The future is offender health: evidencing mainstream health services throughout the offender pathway

Silence of a scream: application of the Silences Framework to provision of nurse-led interventions for ex-offenders

The Silences Framework and its underpinning concept of ‘Screaming Silences’ was originally presented with the invitation for further peer review and utilisation in other contexts in order to test its usefulness and enable critique by a wider audience. This paper reports the use of the framework in a study researching nurse-led interventions for released ex-offenders. Screaming Silences were situated in how an issue, as experienced by ex-offenders, screams out to them in relation to their health and its impact on their reality while remaining silent in the consciousness of society and the application of practice. In addressing these Screaming Silences, we associated the Silences Framework within marginal discourses as they are less prioritised by policy and frequently positioned as far removed from what society considers as normal. Screaming Silences were situated in the subjective experiences of ex-offenders known as the ‘listener’ and the social and personal context in which these experiences occurred. We affirmed that the framework is ideally suited for researching issues which are under-researched, silent from policy discourse and excluded from practice, as it is oriented towards exploring individual experiences by valuing individual interpretations of events.

A systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of peer education and peer support in prisons

BACKGROUND

Prisoners experience significantly worse health than the general population. This review examines the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of peer interventions in prison settings.

METHODS

A mixed methods systematic review of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness studies, including qualitative and quantitative synthesis was conducted. In addition to grey literature identified and searches of websites, nineteen electronic databases were searched from 1985 to 2012. Study selection criteria were:

POPULATION

Prisoners resident in adult prisons and children resident in Young Offender Institutions (YOIs).

INTERVENTION

Peer-based interventions.

COMPARATORS

Review questions 3 and 4 compared peer and professionally led approaches.

OUTCOMES

Prisoner health or determinants of health; organisational/process outcomes; views of prison populations.

STUDY DESIGNS

Quantitative, qualitative and mixed method evaluations.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies were included in the effectiveness review and one study in the cost-effectiveness review; most were of poor methodological quality. Evidence suggested that peer education interventions are effective at reducing risky behaviours, and that peer support services are acceptable within the prison environment and have a positive effect on recipients, practically or emotionally. Consistent evidence from many, predominantly qualitative, studies, suggested that being a peer deliverer was associated with positive effects. There was little evidence on cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

There is consistent evidence from a large number of studies that being a peer worker is associated with positive health; peer support services are also an acceptable source of help within the prison environment and can have a positive effect on recipients. Research into cost-effectiveness is sparse.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO ref: CRD42012002349.

A systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions to maintain and improve offender health in prison settings

Background

Offender health is deemed a priority issue by the Department of Health. Peer support is an established feature of prison life in England and Wales; however, more needs to be known about the effectiveness of peer-based interventions to maintain and improve health in prison settings.

Objectives

The study aimed to synthesise the evidence on peer-based interventions in prison settings by carrying out a systematic review and holding an expert symposium. Review questions were (1) what are the effects of peer-based interventions on prisoner health and the determinants of prisoner health?, (2) what are the positive and negative impacts on health services within prison settings of delivering peer-based interventions?, (3) how do the effects of peer-based approaches compare with those of professionally led approaches? and (4) what are the costs and cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions in prison settings?

Data sources

For the systematic review, 20 electronic databases including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and EMBASE were searched from 1985. Grey literature and relevant websites were also searched. To supplement the review findings 58 delegates, representing a variety of organisations, attended an expert symposium, which provided contextual information.

Review methods

Two reviewers independently selected studies using the following inclusion criteria: population – prisoners resident in prisons and young offender institutions; intervention – peer-based interventions; comparators: review questions 3 and 4 compared peer-led and professionally led approaches; outcomes – prisoner health or determinants of health, organisational/process outcomes or views of prison populations; study design: quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods evaluations. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed validity using piloted electronic forms and validity assessment criteria based on published checklists. Results from quantitative studies were combined using narrative summary and meta-analysis when appropriate; results from qualitative studies were combined using thematic synthesis.

Results

A total of 15,320 potentially relevant papers were identified of which 57 studies were included in the effectiveness review and one study was included in the cost-effectiveness review; most were of poor methodological quality. A typology of peer-based interventions was developed. Evidence suggested that peer education interventions are effective at reducing risky behaviours and that peer support services provide an acceptable source of help within the prison environment and have a positive effect on recipients; the strongest evidence came from the Listener scheme. Consistent evidence from many predominantly qualitative studies suggested that being a peer deliverer was associated with positive effects across all intervention types. There was limited evidence about recruitment of peer deliverers. Recurring themes were the importance of prison managerial and staff support for schemes to operate successfully, and risk management. There was little evidence on the cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions. An economic model, developed from the results of the effectiveness review, although based on data of variable quality and a number of assumptions, showed the cost-effectiveness of peer-led over professionally led education in prison for the prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection.

Limitations

The 58 included studies were, on the whole, of poor methodological quality.

Conclusions

There is consistent evidence from a large number of studies that being a peer worker is associated with positive health. Peer support services can also provide an acceptable source of help within the prison environment and can have a positive effect on recipients. This was confirmed by expert evidence. Research into cost-effectiveness is sparse but a limited HIV-specific economic model, although based on a number of assumptions and evidence of variable quality, showed that peer interventions were cost-effective compared with professionally led interventions. Well-designed intervention studies are needed to provide robust evidence including assessing outcomes for the target population, economic analysis of cost-effectiveness and impacts on prison health services. More research is needed to examine issues of reach, utilisation and acceptability from the perspective of recipients and those who choose not to receive peer support.

Study registration

This study was registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002349.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Managing pain in prison: staff perspectives

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to present the findings of one part of a larger study, funded by the National Institute for Health Research, which explored the management of pain in adult male prisoners in one large category B prison in England. In this paper, the authors focus on the attitudes and perceptions of prison staff towards pain management in prison.

Design/methodology/approach

– A qualitative design was utilised to explore the staff perceptions of pain and pain management in one adult male prison. Questionnaires were provided for all staff with prisoner contact, and a follow up focus group was undertaken to further explore questionnaire data.

Findings

– The questionnaire and focus group findings demonstrated that staff had a good awareness of pain and pain management in prison, with both physical and emotional pain identified. The frequency of approaches by prisoners to staff for pain relief was noted to be high, whilst awareness of how the prison environment could potentially exacerbate pain was discussed. The acquisition of analgesia by prisoners for secondary gain was identified as a challenge to both assessing levels of pain and providing pain relief in prison, illustrating the complexity of providing care within a custodial culture. The effect on staff of caring for prisoners found to be confrontational and deceitful was significant for participants, with feelings of anger and frustration reported.

Research limitations/implications

– This study was undertaken in one adult male category B prison with a very high turnover of prisoners. Staff working in other types of prison, for example, higher security or those more stable with longer sentenced prisoners could provide alternative views, as may staff caring for younger offenders and women. The challenges to undertaking research in prison with staff who can understandably be reluctant to engage in reflection on their practice cannot be underestimated and impact significantly on available methodologies.

Originality/value

– This qualitative research is the first of its kind to offer the perspectives of both health care professionals and prison staff working with prisoners complaining of pain in an English prison. It provides the groundwork for further research and development.