Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T01:04:18.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Overview of Prescription Drug Misuse and Abuse: Defining the Problem and Seeking Solutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Bonnie B. Wilford ,
James Finch ,
Dorynne J. Czechowicz  and
David Warren
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Each year, millions of individuals in the United States are treated for a variety of serious medical conditions with prescription drugs whose therapeutic benefits are well known. The vast majority of these medications are used to treat medical and psychiatric illnesses. Generally, they are used as prescribed, and contribute to a better quality of life for persons suffering from debilitating or life-threatening disorders.

The fact that a small portion of these medications is diverted by those who seek their psychoactive effects raises the important policy issue: how to make drugs easily available for medical use while limiting access for purposes of abuse.

Such a responsibility poses challenges very different from those of the so-called “war” on illicit drugs, because this control must be achieved without impeding patients’ access to medical care. A rational public policy would attempt to achieve a balance between the need to minimize abuse and the need to provide relief.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , Fall 1994 , pp. 197 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Horgan, C. Prottas, J. Tompkins, C. Wastila, L. Bowden, M., “A Research Agenda for Prescription Drug Diversion Control,” in Cooper, J.R. Czechowicz, D.J. Molinari, S.P., eds., Impact of Prescription Drug Diversion Control Systems on Medical Practice and Patient Care (Rockville: National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIDA Research Monograph 131, 1993), pp. 309–24.Google Scholar
Ibid.Google Scholar
Conference materials, which include all papers given at the meeting, are available from the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics.Google Scholar
Office of the Inspector General, Initiative to Improve States' Internal Controls Over Prescription Drugs Purchased Under the Medicaid Program (Washington, D.C.: DHHS, Publication no. A-03-90-000204, 1990).Google Scholar
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies, 1993 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (Rockville: DHHS/PHS, Advance Report 7, July 1994).Google Scholar
Ibid.Google Scholar
American Council of Neuropsychopharmacology, “Exclusion of Benzodiazepines from Medicaid Reimbursement,” Neuropsychopharmacology, 4, no. 4 (1991): 288–89. (Accepted as a consensus statement by the ACNP Council, March 22, 1991). See also Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, supra note 5.Google Scholar
Harris, L., Problems of Drug Dependence 1990: Proceeding of the 52nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Committee on Problems of Drug Dependence (Rockville: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1991); and American Council of Neuropsychopharmacology, supra note 7.Google Scholar
Cohen, S., “Drug Abuse and the Prescribing Physician,” in Buchwald, C. Cohen, S. Katz, D., eds., Frequently Prescribed and Abused Drugs: Their Indications, Efficacy and Rational Prescribing (Rockville: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1980); and Angarola, R., “The Effect of National and International Drug Control Laws on Patient Care,” in Wilford, B., ed., Balancing the Response to Prescription Drug Abuse: Report of a National Symposium on Medicine & Public Policy (Chicago: American Medical Association, 1990).Google Scholar
Wesson, D.R. Smith, D.E., “Prescription Drug Abuse: Physician and Patient Responsibilities,” Western Journal of Medicine, May (1991).Google Scholar
Angarola, , supra note 9.Google Scholar
Ibid.Google Scholar
Ibid.Google Scholar
Cohen, supra note 9.Google Scholar
Office of the Inspector General, supra note 4.Google Scholar
Kreling, C., “The Effects of an Internal Analgesic Formulary Restriction on Medicaid Drug Expenditures in Wisconsin,” Medical Care, 27 (1989): 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Council of Neuropsychopharmacology, supra note 7.Google Scholar
Drug Enforcement Administration, Multiple Copy Prescription Program Resource Guide (Washington, D.C.: Drug Enforcement Administration, 1987).Google Scholar
F–D–C Report, Inc., no. 37, Sept. 17, 1990.Google Scholar
Gallup Organization, Inc., Physicians' Attitudes Toward the New York Triplicate Prescription Legislation (Princeton: The Gallup Organization, 1991); Editorial: “Benzodiazepines: Additional Effects of the Triplicate Program,” New York State Journal of Medicine, 5 (1991): 273–75; and Weintraub, M. Singh, S. Byrne, L. Muharaj, K. Guttmacher, L., “Consequences of the 1989 New York State Triplicate Benzodiazepine Prescription Regulations,” Journal of the American Medical Association, 266, no. 17 (1991): 2392-97.Google Scholar
Office of the Inspector General, supra note 4.Google Scholar
Rucker, T.D., “Drug Utilization Review: Moving Toward an Effective and Safe Model,” in Morgan, J.P. Kagan, D.C., eds., Society and Medication: Conflicting Signals for Prescribers and Patients (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1983).Google Scholar
Office of the Inspector General, supra note 4.Google Scholar
Rucker, , supra note 22.Google Scholar
American Medical Association, American Pharmaceutical Association, and Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, Principles of Drug Use Review (DUR) (Washington, D.C.: American Medical Association, American Pharmaceutical Association, and Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, 1991).Google Scholar