ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2025
Enhancing Naloxone Distribution for Opioid Users in the USA: A Cost-Utility Analysis of Academic Detailing to Clinicians.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOpioid overdose remains a leading cause of mortality in the USA. Although distributing naloxone to laypersons for use during witnessed opioid overdoses has been shown to effectively reduce overdose deaths, clinician awareness of naloxone prescribing remains low. Academic detailing (AD) has been reported to be an effective strategy to increase naloxone distribution to individuals at risk of opioid-related overdose/death.
objectiveThis study evaluated the cost effectiveness of an academic detailing program aimed at promoting naloxone prescribing for adults at risk of opioid-related overdose compared to no intervention (non-AD program).
methodsA Markov model with an integrated decision tree was developed to estimate the costs and outcomes associated with the AD program over a lifetime horizon from the US payer perspective. Model robustness was tested using sensitivity and scenario analyses.
resultsThe results indicated that the AD program incurred a total direct cost of US$6280 and achieved 16.52 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). In comparison, the non-AD program incurred a total direct cost of US$5971 and achieved 15.92 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the AD program was US$514 per QALY gained with an incremental net monetary benefit of US$29,739. Sensitivity and scenario analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings, which suggest that AD is a cost-effective strategy for improving survival and quality of life in individuals at risk of opioid overdose.
conclusionsFor decision makers seeking to address the opioid crisis, implementing an academic detailing program represents a cost-effective option at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$50,000 per QALY gained.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.