This dataset contains aggregate death data at the state and county level for Pennsylvania residents. The data are displayed by year, race/ethnicity, gender, age group and cause of death.

View quarterly trends in opioid dispensation data for all Schedule II-V opioids.
Please see PDMP Data Technical Notes for additional details: http://www.health.pa.gov/Your-Department-of-Health/Offices%20and%20Bureaus/PaPrescriptionDrugMonitoringProgram/Documents/PDMPDataTechnicalNotes.pdf
More information from U.S. Department of Justice
https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/
Schedule I Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("Ecstasy").
Schedule II/IIN Controlled Substances (2/2N)
Substances in this schedule have a high potential for abuse which may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.
Examples of Schedule II narcotics include: hydromorphone (Dilaudid®), methadone (Dolophine®), meperidine (Demerol®), oxycodone (OxyContin®, Percocet®), and fentanyl (Sublimaze®, Duragesic®). Other Schedule II narcotics include: morphine, opium, codeine, and hydrocodone.
Examples of Schedule IIN stimulants include: amphetamine (Dexedrine®, Adderall®), methamphetamine (Desoxyn®), and methylphenidate (Ritalin®).
Other Schedule II substances include: amobarbital, glutethimide, and pentobarbital.
Schedule III/IIIN Controlled Substances (3/3N)
Substances in this schedule have a potential for abuse less than substances in Schedules I or II and abuse may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.
Examples of Schedule III narcotics include: products containing not more than 90 milligrams of codeine per dosage unit (Tylenol with Codeine®), and buprenorphine (Suboxone®).
Examples of Schedule IIIN non-narcotics include: benzphetamine (Didrex®), phendimetrazine, ketamine, and anabolic steroids such as Depo®-Testosterone.
Schedule IV Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have a low potential for abuse relative to substances in Schedule III.
Examples of Schedule IV substances include: alprazolam (Xanax®), carisoprodol (Soma®), clonazepam (Klonopin®), clorazepate (Tranxene®), diazepam (Valium®), lorazepam (Ativan®), midazolam (Versed®), temazepam (Restoril®), and triazolam (Halcion®).
Schedule V Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have a low potential for abuse relative to substances listed in Schedule IV and consist primarily of preparations containing limited quantities of certain narcotics.
Examples of Schedule V substances include: cough preparations containing not more than 200 milligrams of codeine per 100 milliliters or per 100 grams (Robitussin AC®, Phenergan with Codeine®), and ezogabine.

Restaurant Inspection results by county and facility.

This dataset reports number of successful naloxone reversals by police officers, as self-reported by municipal police departments, Capitol Police, and Pennsylvania State police. The data is stratified by county and by year. Note that there is no legislation mandating that law enforcement report naloxone reversals to DDAP; these data represent voluntary self-reports from departments.
NA - Not applicable. No FIPS code or county code exist for Pennsylvania State Police and Capitol Police. Also, counties labelled “NA” do not have municipal police departments and are only covered by Pennsylvania State Police.

Persons enrolled in Medical Assistance (Medicaid) for a given month. Includes Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), General Assistance (GA), Disabled, & Waiver categories.

This dataset contains the total counts of PA Department of Human Services (DHS) Medical Assistance (MA) individuals diagnosed with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) or OUD Poisoning. Also included are individuals receiving MAT (Medication assisted treatment - the use of medications in combination with counseling and behavioral therapies for the treatment of substance use disorders.) NOT diagnosed in the same period. Counts are reported by case county and cover calendar years 2015 - 2017.

This data set provides an estimate of the number of people aged 15-34 years with newly identified confirmed chronic (or past/present) hepatitis C infection, by county and by year.
The dataset is limited to persons aged 15 to 34 because hepatitis C infection is usually asymptomatic for decades after infection occurs. Cases are usually identified because they have finally become symptomatic, or they were screened. Until very recently, screening for hepatitis C was not routinely performed. This makes it very challenging to identify persons with recent infection. Limiting the age of newly identified patients to 15-34 years makes it more likely that the cases included in the dashboard were infected fairly recently. It is not meant to imply that the opioid crisis’ effect on hepatitis C transmission is limited to younger people.
The process by which case counts are determined is as follows: Case reports, which include lab test results and address data, are sent to Pennsylvania’s electronic disease surveillance system (PA-NEDSS). Confirmation status is determined by public health investigators who evaluate test results against the CDC case definition for hepatitis C in place for the year in which the patient was first reported (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/hepatitis-c-chronic/). Reportable disease data, including hepatitis C, is extracted from PA-NEDSS, combined with similar data sent by the Philadelphia Department of Public Health (PDPH, which uses a separate surveillance system), and sent to CDC. Case data sent to CDC (from PA-NEDSS and PDPH combined) are used to create a statewide reportable disease dataset. This statewide file was used to generate the dashboard dataset.
Note that the term that CDC has used to denote persons with hepatitis C infection that is not known to be acute has switched back and forth between “Hepatitis C, past or present” and “Hepatitis C, chronic” over the past several years. The CDC case definition for hepatitis C, chronic (or past or present) changed in 2005, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2016. Persons reported as confirmed in one year may not have been considered confirmed in another year. For example, patients with a positive radioimmunoblot assay (RIBA) or elevated enzyme immunoassay (EIA) signal-to-cutoff level were counted as confirmed in 2012, but not counted as confirmed in 2016.
Data sent to CDC’s National Notifiable Disease Surveillance System use a measure for aggregating cases by year called the MMWR year. The MMWR, or the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, is an official publication by CDC and the means by which CDC has historically presented aggregated case count data. Since data in the MMWR are presented by week, the MMWR year always starts on the Sunday closest to Jan 1 and ends on the Saturday closest to Dec 31. The most recent year for which case counts are finalized is 2016. Annual case counts are finalized in May of the following year.
The patient zip code, as submitted to PA-NEDSS, is used to determine the case’s county of residence at the time of initial case report. In some instances, the patient zip code is unavailable. In those circumstances, the zip code of the provider that ordered the lab test is used as a proxy for patient zip code.
Users should note that the state prison system routinely screens all incoming inmates for hepatitis C. If these inmates are determined to be confirmed cases, they are assigned to the county in which they were incarcerated when their confirmed hepatitis C was first identified. Hepatitis C case counts in counties with state prisons should be interpreted cautiously in light of this enhanced screening activity.

View trends in overdose rates for Any Drug Overdoses, Any Opioid Overdoses and Heroin Overdoses at the state and county level as Annual Rates.
Please see Overdose Data Technical Notes for additional details: http://www.health.pa.gov/Your-Department-of-Health/Offices%20and%20Bureaus/PaPrescriptionDrugMonitoringProgram/Documents/OverdoseDataTechnicalNotes.pdf
Syndromic surveillance is the analysis of medical data to detect or anticipate disease outbreaks. According to a CDC definition, "the term 'syndromic surveillance' applies to surveillance using health-related data that precede diagnosis and signal a sufficient probability of a case or an outbreak to warrant further public health response.

OverdoseFreePA
OverdoseFreePA is made possible by the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, and is directed and managed by the Pennsylvania Overdose Reduction Technical Assistance Center (TAC), University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy. The website is a result of collaboration with county and state partners across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Our partnerships include:

Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association
Pennsylvania Medical Society
Pennsylvania Pharmacist Association
Pennsylvania Psychiatric Society
The Hospital and Healthsystem Association of Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Dental Association
Drug Enforcement Administration 360 Strategy
There are a growing number of Pennsylvania counties involved in ramping up overdose prevention, treatment, and recovery activities to address the opioid overdose epidemic. The counties involved are collaborating to develop resources that can be used by all Pennsylvanians to increase community awareness and knowledge of overdose and overdose prevention strategies as well as to support initiatives aimed at decreasing drug overdoses and deaths within the participating counties. As a centralized resource and technical assistance hub, OverdoseFreePA is a central repository for these efforts to facilitate increased treatment and prevention efforts in these communities.

Pennsylvania Opioid Overdose Reduction Technical Assistance Center (TAC)
Pennsylvania, and the nation at large, is in the midst of opioid overdose epidemic. The TAC’s vision is to lead Pennsylvania communities to zero overdoses.The TAC hopes to achieve this vision by providing concierge technical assistance in the form of data driven recommendations and customized strategic planning to counties working to eliminate overdoses. The TAC strives to lead the field in identifying and sharing strategies to eliminate overdose through the central repository of OverdoseFreePA.

Based out of the Program Evaluation and Research Unit (PERU) at the University of Pittsburgh’s School of Pharmacy, the TAC assists counties and communities in assessing needs, building capacity to address the needs, developing and implementing data driven plans with high quality outcomes, and sustaining initiatives to eliminate overdoses, both fatal and non-fatal, throughout Pennsylvania.

More information here -http://www.overdosefreepa.pitt.edu/who-we-are/

Countywide counts of newborn hospital stays with Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS) and countywide rates of newborn hospital stays with (NAS) per 1,000 newborn stays. Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome, or neonatal drug withdrawal, is an array of problems that develops shortly after birth in newborns who were exposed to addictive drugs, most often opioids, while in the mother’s womb. Withdrawal signs develop because these newborns are no longer exposed to the drug for which they have become physically dependent. This analysis is restricted to newborns with Pennsylvania-state residence who were hospitalized in Pennsylvania hospitals.
Disclaimer: Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4) database contains statewide hospital discharge data submitted to PHC4 by Pennsylvania hospitals. Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information obtained from the Uniform Claims and Billing Form (UB-82/92/04) data elements. Computer collection edits and validation edits provide opportunity to correct specific errors that may have occurred prior to, during or after submission of data. The ultimate responsibility for data accuracy lies with individual providers. PHC4 agents and staff make no representation, guarantee, or warranty, expressed or implied that the data received from the hospitals are error-free, or that the use of this data will prevent differences of opinion or disputes with those who use published reports or purchased data. PHC4 will bear no responsibility or liability for the results or consequences of its use.