IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0130050.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Messaging to Increase Public Support for Naloxone Distribution Policies in the United States: Results from a Randomized Survey Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus A Bachhuber
  • Emma E McGinty
  • Alene Kennedy-Hendricks
  • Jeff Niederdeppe
  • Colleen L Barry

Abstract

Background: Barriers to public support for naloxone distribution include lack of knowledge, concerns about potential unintended consequences, and lack of sympathy for people at risk of overdose. Methods: A randomized survey experiment was conducted with a nationally-representative web-based survey research panel (GfK KnowledgePanel). Participants were randomly assigned to read different messages alone or in combination: 1) factual information about naloxone; 2) pre-emptive refutation of potential concerns about naloxone distribution; and 3) a sympathetic narrative about a mother whose daughter died of an opioid overdose. Participants were then asked if they support or oppose policies related to naloxone distribution. For each policy item, logistic regression models were used to test the effect of each message exposure compared with the no-exposure control group. Results: The final sample consisted of 1,598 participants (completion rate: 72.6%). Factual information and the sympathetic narrative alone each led to higher support for training first responders to use naloxone, providing naloxone to friends and family members of people using opioids, and passing laws to protect people who administer naloxone. Participants receiving the combination of the sympathetic narrative and factual information, compared to factual information alone, were more likely to support all policies: providing naloxone to friends and family members (OR: 2.0 [95% CI: 1.4 to 2.9]), training first responders to use naloxone (OR: 2.0 [95% CI: 1.2 to 3.4]), passing laws to protect people if they administer naloxone (OR: 1.5 [95% CI: 1.04 to 2.2]), and passing laws to protect people if they call for medical help for an overdose (OR: 1.7 [95% CI: 1.2 to 2.5]). Conclusions: All messages increased public support, but combining factual information and the sympathetic narrative was most effective. Public support for naloxone distribution can be improved through education and sympathetic portrayals of the population who stands to benefit from these policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus A Bachhuber & Emma E McGinty & Alene Kennedy-Hendricks & Jeff Niederdeppe & Colleen L Barry, 2015. "Messaging to Increase Public Support for Naloxone Distribution Policies in the United States: Results from a Randomized Survey Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0130050
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130050
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130050&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0130050?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davis, C.S. & Ruiz, S. & Glynn, P. & Picariello, G. & Walley, A.Y., 2014. "Expanded access to naloxone among firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical technicians in massachusetts," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(8), pages 7-9.
    2. Des Jarlais, D.C. & Paone, D. & Friedman, S.R. & Peyser, N. & Newman, R.G., 1995. "Regulating controversial programs for unpopular people: Methadone maintenance and syringe exchange programs," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(11), pages 1577-1584.
    3. Doe-Simkins, M. & Walley, A.Y. & Epstein, A. & Moyer, P., 2009. "Saved by the nose: Bystander-administered intranasal naloxone hydrochloride for opioid overdose," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(5), pages 788-791.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Reynolds, J.P. & Pilling, M. & Marteau, T.M., 2018. "Communicating quantitative evidence of policy effectiveness and support for the policy: Three experimental studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 1-12.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Berardi, Luca & Bucerius, Sandra & Haggerty, Kevin D. & Krahn, Harvey, 2021. "Narcan and Narcan't: Implementation factors influencing police officer use of Narcan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    2. White, Michael D. & Perrone, Dina & Malm, Aili & Watts, Seth, 2021. "Narcan cops: Officer perceptions of opioid use and willingness to carry naloxone," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Crum, John D. & Corradi, A. & Ramey, D.M., 2024. "For law enforcement purposes: The complicated relationship between the 1033 program and the expanding police mandate," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Mars, Sarah G. & Fessel, Jason N. & Bourgois, Philippe & Montero, Fernando & Karandinos, George & Ciccarone, Daniel, 2015. "Heroin-related overdose: The unexplored influences of markets, marketing and source-types in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 44-53.
    5. Daniel I. Rees & Joseph J. Sabia & Laura M. Argys & Joshua Latshaw & Dhaval Dave, 2017. "With a Little Help from My Friends: The Effects of Naloxone Access and Good Samaritan Laws on Opioid-Related Deaths," NBER Working Papers 23171, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0130050. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.