support diverse programs that would assist in the reduction of opioid prescription. For instance, the program supports the creation of access to information about opioids to all members of the society especially the youths. Additionally, the government is focused on ensuring that people develop monitoring technology that can assist medical doctors I identifying the patients who stand a chance for developing opioid use disorder thus providing an alternative solution to chronic pains. The alternative strategies put in place shows that reduction of opioid use to three days considers the well-being of the individuals with chronic illnesses by providing alternative approaches for addressing such disorders. 

References 

Bartelson, B., & Green, J. L. (2015). Trends in opioid analgesic abuse and mortality in the United States.    New England Journal of Medicine ,    372 (3), 241-248. 

Beletsky, L., & Davis, C. S. (2017). Today’s fentanyl crisis: Prohibition’s Iron Law, revisited.    International Journal of Drug Policy ,    46 , 156-159.States, 2006–2015.    MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report ,    66 (34), 897. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC. (2011). Vital signs: overdoses of prescription opioid pain relievers---United States, 1999--2008.    MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report ,    60 (43), 1487. 

Cicero, T. J., & Ellis, M. S. (2015). Abuse-deterrent formulations and the prescription opioid abuse epidemic in the United States: lessons learned from OxyContin.    JAMA psychiatry ,    72 (5), 424-430. 

Dart, R. C., Surratt, H. L., Cicero, T. J., Parrino, M. W., Severtson, S. G., Bucher 

Gray, A. A. H., & Moore, J. (2017). Addressing the Opioid Epidemic in Medicaid Managed Care for Women and Newborns.    Institute for Medicaid Innovation, June . 

Laxmaiah Manchikanti, M. D., Standiford Helm, I. I., MA, J. W. J., PhD, V. P., MSc, J. S. G., & DO, P. (2012). Opioid epidemic in the United States.    Pain physician ,    15 , 2150-1149. 

Nelson, L. S., & Perrone, J. (2012). Curbing the opioid epidemic in the United States: the risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS).    Jama ,    308 (5), 457-458. 

O’Donnell, J. K., Gladden, R. M., & Seth, P. (2017). Trends in deaths involving heroin and synthetic opioids excluding methadone, and law enforcement drug product reports, by census region—United 

Rudd, R. A. (2016). Increases in drug and opioid-involved overdose deaths—United States, 2010–2015.    MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report ,    65 . 

Rudd, R. A., Aleshire, N., Zibbell, J. E., & Gladden, R. M. (2016). Increases in drug and opioid overdose deaths—United States, 2000–2014.    American Journal of Transplantation ,    16 (4), 1323-1327.