Impact of jail-based methadone or buprenorphine treatment on non-fatal opioid overdose after incarceration.

BACKGROUND: Non-fatal overdose is a leading predictor of subsequent fatal overdose. For individuals who are incarcerated, the risk of experiencing an overdose is highest when transitioning from a correctional setting to the community. We assessed if enrollment in jail-based medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is associated with lower risk of non-fatal opioid overdoses after jail release among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study of adults with OUD who were incarcerated in New York City jails and received MOUD or did not receive any MOUD (out-of-treatment) within the last three days before release to the community in 2011-2017. The outcome was the first non-fatal opioid overdose emergency department (ED) visit within 1 year of jail release during 2011-2017. Covariates included demographic, clinical, incarceration-related, and other characteristics. We performed multivariable cause-specific Cox proportional hazards regression analysis to compare the risk of non-fatal opioid overdose ED visits within 1 year after jail release between groups. RESULTS: MOUD group included 8660 individuals with 17,119 incarcerations; out-of-treatment group included 10,163 individuals with 14,263 incarcerations. Controlling for covariates and accounting for competing risks, in-jail MOUD was associated with lower non-fatal opioid overdose risk within 14 days after jail release (adjusted HR=0.49, 95% confidence interval=0.33-0.74). We found no significant differences 15-28, 29-56, or 57-365 days post-release. CONCLUSION: MOUD group had lower risk of non-fatal opioid overdose immediately after jail release. Wider implementation of MOUD in US jails could potentially reduce post-release overdoses, ED utilization, and associated healthcare costs.

County-level factors associated with a mismatch between opioid overdose mortality and availability of opioid treatment facilities.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose deaths in the United States remain a major public health crisis. Little is known about counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality but low availability of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment facilities. We sought to identify characteristics of United States (US) counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality and low rates of opioid treatment facilities. METHODS: Rates of overdose mortality from 3,130 US counties were compared with availability of opioid treatment facilities that prescribed or allowed medications for OUD (MOUD), from 2018-2019. The outcome variable, "risk-availability mismatch" county, was a binary indicator of a high rate (above national average) of opioid overdose mortality with a low (below national average) rate of opioid treatment facilities. Covariates of interest included county-level sociodemographics and rates of insurance, unemployment, educational attainment, poverty, urbanicity, opioid prescribing, depression, heart disease, Gini index, and Theil index. Multilevel logistic regression, accounting for the clustering of counties within states, was used to determine associations with being a "risk-availability mismatch" county. RESULTS: Of 3,130 counties, 1,203 (38.4%) had high rates of opioid overdose mortality. A total of 1,098 counties (35.1%) lacked a publicly-available opioid treatment facility in 2019. In the adjusted model, counties with an additional 1% of: white residents (odds ratio, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), unemployment (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19), and residents without insurance (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08) had increased odds of being a mismatch county. Counties that were metropolitan (versus non-metropolitan) had an increased odds of being a mismatch county (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.45-2.38). CONCLUSION: Assessing mismatch between treatment availability and need provides useful information to characterize counties that require greater public health investment. Interventions to reduce overdose mortality are unlikely to be effective if they do not take into account diverse upstream factors, including sociodemographics, disease burden, and geographic context of communities.

Drug Deactivation Pouches for Primary Prevention of Opioid Overdose: Perceptions and Attitudes of Community Members.

IMPORTANCE: A substantial number of opioid analgesics dispensed into communities will go unused and be susceptible to diversion for misuse. Convenient, efficient, and environmentally safe mechanisms for disposal are needed to prevent the diversion of unused opioid analgesics. OBJECTIVE: This initiative piloted the feasibility of distributing drug deactivation pouches in a community setting and examined community members' acceptance, intention to use drug deactivation pouches, and their current disposal practices of unused opioid analgesics. Although many studies have examined the benefits of deactivation pouches in preventing drug overdose, few have explored community members' perspectives, the feasibility, and the acceptability of these pouches in disposing of unused medications. METHODS: In the fall of 2017, we piloted the distribution of drug deactivation pouches to assess the overall interest in the pouches at a 3-day community event and continued the second wave of this pilot in the community from the summer of 2018 to the spring of 2019.Our main outcomes and measures included the acceptance of the drug deactivation pouches and the intention to use the pouches. "Acceptance" was defined as study participants physically taking the kit and "Intention" was how participants intended to use the pouch. RESULTS: A total of 170 community members were approached at a community event about the drug deactivation pouches and 116 accepted at least 1 pouch (68.2% acceptance rate). In the second wave, 124 community members were approached by Community Health Workers; 100% accepted the pouch. Overall, the acceptance rate was 81.6%. People mentioned significant interest in using the pouches. Furthermore, surveys that assessed community members' intention to use the deactivation pouches showed that 48% intended to use the pouch. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The distribution of drug deactivation pouches is feasible in a community setting and although community members expressed interest in using drug deactivation pouches to dispose of unused opioid analgesics and other drugs, the majority still disposed of their unused medications through other avenues. This, underscore the need to raise community members' awareness about the importance, benefits, and viability of these pouches as a tool for the primary prevention of opioid overdose because of their ease of use, safety, environmental considerations, and cost-effectiveness.

Developing medical simulations for opioid overdose response training: A qualitative analysis of narratives from responders to overdoses.

Medical simulation offers a controlled environment for studying challenging clinical care situations that are difficult to observe directly. Overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs aim to train potential rescuers in responding to opioid overdoses, but assessing rescuer performance in real-life situations before emergency medical services arrive is exceedingly complex. There is an opportunity to incorporate individuals with firsthand experience in treating out-of-hospital overdoses into the development of simulation scenarios. Realistic overdose simulations could provide OEND programs with valuable tools to effectively teach hands-on skills and support context-sensitive training regimens. In this research, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 individuals experienced in responding to opioid overdoses including emergency department physicians, first responders, OEND program instructors, and peer recovery specialists. Two coders conducted qualitative content analysis using open and axial thematic coding to identify nuances associated with illicit and prescription opioid overdoses. The results are presented as narrative findings complemented by summaries of the frequency of themes across the interviews. Over 20 hours of audio recording were transcribed verbatim and then coded. During the open and axial thematic coding process several primary themes, along with subthemes, were identified, highlighting the distinctions between illicit and prescription opioid overdoses. Distinct contextual details, such as locations, clinical presentations, the environment surrounding the patient, and bystanders' behavior, were used to create four example simulations of out-of-hospital overdoses. The narrative findings in this qualitative study offer context-sensitive information for developing out-of-hospital overdose scenarios applicable to simulation training. These insights can serve as a valuable resource, aiding instructors and researchers in systematically creating evidence-based scenarios for both training and research purposes.

Adverse Effects After Prehospital Administration of Naloxone by Bystanders: A Preliminary Study.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid use disorder is a cause of significant morbidity and mortality. In order to reverse opioid overdose as quickly as possible, many institutions and municipalities have encouraged people with no professional medical training to carry and administer naloxone. This study sought to provide preliminary data for research into the rates of adverse effects of naloxone when administered by bystanders compared to Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel, since this question has not been studied previously. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study performed at an urban, tertiary, academic medical center that operates its own EMS service. A consecutive sample of patients presenting to EMS with opioid overdose requiring naloxone was separated into two groups based on whether naloxone was administered by bystanders or by EMS personnel. Each group was analyzed to determine the incidence of four pre-specified adverse events. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between the bystander (19%) and EMS (16%) groups (OR = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.63 - 2.32; P = .499) in this small sample. Based on these initial results, a study would need a sample size of 6,188 in order to reach this conclusion with 80% power. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the rates of any of the individual adverse events. Secondary analysis of patients' demographics showed differences between the two groups which generate hypotheses for further investigation of disparities in naloxone administration. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study provides foundational data for further investigation of naloxone administration by bystanders. Adverse events after the prehospital administration of naloxone are rare, and future studies will require large sample sizes. These preliminary data did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in adverse event rates when comparing naloxone administration by bystanders and EMS clinicians. This study provides data that will be useful for conducting further research on multiple facets of this topic.

Factors associated with gaps in naloxone knowledge: evidence from a 2022 great plains survey.

BACKGROUND: The rising prevalence of fast-acting opioids in the USA suggests the increased need for non-professional first responder administration of naloxone. Effective administration of naloxone during an overdose requires that bystanders are familiar with, have access to, and know how to use naloxone. METHODS: Drawing on a statewide, address-based sample of Nebraskan adults, we used logistic regression to predict the likelihood of respondents' familiarity with, access to, and competency to administer naloxone. Our independent variables included measures indicating proximity to drug use, perceived community stigma toward people who use drugs, and demographic data. RESULTS: There were significant gaps in naloxone knowledge in Nebraska. Although 74.8% of respondents were familiar with naloxone, only 18.2% knew how to access it and 18.0% knew how to use it. Being close to an overdose experience, lifetime illicit opioid use, being close to a person who uses opioids, and having access to illicit opioids were not significantly associated with naloxone familiarity, access, or competency among respondents in Nebraska's two largest cities, Omaha and Lincoln. Outside of these cities, being close to a past overdose experience and access to illicit opioids was associated with higher odds of naloxone access and competency, but lifetime opioid use and being close to a person who uses opioids were not. Finally, among those familiar with naloxone, a higher perception of community stigma toward people who use opioids generally was associated with lower odds of naloxone access and competency. Higher perception of community stigma toward people who use heroin, methamphetamines, and cocaine, however, was associated with higher odds of naloxone access. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the continued need for education on naloxone with a specific focus on access and competency to further reduce opioid-related overdose deaths. Specific focus should be placed on promoting naloxone knowledge among people with a higher likelihood of needing to administer naloxone to reduce otherwise avoidable deaths. Further work is needed to understand differences in the relationship between substance-specific perceived stigma and its association with naloxone access.

Feasibility of paying people who use drugs cash to distribute naloxone within their networks.

INTRODUCTION: Immediate access to naloxone is needed to prevent fatal opioid-related overdoses in the presence of fentanyl analogs saturating the opioid supply. Peer models engage impacted populations who are not accessing naloxone through standard venues, yet compensating peers who utilize syringe service programs with cash stipends to distribute naloxone within networks of people who use drugs is not well described. METHODS: As part of the HEALing Communities Study, syringe service program-based interventions were developed in Holyoke and Gloucester, MA, which paid people who use drugs ("peers") cash to distribute naloxone. Early program outcomes were evaluated for the time each program was funded within the HCS study period. RESULTS: During 22 study-months of observation, peers in two communities distributed 1104 naloxone kits. The total cost of peer compensation for program delivery was $10,510. The rate of peer-distributed naloxone per 100 K population reached 109 kits/mo and 222 kits/mo in the two communities. Participating peers addressed gaps in harm reduction outreach and distributed naloxone and other harm reduction equipment to individuals who were not syringe service program participants, expanding organizational reach. Being compensated with unrestricted cash stipends supported dignity and acknowledged peers' work in overdose prevention. CONCLUSION: The underutilization of compensated peer models is often attributed to funding and organizational barriers. These programs demonstrate that providing cash stipends to peers is feasible and expanded naloxone distribution at two existing syringe service programs. Providing cash stipends for peers who engage in secondary naloxone distribution offers promise in delivering naloxone to people not accessing syringe services.

A Practical Guide to Implementing an Evidenced-Based Hands-On Naloxone Training.

Synthetic opioids contribute to the majority of opioid overdose-related deaths in the United States. Expansion of naloxone training to community laypersons is one strategy to mitigate opioid overdose-related deaths. A hands-on naloxone training demonstrated efficacy in improving opioid knowledge and overdose response in baccalaureate nursing students, Greek-affiliated students, and rural clinicians and staff post-training. The purpose of this practical guide is to provide detailed steps to implement an evidence-based hands-on naloxone training for laypersons in community settings. The hands-on naloxone training consisted of five components: evaluator training, a validated pre-post opioid knowledge questionnaire, an opioid lecture, a performance evaluation, and a satisfaction survey. Post-training, trainees demonstrated increased knowledge related to opioids and overdose response, and they felt comfortable administering naloxone to someone experiencing an opioid overdose. Researchers, educators, and community health nurses can adapt this evidence-based practical guide to train peers and acquaintances who are likely to witness an opioid overdose. Virtual training and multi-lingual protocols should be considered to successfully train diverse groups of community laypersons. An active hands-on naloxone training can improve confidence for community health nurses and other health care professionals, and it may reduce delays in response time and naloxone administration. Nurses can use this hands-on training to educate students, families, community members, and stakeholders how to respond to an opioid overdose event.

Simulating the Simultaneous Impact of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder and Naloxone on Opioid Overdose Death in Eight New York Counties.

BACKGROUND: The United States is in the midst of an opioid overdose epidemic; 28.3 per 100,000 people died of opioid overdose in 2020. Simulation models can help understand and address this complex, dynamic, and nonlinear social phenomenon. Using the HEALing Communities Study, aimed at reducing opioid overdoses, and an agent-based model, Simulation of Community-Level Overdose Prevention Strategy, we simulated increases in buprenorphine initiation and retention and naloxone distribution aimed at reducing overdose deaths by 40% in New York Counties. METHODS: Our simulations covered 2020-2022. The eight counties contrasted urban or rural and high and low baseline rates of opioid use disorder treatment. The model calibrated agent characteristics for opioid use and use disorder, treatments and treatment access, and fatal and nonfatal overdose. Modeled interventions included increased buprenorphine initiation and retention, and naloxone distribution. We predicted a decrease in the rate of fatal opioid overdose 1 year after intervention, given various modeled intervention scenarios. RESULTS: Counties required unique combinations of modeled interventions to achieve a 40% reduction in overdose deaths. Assuming a 200% increase in naloxone from current levels, high baseline treatment counties achieved a 40% reduction in overdose deaths with a simultaneous 150% increase in buprenorphine initiation. In comparison, low baseline treatment counties required 250-300% increases in buprenorphine initiation coupled with 200-1000% increases in naloxone, depending on the county. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate the need for tailored county-level interventions to increase service utilization and reduce overdose deaths, as the modeled impact of interventions depended on the county's experience with past and current interventions.

Organize and mobilize for implementation effectiveness to improve overdose education and naloxone distribution from syringe services programs: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The United States (US) continues to face decades-long increases in opioid overdose fatalities. As an opioid overdose reversal medication, naloxone can dramatically reduce opioid overdose mortality rates when distributed to people likely to experience or witness an opioid overdose and packaged with education on its use, known as overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND). Syringe services programs (SSPs) are ideal venues for OEND with staff who are culturally competent in providing services for people who are at risk of experiencing or observing an opioid overdose. We carried out a randomized controlled trial of SSPs to understand the effectiveness of the organize and mobilize for implementation effectiveness (OMIE) approach at improving OEND implementation effectiveness within SSPs. METHODS: Using simple randomization, 105 SSPs were enrolled into the trial and assigned to one of two study arms - (1) dissemination of OEND best practice recommendations (Control SSPs) or the OMIE approach along with dissemination of the OEND best practice recommendations (i.e., OMIE SSPs). OMIE SSPs could participate in 60-min OMIE sessions once a month for up to 12 months. At 12-month post-baseline, 102 of 105 SSPs (97%) responded to the follow-up survey. RESULTS: The median number of sessions completed by OMIE SSPs was 10. Comparing OMIE SSPs to control SSPs, we observed significant increases in the number of participants receiving naloxone (incidence rate ratio: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.42, 3.25; p < 0.01) and the rate of naloxone doses distributed per SSP participant (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.18, 3.30; p = 0.01). We observed no statistically significant difference in the number of adopted best practices between conditions (difference in means 0.2, 95% CI: - 0.7, 1.0; p = 0.68). We also observed a threshold effect where SSPs receiving a higher OMIE dose had greater effect sizes with regard to the number of people given naloxone and the number of naloxone doses distributed. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the multifaceted OMIE approach was effective at increasing naloxone distribution from SSPs, despite substantial external shocks during the trial. These findings have major implications for addressing the overdose crisis, which has continued unabated for decades. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03924505 . Registered 19 April 2019.

Stronger, longer, better opioid antagonists? Nalmefene is NOT a naloxone replacement.

The fatal overdose crisis claims nearly 200 lives daily in the United States (U.S). Evolutions in the illicit drug supply, such as the addition of sedative adulterants and a shift to synthetic opioids such as fentanyl, have driven increasing rates of both fatal and non-fatal overdose. Specifically, synthetic opioid usage of fentanyl was implicated in 68 % of the U.S. drug overdose deaths in 2022 alone. This has placed tremendous burden on communities, emergency medical services, and healthcare systems, and contributed to tragedy and grief both in the U.S. and worldwide. Despite the availability of effective opioid antagonist medications and standards of care, there has been increased interest in research and development of alternative opioid overdose reversal agents by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in partnership with pharmaceutical manufacturers over the last decade. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved nalmefene (Opvee) a mu-opioid receptor antagonist that boasts an extended half-life and stronger mu-receptor affinity compared to the standard of care use of naloxone for opioid reversal. In this article, we explore the medical need and ramifications of the introduction of longer-acting opioid antagonists in the current opioid overdose landscape. Existing data highlight the effectiveness of already available naloxone products as a safe and effective standard of care. These data support the notion that stronger, longer-acting agents may be unnecessary, and their existence may cause undue harm, such as more severe and/or prolonged withdrawal symptoms, lead to challenging patient interactions, and complicate the initiation of medications for opioid use disorder. More evidence is needed before healthcare professionals should implement the use of stronger, longer-acting opioid antagonists for reversing opioid overdose over evidence-based, cost-effective naloxone.

Mortality risk and causes of death among people who use opioids in a take-home naloxone cohort.

BACKGROUND: People who use opioids (PWUO) have an excess mortality from a range of causes. The cumulative effect of behavioral, social, and health risk factors complicates the interpretation of the effects of suitable interventions. This study explores mortality causes among a cohort of PWUO in the take-home naloxone (THN) program. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of PWUO who received THN between 2015 and 2023. Participant data was linked with death registry data. Crude mortality rates and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated for all causes, internal causes, and accidental opioid overdoses (AOOs). In addition to age and gender, risk factors like main route of administration, polydrug use, self-experienced overdoses, and using while alone were fitted in a Cox Regression model to explore factors associated with mortality. RESULTS: The 2194 participants had a considerably higher mortality ratio for all causes investigated when compared to the general population (SMR=10.9, 95 % CI = 9.3,12.6). AOOs were the most prevalent cause of death (49 %). Those who reported frequent opioid use while alone had an elevated risk of dying of 2.6 (95 % CI = 1.1,6.4) compared to those who never used while alone. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent opioid use while alone was associated with elevated mortality risk, supporting the importance of overdose prevention education with naloxone distribution, and additional efforts to improve environmental and social areas for safer drug-use practices among PWUO. The variety of mortality causes found in this study illustrates the need for multifaceted and targeted interventions for people at risk of overdosing.

Reducing the Likelihood of Opioid Overdose Fatalities on College and University Campuses: An Action Plan and Model.

For more than two decades there has been a continuous rise in opioid overdose related deaths. The majority of the deaths include the age range when, traditionally, individuals are likely to attend college or university. As a result, Vassar College has taken the important initiative and created and implemented a new opioid overdose intervention strategy and action plan called AED+. AED+ expands on the Model of Greater Awareness, Training and Increased Availability of and Accessibility to Life Saving Intervention Devices; a model that was created based on AED devices improving outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest emergencies. Similar to AED's improving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes, the + component of the AED+ initiative increases awareness and provides basic, targeted education about naloxone and its use. Furthermore, the education includes information about naloxone's greater availability and its more immediate access across the campus by students, staff, faculty, administrators, and visitors in the event of a suspected opioid overdose. Starting in May 2023, members of the school's Health Service and senior administrative leaders identified it necessary to be proactive and not reactive to managing an opioid overdose in the campus community. Although Vassar College has not recently experienced an opioid overdose, it is confidently projected that these targeted actions will proactively and positively reduce the likelihood of opioid-related fatalities on campus. Furthermore, it is the purpose of this article to share the AED+ model so other colleges and universities can modify it to best fit their unique setting in order to improve opioid overdose outcomes.

Distribution of intranasal naloxone to potential opioid overdose bystanders in Sweden: effects on overdose mortality in a full region-wide study.

OBJECTIVES: Distribution of take-home naloxone is suggested to reduce opioid-related fatalities, but few studies have examined the effects on overdose deaths in the general population of an entire community. This study aimed to assess the effects on overdose deaths of a large-scale take-home naloxone programme starting in June 2018, using an observational design with a historic control period. DESIGN: From the national causes of death register, deaths diagnosed as X42 or Y12 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, ICD-10) were registered as overdoses. Numbers of overdoses were calculated per 100 000 inhabitants in the general population, and controlled for data including only individuals with a prior substance use disorder in national patient registers, to focus on effects within the primary target population of the programme. The full intervention period (2019-2021) was compared with a historic control period (2013-2017). SETTING: Skåne county, Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: General population. INTERVENTIONS: Large-scale take-home naloxone distribution to individuals at risk of overdose. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Decrease in overdose deaths per 100 000 inhabitants, in total and within the population with substance use disorder diagnosis. RESULTS: Annual average number of overdose deaths decreased significantly from 3.9 to 2.8 per 100 000 inhabitants from the control period to the intervention period (a significant decrease in men, from 6.7 to 4.3, but not in women, from 1.2 to 1.3). Significant changes remained when examining only prior substance use disorder patients, and decreases in overdose deaths could not be attributed to a change in treatment needs for opioid use disorders in healthcare and social services. CONCLUSIONS: The present study, involving 3 years of take-home naloxone distribution, demonstrated a decreased overdose mortality in the population, however, only in men. The findings call for further implementation of naloxone programmes, and for further studies of potential effects and barriers in women. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03570099.

Characterizing opioid overdose hotspots for place-based overdose prevention and treatment interventions: A geo-spatial analysis of Rhode Island, USA.

OBJECTIVE: Examine differences in neighborhood characteristics and services between overdose hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods and identify neighborhood-level population factors associated with increased overdose incidence. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective analysis of Rhode Island, USA residents who had a fatal or non-fatal overdose from 2016 to 2020 using an environmental scan and data from Rhode Island emergency medical services, State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System, and the American Community Survey. We conducted a spatial scan via SaTScan to identify non-fatal and fatal overdose hotspots and compared the characteristics of hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods. We identified associations between census block group-level characteristics using a Besag-York-Mollié model specification with a conditional autoregressive spatial random effect. RESULTS: We identified 7 non-fatal and 3 fatal overdose hotspots in Rhode Island during the study period. Hotspot neighborhoods had higher proportions of Black and Latino/a residents, renter-occupied housing, vacant housing, unemployment, and cost-burdened households. A higher proportion of hotspot neighborhoods had a religious organization, a health center, or a police station. Non-fatal overdose risk increased in a dose responsive manner with increasing proportions of residents living in poverty. There was increased relative risk of non-fatal and fatal overdoses in neighborhoods with crowded housing above the mean (RR 1.19 [95 % CI 1.05, 1.34]; RR 1.21 [95 % CI 1.18, 1.38], respectively). CONCLUSION: Neighborhoods with increased prevalence of housing instability and poverty are at highest risk of overdose. The high availability of social services in overdose hotspots presents an opportunity to work with established organizations to prevent overdose deaths.