Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Corey S. Davis is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Corey S. Davis.


American Journal of Public Health | 2005

Effects of an Intensive Street-Level Police Intervention on Syringe Exchange Program Use in Philadelphia, Pa

Corey S. Davis; Scott Burris; Julie Kraut-Becher; Kevin G. Lynch; David S. Metzger

Repeated measurements and mixed-effects models were used to analyze the effects of an intensive long-term street-level police intervention on syringe exchange program use. Utilization data for 9 months before and after the beginning of the intervention were analyzed. Use fell across all categories and time periods studied, with significant declines in use among total participants, male participants, and Black participants. Declines in use among Black and male participants were much more pronounced than decreases among White and female participants.


American Journal of Public Health | 2014

Expanded Access to Naloxone Among Firefighters, Police Officers, and Emergency Medical Technicians in Massachusetts

Corey S. Davis; Sarah Ruiz; Patrick Glynn; Gerald Picariello; Alexander Y. Walley

Naloxone is a medication that reverses respiratory depression from opioid overdose if given in time. Paramedics routinely administer naloxone to opioid overdose victims in the prehospital setting, and many states are moving to increase access to the medication. Several jurisdictions have expanded naloxone administration authority to nonparamedic first responders, and others are considering that step. We report here on policy change in Massachusetts, where several communities have equipped emergency medical technicians, law enforcement officers, and firefighters with naloxone.


Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics | 2013

Changing law from barrier to facilitator of opioid overdose prevention

Corey S. Davis; Damika Webb; Scott Burris

Opioid overdose is the leading cause of accidental injury death in the United States, taking the lives of over 16,000 Americans every year. Many of those deaths are preventable through the timely provision of naloxone, a drug that reliably and effectively reverses opioid overdose. However, that drug is often not available where and when it is needed, due in large part to laws that pre-date the overdose epidemic. Preliminary evidence suggests that amending those laws to encourage the prescription and use of naloxone will reduce opioid overdose deaths, and a number of states have done so in the past several years. Since legal amendments designed to facilitate naloxone access have no documented negative effects, can be implemented at little or no cost, and have the potential to save both lives and resources, states that have not passed them may benefit from doing so.


Drug and Alcohol Dependence | 2015

Legal changes to increase access to naloxone for opioid overdose reversal in the United States

Corey S. Davis; Derek Carr

BACKGROUND Opioid overdose, which has reached epidemic levels in the United States, is reversible by administration of the medication naloxone. Naloxone requires a prescription but is not a controlled substance and has no abuse potential. In the last half-decade, the majority of states have modified their laws to increase layperson access to the medication. METHODS We utilized a structured legal research protocol to systematically identify and review all statutes and regulations related to layperson naloxone access in the United States that had been adopted as of September, 2015. Each law discovered via this process was reviewed and coded by two trained legal researchers. RESULTS As of September, 2015, 43 states and the District of Columbia have passed laws intended to increase layperson naloxone access. We categorized these laws into three domains: (1) laws intended to increase naloxone prescribing and distribution, (2) laws intended to increase pharmacy naloxone access, and (3) laws intended to encourage overdose witnesses to summon emergency responders. These laws vary greatly across states in such characteristics as the types of individuals who can receive a prescription for naloxone, whether laypeople can dispense the medication, and immunity provided to those who prescribe, dispense and administer naloxone or report an overdose emergency. CONCLUSIONS Most states have now passed laws intended to increase layperson access to naloxone. While these laws will likely reduce overdose morbidity and mortality, the cost of naloxone and its prescription status remain barriers to more widespread access.


Harm Reduction Journal | 2015

Orienting Patients to Greater Opioid Safety: Models of Community Pharmacy-Based Naloxone

Traci C. Green; Emily F. Dauria; Jeffrey P. Bratberg; Corey S. Davis; Alexander Y. Walley

The leading cause of adult injury death in the USA is drug overdose, the majority of which involves prescription opioid medications. Outside of the USA, deaths by drug overdose are also on the rise, and overdose is a leading cause of death for drug users. Reducing overdose risk while maintaining access to prescription opioids when medically indicated requires careful consideration of how opioids are prescribed and dispensed, how patients use them, how they interact with other medications, and how they are safely stored. Pharmacists, highly trained professionals expert at detecting and managing medication errors and drug-drug interactions, safe dispensing, and patient counseling, are an under-utilized asset in addressing overdose in the US and globally. Pharmacies provide a high-yield setting where patient and caregiver customers can access naloxone—an opioid antagonist that reverses opioid overdose—and overdose prevention counseling. This case study briefly describes and provides two US state-specific examples of innovative policy models of pharmacy-based naloxone, implemented to reduce overdose events and improve opioid safety: Collaborative Pharmacy Practice Agreements and Pharmacy Standing Orders.


American Journal of Public Health | 2008

The Law (and Politics) of Safe Injection Facilities in the United States

Leo Beletsky; Corey S. Davis; Evan D. Anderson; Scott Burris

Safe injection facilities (SIFs) have shown promise in reducing harms and social costs associated with injection drug use. Favorable evaluations elsewhere have raised the issue of their implementation in the United States. Recognizing that laws shape health interventions targeting drug users, we analyzed the legal environment for publicly authorized SIFs in the United States. Although states and some municipalities have the power to authorize SIFs under state law, federal authorities could still interfere with these facilities under the Controlled Substances Act. A state- or locally-authorized SIF could proceed free of legal uncertainty only if federal authorities explicitly authorized it or decided not to interfere. Given legal uncertainty, and the similar experience with syringe exchange programs, we recommend a process of sustained health research, strategic advocacy, and political deliberation.


Harm Reduction Journal | 2009

Bundling Occupational Safety with Harm Reduction Information as a Feasible Method for Improving Police Receptiveness to Syringe Access Programs: Evidence from Three U.S. Cities

Corey S. Davis; Leo Beletsky

IntroductionIn light of overwhelming evidence that access to sterile injection equipment reduces incidence of injection-attributable bloodborne disease without encouraging drug use, many localities have authorized sterile syringe access programs (SAPs), including syringe exchange and pharmacy-based initiatives. Even where such interventions are clearly legal, many law enforcement officers are unaware of the public health benefits and legal status of these programs and may continue to treat the possession of injection equipment as illegal and program participation as a marker of illegal behavior. Law enforcement practice can impede SAP utilization and may increase the risk of needlestick injury (NSI) among law enforcement personnel. Many SAPs conduct little or no outreach to law enforcement, in part because they perceive law enforcement actors as unreceptive to health-promotion programs targeting drug users.Case descriptionWe report on a brief training intervention for law enforcement personnel designed to increase officer knowledge of and positive attitudes towards SAPs by bundling content that addresses officer concerns about infectious disease and occupational safety with information about the legality and public health benefits of these programs. Pilot trainings using this bundled curriculum were conducted with approximately 600 officers in three US cities.Discussion and evaluationLaw enforcement officers were generally receptive to receiving information about SAPs through the bundled curriculum. The trainings led to better communication and collaboration between SAP and law enforcement personnel, providing a valuable platform for better harmonization of law enforcement and public health activities targeting injection drug users.ConclusionThe experience in these three cities suggests that a harm reduction training curriculum that bundles strategies for increasing officer occupational safety with information about the legality and public health benefits of SAPs can be well received by law enforcement personnel and can lead to better communication and collaboration between law enforcement and harm reduction actors. Further study is indicated to assess whether such a bundled curriculum is effective in changing officer attitudes and beliefs and reducing health risks to officers and injection drug users, as well as broader benefits to the community at large.


Harm Reduction Journal | 2012

Harmonizing Disease Prevention and Police Practice in the Implementation of HIV Prevention Programs: Up-Stream Strategies from Wilmington, Delaware

Basha Silverman; Corey S. Davis; Julia Graff; Umbreen Bhatti; Melissa Santos; Leo Beletsky

IntroductionImproving access to sterile injection equipment is a key component in community-based infectious disease prevention. Implementation of syringe access programs has sometimes been complicated by community opposition and police interference.Case descriptionIn 2006, the Delaware legislature authorized a pilot syringe exchange program (SEP). A program designed to prevent, monitor, and respond to possible policing and community barriers before they had a chance to effect program implementation and operation. A program designed to prevent, monitor, and respond to these barriers was planned and implemented by a multidisciplinary team of legal practitioners and public health professionals.DiscussionWe report on an integrated intervention to address structural barriers to syringe exchange program utilization. This intervention employs community, police and client education combined with systematic surveillance of and rapid response to police interference to preempt the kinds of structural barriers to implementation observed elsewhere. The intervention addresses community concerns and stresses the benefits of syringe exchange programs to officer occupational safety.ConclusionsA cohesive effort combining collaboration with and educational outreach to police and community members based on the needs and concerns of these groups as well as SEP clients and potential clients helped establish a supportive street environment for the SEP. Police-driven structural barriers to implementation of public health programs targeting populations engaged in drug use and other illicit behavior can be addressed by up-stream planning, prevention, monitoring and intervention strategies. More research is needed to inform the tailoring of interventions to address police-driven barriers to HIV prevention services, especially among marginalized populations.


American Journal of Public Health | 2015

Engaging Law Enforcement in Overdose Reversal Initiatives: Authorization and Liability for Naloxone Administration

Corey S. Davis; Derek Carr; Jessica K. Southwell; Leo Beletsky

Opioid overdose is reversible through the timely administration of naloxone, which has been used by emergency medical services for decades. Law enforcement officers (LEOs) are often the first emergency responders to arrive at an overdose, but they are not typically equipped with naloxone. This is rapidly changing; more than 220 law enforcement agencies in 24 states now carry naloxone. However, rollout in some departments has been hampered by concerns regarding officer and agency liability. We systematically examined the legal risk associated with LEO naloxone administration. LEOs can be authorized to administer naloxone through a variety of mechanisms, and liability risks related to naloxone administration are similar to or lower than those of other activities in which LEOs commonly engage.


Journal of The American Pharmacists Association | 2017

State legal innovations to encourage naloxone dispensing

Corey S. Davis; Derek Carr

OBJECTIVES The opioid overdose epidemic continues to claim the lives of tens of thousands of Americans every year. Increased access to the opioid antagonist naloxone can reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. In this commentary, we describe several recent legal innovations designed to encourage pharmacists to ensure that naloxone is available when and where it is needed, and dispel some common misconceptions regarding potential legal risks associated with pharmacy naloxone dispensing. DATA SOURCES Data are drawn from state laws and regulations, as catalogued by the Westlaw database. SUMMARY States have rapidly modified law and policy to increase layperson access to naloxone. As of August 2016, 44 states permit naloxone to be prescribed for administration to a person with whom the prescriber does not have a prescriber-patient relationship. Forty-two states permit naloxone to be dispensed via a non-patient-specific mechanism such as a standing or protocol order, and 5 states permit some pharmacists to prescribe naloxone on their own authority. The liability risk associated with naloxone dispensing is no higher than any other medication, and may be lower than some. However, to encourage the prescription and dispensing of naloxone, 36 states provide additional protection from civil liability for pharmacy naloxone dispensing, and 32 states provide protection from potential criminal action. Naloxone access laws in 31 states explicitly provide that dispensing naloxone as permitted by law cannot be grounds for disciplinary action by the state board of pharmacy or similar entity. CONCLUSION Pharmacists are key members of the health care team and are uniquely situated to reduce potential opioid overdose risk. Pharmacists should be aware of and utilize innovative state laws designed to increase access to naloxone.

Collaboration


Dive into the Corey S. Davis's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Leo Beletsky

Northeastern University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Evan D. Anderson

University of Pennsylvania

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lisa de Saxe Zerden

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lainie Rutkow

Johns Hopkins University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge