IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/28067.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic Studies on the Opioid Crisis: A Review

Author

Listed:
  • Johanna Catherine Maclean
  • Justine Mallatt
  • Christopher J. Ruhm
  • Kosali Simon

Abstract

The United States has experienced an unprecedented crisis related to the misuse of and addiction to opioids. As of 2018, 128 Americans die each day of an opioid overdose, and total economic costs associated with opioid misuse are estimated to be more than $500 billion annually. The crisis has evolved in three phases, starting in the 1990s and continuing through 2010 with a massive increase in use of prescribed opioids associated with lax prescribing regulations and aggressive marketing efforts by the pharmaceutical industry. A second phase included tightening restrictions on prescribed opioids, reformulation of some commonly misused prescription medications, and a shift to heroin consumption over the period 2010 to 2013. Since 2013, the third phase of the crisis has included a movement towards synthetic opioids, especially fentanyl, and a continued tightening of opioid prescribing regulations, along with the growth of both harm reduction and addiction treatment access policies. Economic research, using innovative frameworks, causal methods, and rich data, has added to our understanding of the causes and consequences of the crisis. This body of research also identifies intended and unintended impacts of policies designed to address the crisis. Although there is general agreement that the causes of the crisis include a combination of supply- and demand-side factors, and interactions between them, there is less consensus regarding the relative importance of each. Studies show that regulations can reduce opioid prescribing but may have less impact on root causes of the crisis and, in some cases, have spillover effects resulting in greater use of more harmful substances obtained in illicit markets, where regulation is less possible. There are effective opioid use disorder treatments available, but access, stigma, and cost hurdles have stifled utilization, resulting in a large degree of under-treatment in the U.S. How challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic may intersect with the opioid crisis is unclear. Emerging areas for future research include understanding how societal and healthcare systems disruptions affect opioid use, as well as which regulations and policies most effectively reduce potentially inappropriate prescription opioid use and illicit opioid sources without unintended negative consequences.

Suggested Citation

  • Johanna Catherine Maclean & Justine Mallatt & Christopher J. Ruhm & Kosali Simon, 2020. "Economic Studies on the Opioid Crisis: A Review," NBER Working Papers 28067, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:28067
    Note: CH EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w28067.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Philip Armour & Rosanna Smart & Elliott Brennan, 2021. "The Causes and Consequences of Opioid Use among Older Americans: A Panel Survey Approach," Working Papers wp419, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    2. Ilaria Natali & Mathias Dewatripont & Victor Ginsburgh & Michel Goldman & Patrick Legros, 2023. "Prescription opioids and economic hardship in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(9), pages 1473-1504, December.
    3. Olga Scrivner & Elizabeth McAvoy & Thuy Nguyen & Tenzin Choeden & Kosali Simon & Katy Borner, 2021. "Interactive Network Visualization of Opioid Crisis Related Data- Policy, Pharmaceutical, Training, and More," Papers 2102.05596, arXiv.org.
    4. William Encinosa & Didem Bernard & Thomas M. Selden, 2022. "Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-52, March.
    5. Deza, Monica & Maclean, Johanna Catherine & Solomon, Keisha, 2022. "Local access to mental healthcare and crime," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    6. Janssen, Aljoscha & Zhang, Xuan, 2020. "Retail Pharmacies and Drug Diversion during the Opioid Epidemic," Working Paper Series 1373, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    7. Coleman Drake & Jiebing Wen & Jesse Hinde & Hefei Wen, 2021. "Recreational cannabis laws and opioid‐related emergency department visit rates," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(10), pages 2595-2605, September.
    8. Park, Sujeong & Powell, David, 2021. "Is the rise in illicit opioids affecting labor supply and disability claiming rates?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    9. Cecilia S. Diaz-Campo, M. Antonella Mancino, 2023. "What We RANDomly Did Not Learn: Opioid Elasticities and Underlying Mechanisms," LCERPA Working Papers bm0139, Laurier Centre for Economic Research and Policy Analysis.
    10. Shishir Shakya & Jane E. Ruseski, 2023. "The effect of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs on county‐level opioid prescribing practices and spillovers," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(3), pages 435-454, July.
    11. Noah Spencer, 2022. "Does decriminalization cause more drug overdose deaths? Evidence from Oregon Measure 110," Working Papers tecipa-745, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    12. David M. Cutler & Edward L. Glaeser, 2021. "When Innovation Goes Wrong: Technological Regress and the Opioid Epidemic," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(4), pages 171-196, Fall.
    13. Johanna Catherine Maclean & Justine Mallatt & Christopher J. Ruhm & Kosali Simon, 2022. "The Opioid Crisis, Health, Healthcare, and Crime: A Review of Quasi-Experimental Economic Studies," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 703(1), pages 15-49, September.
    14. David M. Cutler & Edward L. Glaeser, 2021. "When Innovation Goes Wrong: Technological Regress and the Opioid Epidemic," NBER Working Papers 28873, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor Economics: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:28067. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.