Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background and Context: Realization of the life-saving potential of “take-home naloxone” has been a personal journey, but it has also been a collective journey. It has been a story of individual exploration and growth, and also a story of changes at a societal level. “Take-home naloxone” has matured since its first conceptualization a quarter of a century ago. It required recognition of the enormous burden of deaths from drug overdose (particularly heroin and other opioids), and also realization of critical clusterings (such as post-release from prison). It also required realization that, since many overdose deaths are witnessed, we can potentially prevent many deaths by mobilizing drug users themselves, their families, and the wider caring community to act as intervention workforce to give life-saving interim emergency care. Summary of Scope: This article explores 5 areas (many illustrations UK-based where the author works): firstly, the need for strong science; secondly, our improved understanding of opioid overdose and deaths; thirdly, the search for greater impact from our policies and interventions; fourthly, developing better forms of naloxone; and fifthly, examining the challenges still to be addressed. Key Messages: “Take-home naloxone” is an exemplar of harm reduction with potential global impact – drug policy and practice for the public good. However, “having the potential” is not good enough – there needs to be actual implementation. This will be easier once the component parts of “take-home naloxone” are improved (better naloxone products, better training aids, revised legislation, and explicit funding support). Many improvements are already possible, but we hesitate about implementation. It is our responsibility to drive progress faster. With “take-home naloxone,” we can be proud of what we have achieved, but we must also be humble about how much more we still need to do.
John Strang (Tue,) studied this question.