An experimental investigation of federal messaging on public support for enforcement- and treatment-based approaches for opioid overdose prevention in South Carolina.
Lídia Gual-Gonzalez, Hunter M Boehme, Peter Leasure, Pieter A Baker, Melissa S Nolan
{"title":"An experimental investigation of federal messaging on public support for enforcement- and treatment-based approaches for opioid overdose prevention in South Carolina.","authors":"Lídia Gual-Gonzalez, Hunter M Boehme, Peter Leasure, Pieter A Baker, Melissa S Nolan","doi":"10.1186/s40352-025-00356-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As the opioid overdose crisis continues to produce excessive morbidity and mortality in the United States, government agencies have applied various approaches to prevent overdoses, including law-enforcement efforts (e.g., arresting people who use drugs, interrupting drug traffickers, etc.) and treatment-based approaches (e.g., naloxone, medications for opioid use disorder, etc.). Public perception and support of these approaches are relevant for informing policy, allocating resources, and effectively implementing community interventions to prevent drug-related harms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using an embedded informational survey design, we experimentally assessed whether public support for strategies to prevent overdose in South Carolina is influenced by language from federal agencies describing treatment- or enforcement-based approaches. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) enforcement -based approach, (2) treatment-based approach, or (3) the control condition. Those assigned to experimental groups were presented with statistics on drug overdose deaths, followed by an informational prompt with language about overdose prevention approaches from either DEA (enforcement) or NIH (treatment), while the control group received no informational prompt.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings from a sample of 4,675 respondents indicated that those assigned the DEA prompt were significantly more likely to support enforcement-based approaches in arresting drug traffickers and people who use drugs (AME = 0.060, p < 0.001). On the other hand, those assigned to the NIH prompt were significantly more likely to agree that both law enforcement (AME = 0.065, p < 0.0001) and clinicians (AME = 0.044, p < 0.05) are capable of preventing drug overdose deaths.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings shed light on public perceptions of approaches to addressing the opioid epidemic and limited modifiability when presented with language from federal agencies. This may inform future research, practice, and/or policy aiming to maintain public safety while also providing treatment options to people who use drugs in order to reduce overdose deaths.</p>","PeriodicalId":37843,"journal":{"name":"Health and Justice","volume":"13 1","pages":"46"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12291324/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-025-00356-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: As the opioid overdose crisis continues to produce excessive morbidity and mortality in the United States, government agencies have applied various approaches to prevent overdoses, including law-enforcement efforts (e.g., arresting people who use drugs, interrupting drug traffickers, etc.) and treatment-based approaches (e.g., naloxone, medications for opioid use disorder, etc.). Public perception and support of these approaches are relevant for informing policy, allocating resources, and effectively implementing community interventions to prevent drug-related harms.
Methods: Using an embedded informational survey design, we experimentally assessed whether public support for strategies to prevent overdose in South Carolina is influenced by language from federal agencies describing treatment- or enforcement-based approaches. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) enforcement -based approach, (2) treatment-based approach, or (3) the control condition. Those assigned to experimental groups were presented with statistics on drug overdose deaths, followed by an informational prompt with language about overdose prevention approaches from either DEA (enforcement) or NIH (treatment), while the control group received no informational prompt.
Results: Findings from a sample of 4,675 respondents indicated that those assigned the DEA prompt were significantly more likely to support enforcement-based approaches in arresting drug traffickers and people who use drugs (AME = 0.060, p < 0.001). On the other hand, those assigned to the NIH prompt were significantly more likely to agree that both law enforcement (AME = 0.065, p < 0.0001) and clinicians (AME = 0.044, p < 0.05) are capable of preventing drug overdose deaths.
Conclusions: These findings shed light on public perceptions of approaches to addressing the opioid epidemic and limited modifiability when presented with language from federal agencies. This may inform future research, practice, and/or policy aiming to maintain public safety while also providing treatment options to people who use drugs in order to reduce overdose deaths.
期刊介绍:
Health & Justice is open to submissions from public health, criminology and criminal justice, medical science, psychology and clinical sciences, sociology, neuroscience, biology, anthropology and the social sciences, and covers a broad array of research types. It publishes original research, research notes (promising issues that are smaller in scope), commentaries, and translational notes (possible ways of introducing innovations in the justice system). Health & Justice aims to: Present original experimental research on the area of health and well-being of people involved in the adult or juvenile justice system, including people who work in the system; Present meta-analysis or systematic reviews in the area of health and justice for those involved in the justice system; Provide an arena to present new and upcoming scientific issues; Present translational science—the movement of scientific findings into practice including programs, procedures, or strategies; Present implementation science findings to advance the uptake and use of evidence-based practices; and, Present protocols and clinical practice guidelines. As an open access journal, Health & Justice aims for a broad reach, including researchers across many disciplines as well as justice practitioners (e.g. judges, prosecutors, defenders, probation officers, treatment providers, mental health and medical personnel working with justice-involved individuals, etc.). The sections of the journal devoted to translational and implementation sciences are primarily geared to practitioners and justice actors with special attention to the techniques used.