Defining Misprescribing to Inform Prescription Opioid Policy

1Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

Prescription opioid policies too often reflect over a century's worth of moralizing about the nature of opioid use disorder, the value of pain, and the meaning of suffering. The social and legal penalties to prescribers run in one direction—avoid overprescribing, however defined, at all costs. The lack of shared definitions is problematic for formulating and evaluating opioid policy. For example, the variant definitions of “misuse,” “abuse,” and “addiction” complicate estimates of morbidity. There are also no widely accepted definitions of misprescribing and overprescribing. I offer here a modest attempt at the categorization of misprescribing: inadvertent overprescribing, corrupt overprescribing, qualitative overprescribing, quantitative overprescribing, multiclass overprescribing, and underprescribing.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dineen, K. K. (2018, July 1). Defining Misprescribing to Inform Prescription Opioid Policy. Hastings Center Report. John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.862

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free