Medical Isolation and Solitary Confinement: Balancing Health and Humanity in US Jails and Prisons During COVID-19

An Interpretive Description of Drug Withdrawal Among Pregnant Women in Jail

OBJECTIVE

To explore the experience of drug withdrawal among pregnant women in jail.

DESIGN

A qualitative interpretive descriptive approach.

SETTING/PROBLEM

The care of incarcerated pregnant women constitutes a complex and significant public health problem. Many have substance use disorder (SUD) and cycle in and out of jails in their community, resulting in repeated experiences of drug withdrawal. Most jails do not provide medication-assisted therapy for management of withdrawal, a situation that violates standards of care set by leading health organizations. The experience of drug withdrawal among pregnant women in jail has not been qualitatively explored in the literature.

PARTICIPANTS

Five women completed interviews for the study.

INTERVENTION

In-depth, qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

Five themes with subthemes emerged from the interviews: Framing the Story Through Life History: I Need You to Know Where I Come From, Patterns of Thinking About Substance Use, The Manifestations of Withdrawal: Body and Mind, Perceived Punishment for Drug Use During Pregnancy, and Mixed Perceptions of Withdrawal Treatment.

CONCLUSION

Participants told a story beyond that of the physical withdrawal symptoms, revealing new insights into their maternal distress and the need for compassionate, nonstigmatized care to address physical and mental symptoms, as well as advocacy for the provision of an evidence-based standard of care. Nurses who care for pregnant women with SUD in the jail setting could benefit from collaborative relationships with other health care professionals in the community to reduce disparate health outcomes for this vulnerable population.

Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy in U.S. Prisons: Perspectives from a Statewide Survey of Incarcerated People

Much of the American response to the COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by a divergence between general public opinion and public health policy. With little attention paid to individuals incarcerated during this time, there is limited direct evidence regarding how incarcerated people perceived efforts to mediate the harms of COVID-19. Prisons operate as a microcosm of society in many ways but they also face unique public health challenges. This study examines vaccine hesitancy-and acceptance-among a sample of individuals incarcerated within adult prisons in Pennsylvania. Using administrative records as well as rich attitudinal data from a survey of the incarcerated population, this study identifies a variety of social and historical factors that are-and are not-associated with an incarcerated person's willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings highlight vaccination challenges unique to the carceral context and offer policy recommendations to improve trust in credible health messengers and health service provision for this often overlooked but vulnerable population.

Indirect vaccine effectiveness in an outbreak of Alpha B.1.1.7 variant in a California state Prison, May 2021

Incarcerated populations experienced high rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and death during early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. To evaluate vaccine effectiveness in the carceral context, we investigated the first outbreak of COVID-19 in a California state prison following widespread rollout of vaccines to residents in early 2021. We identified a cohort of 733 state prison residents presumed to be exposed between May 14 and June 22, 2021. 46.9 % (n = 344) were vaccinated, primarily with two doses of mRNA-1273 (n = 332, 93.6 %). In total, 92 PCR-positive cases were identified, of which 14 (14.5 %) occurred among mRNA-1273 vaccinated residents. No cases required hospitalization. All nine isolates collected belonged to the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant. We used Cox proportional hazard regression to estimate vaccine effectiveness for at least one dose of any vaccine at the start of the outbreak. Vaccine effectiveness was 86 % (95 % CI: 75 %-97 %) against PCR-confirmed infection, with similar results for symptomatic infection. Higher rates of building-level vaccine uptake were associated with a lower overall rate of PCR-confirmed infection and symptomatic infection among unvaccinated residents. Among unvaccinated residents who lived in shared cells at the time of presumed exposure, exposure to a vaccinated cellmate was associated with a 38% (95% CI: 0.37, 1.04) lower hazard rate of PCR-confirmed infection over the study period. In this outbreak involving the Alpha SARS-CoV-2 variant, vaccination conferred direct and possibly indirect protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. Our results support the importance of vaccine uptake in mitigating outbreaks and severe disease in the prison setting and the consideration of community vaccination levels in policy and infection response.

"It's just us sitting there for 23 hours like we done something wrong": Isolation, incarceration, and the COVID-19 pandemic

For the millions of people incarcerated in United States' prisons and jails during the COVID-19 pandemic, isolation took many forms, including medical isolation for those sick with COVID-19, quarantine for those potentially exposed, and prolonged facility-wide lockdowns. Incarcerated people's lived experience of isolation during the pandemic has largely gone undocumented. Through interviews with 48 incarcerated people and 27 staff at two jails and one prison in geographically diverse locations in the United States, we document the implementation of COVID-19 isolation policies from the perspective of those that live and work in carceral settings. Incarcerated people were isolated from social contact, educational programs, employment, and recreation, and lacked clear communication about COVID-19-related protocols. Being isolated, no matter the reason, felt like punishment and was compared to solitary confinement-with resultant long-term, negative impacts on health. Participants detailed isolation policies as disruptive, detrimental to mental health, and dehumanizing for incarcerated people. Findings point to several recommendations for isolation policy in carceral settings. These include integrating healthcare delivery into isolation protocols, preserving social relationships during isolation, promoting bidirectional communication about protocols and their effect between facility leadership and incarcerated people. Most importantly, there is an urgent need to re-evaluate the current approach to the use of isolation in carceral settings and to establish external oversight procedures for its use during pandemics.

"The COVID-19 pandemic and operational challenges, impacts, and lessons learned: a multi-methods study of U.S. prison systems"

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine how the COVID-19 pandemic changed U.S. prison operations and influenced the daily work of prison staff.

METHODS

In collaboration with the National Institute of Corrections, we administered a survey to 31 state correctional agencies in April 2021 and conducted five focus groups with 62 correctional staff.

RESULTS

Using a framework of bounded rationality, we find that daily operations were strained, particularly in the areas of staffing, implementing public health policy efforts, and sustaining correctional programming. While prison systems and staff were under-prepared to respond to the pandemic, they attempted to address complex problems with the limited resources they had.

CONCLUSIONS

Results underscore a need in corrections for prioritizing further developments and reviews of collaborative policies and practices for managing crisis situations. Seeking avenues for leveraging technological innovations to improve operations and facilitate enhanced communication are especially warranted. Finally, meaningful reductions in the prison population, changes in physical infrastructure, and expansions of hiring and retention initiatives are critical for positioning prisons to manage future emergencies.

Self-rated health impact of COVID 19 confinement on inmates in Southeastern of Europe: a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the implementation of various measures within closed institutions like prisons to control the spread of the virus. Analyzing the impact of these measures on the health of inmates is crucial from a public health perspective. This study aimed to explore inmates' subjective perception of the COVID-19 lockdown, the implemented measures, their physical self-perception, and their views on the vaccination process.

METHOD

Between April 2021 and January 2022, 27 semi-structured individual interviews and 1 focus group were conducted with inmates in a prison located in northwest Spain. The interviews were conducted in person and audio-recorded. Thematic content analysis was employed, utilizing methodological triangulation to enhance the coherence and rigor of the results.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed two main themes and nine subthemes. The first theme focused on inmates' perception of the implementation of protective measures against COVID-19 within the prison and its impact on their well-being. The second theme explored the pandemic's emotional impact on inmates. All participants reported negative consequences on their health resulting from the measures implemented by the institution to contain the pandemic. However, they acknowledged that measures like lockdowns and mass vaccination helped mitigate the spread of the virus within the prison, contrary to initial expectations.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 and related measures have directly affected the health of inmates. To improve their health and minimize the impact of pandemic-induced changes, community participation and empowerment of individuals are essential tools, particularly within closed institutions such as prisons.

Devaluing Incarcerated Populations: Deprioritizing Incarcerated Populations for COVID-19 Vaccination

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for increased attention to measures in place to protect the health of incarcerated populations. Correctional facilities saw massive COVID-19 outbreaks and correctional nurses have been at the forefront of efforts to control COVID-19 in correctional facilities. Before vaccines were widely available, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine developed a framework to guide equitable COVID-19 vaccine allocation. This study assessed the use of the framework by reviewing 15 state COVID-19 vaccination plans to identify how incarcerated populations were prioritized. Thirteen initial plans could be located. Ten of these plans placed incarcerated persons in Phases 1 and 2, while 1 state placed them in Phase 3. However, subsequent versions of the plans revealed that 8 states had deprioritized incarcerated populations by no longer considering them as a unique population. The framework was developed to promote equity, however, incarcerated persons were often dis-included as a high-risk population for vaccine prioritization, prolonging their risk of COVID-19. Engaging in the opportunity to influence both policy and practice, and promote the ethical consideration of incarcerated populations may help to address both the structural (prison) challenges and larger political structures that impacted vaccine availability and ability to provide the best care possible to this high-risk population.

Layered Screening and Contact-Limiting Interventions Are Necessary to Reduce SARS-Cov-2 Outbreak Risks in Large Urban Jails

Highly transmissible infections with short serial intervals, such as SARS-Cov-2 and influenza, can quickly overwhelm healthcare resources in institutional settings such as jails. We assessed the impact of intake screening measures on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in this setting. We identified which elements of the intake process created the largest reductions in caseload. We implemented an individual-based simulation representative of SARS-Cov-2 transmission in a large urban jail utilizing testing at entry, quarantine, and post-quarantine testing to protect its general population from mass infection. We tracked the caseload under each scenario and quantified the impact of screening steps by varying quarantine duration, removing testing, and using a range of test sensitivities. We repeated the simulations under a range of transmissibility and community prevalence levels to evaluate the sensitivity of our results. We found that brief quarantine of newly incarcerated individuals separate from the existing population of the jail to permit pre-quarantine and end-of-quarantine tests reduced SARS-CoV-2 caseload 30-70% depending on test sensitivity. These results were robust to variation in the transmissibility. Further quarantine (up to 14 days) on average created only a 5% further reduction in caseload. A multilayered intake process is necessary to limit the spread of highly transmissible pathogens with short serial intervals. The pre-symptomatic phase means that no single strategy can be effective. We also show that shorter durations of quarantine combined with testing can be nearly as effective at preventing spread as longer-duration quarantine up to 14 days.

Meanings and Experiences of Prisoners and Family Members Affected by the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Brazilian Prison Unit: A Grounded Theory Analysis

Worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic represented a health emergency for prisons. This study sought to understand the meanings and experiences through the narratives of prisoners and family members affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of a maximum-security state penitentiary complex in southern Brazil. For this purpose, a qualitative study was developed based on the methodological framework of constructivist grounded theory. Data were collected between February and August 2022 through individual in-depth interviews and field notes. The sample consisted of 41 participants: 28 male prisoners, and 13 family members. Guided by the Charmaz method of grounded theory analysis, the study afforded the core category "Feeling trapped in prison during the COVID-19 pandemic" with three interrelated phases: "Triggering", "Escalating", and "Readjustment". The "Triggering" phase refers to COVID-19-related elements or events that triggered certain reactions, processes, or changes in prison. During the "Escalating" phase, participants became overwhelmed by the suffering caused by incarceration and the pandemic crisis. The "Readjustment" phase involved adapting, reorienting, or reformulating previous approaches or strategies for dealing with a specific situation. Prisons faced complex challenges during the pandemic and were forced to prioritize protecting public health. However, the measures adopted must be carefully evaluated, ensuring their needs and that they are based on scientific evidence. The punitive approach can undermine inmate trust in prison authorities, making it difficult to report symptoms and adhere to preventive measures.

Public Health and Prisons: Priorities in the Age of Mass Incarceration

Mass incarceration is a sociostructural driver of profound health inequalities in the United States. The political and economic forces underpinning mass incarceration are deeply rooted in centuries of the enslavement of people of African descent and the genocide and displacement of Indigenous people and is inextricably connected to labor exploitation, racial discrimination, the criminalization of immigration, and behavioral health problems such as mental illness and substance use disorders. This article focuses on major public health crises and advances in state and federal prisons and discusses a range of practical strategies for health scholars, practitioners, and activists to promote the health and dignity of incarcerated people. It begins by summarizing the historical and sociostructural factors that have led to mass incarceration in the United States. It then describes the ways in which prison conditions create or worsen chronic, communicable, and behavioral health conditions, while highlighting priority areas for public health research and intervention to improve the health of incarcerated people, including decarceral solutions that can profoundly minimize-and perhaps one day help abolish-the use of prisons.

Perceptions of vaccine safety and hesitancy among incarcerated adults and correctional staff in the rural midwest

Objectives

This project assessed vaccine hesitancy among staff and incarcerated adults in one rural medium-security prison in the Midwestern United States and identified differences in hesitancy across sociodemographic and work-related variables.

Methods

610 prison staff and people incarcerated completed a cross-sectional survey in May 2021. The vaccine hesitancy scale (VHS) identified perceived risk and confidence in vaccination. A single item assessed whether people typically follow public health protocols in the prison. A combination of analyses was utilized, including ANOVA, Chi-Square, and Pearson's correlation.

Results

Vaccine hesitancy was moderate to high for both populations. Incarcerated people had more confidence in vaccination than staff; differences did not reach statistical significance. Incarcerated people had statistically significantly higher perceptions of risk compared to staff. Both populations reported doing their best to follow public health protocols. For both populations, vaccine hesitancy varied by education and veteran status. Among staff, hesitancy varied by gender and political beliefs. For people incarcerated, it varied by pre-incarceration income and visit frequency.

Conclusions

Results support the need for public health policy and procedural interventions to reduce hesitancy towards vaccination in correctional settings.

"It was like you were being literally punished for getting sick": formerly incarcerated people's perspectives on liberty restrictions during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has greatly impacted the health of incarcerated individuals in the US. The goal of this study was to examine perspectives of recently incarcerated individuals on greater restrictions on liberty to mitigate COVID-19 transmission.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured phone interviews from August through October 2021 with 21 people who had been incarcerated in Bureau of Prisons (BOP) facilities during the pandemic. Transcripts were coded and analyzed, using a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Many facilities implemented universal "lockdowns," with time out of the cell often limited to one hour per day, with participants reporting not being able to meet all essential needs such as showers and calling loved ones. Several study participants reported that repurposed spaces and tents created for quarantine and isolation provided "unlivable conditions." Participants reported receiving no medical attention while in isolation, and staff using spaces designated for disciplinary purposes (e.g., solitary housing units) for public health isolation purposes. This resulted in the conflation of isolation and discipline, which discouraged symptom reporting. Some participants felt guilty over potentially causing another lockdown by not reporting their symptoms. Programming was frequently stopped or curtailed and communication with the outside was limited. Some participants relayed that staff threatened to punish noncompliance with masking and testing. Liberty restrictions were purportedly rationalized by staff with the idea that incarcerated people should not expect freedoms, while those incarcerated blamed staff for bringing COVID-19 into the facility.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results highlighted how actions by staff and administrators decreased the legitimacy of the facilities' COVID-19 response and were sometimes counterproductive. Legitimacy is key in building trust and obtaining cooperation with otherwise unpleasant but necessary restrictive measures. To prepare for future outbreaks facilities must consider the impact of liberty-restricting decisions on residents and build legitimacy for these decisions by communicating justifications to the extent possible.

"Prison life is very hard and it's made harder if you're isolated": COVID-19 risk mitigation strategies and the mental health of incarcerated women in California

PURPOSE

This study aims to describe the COVID-19 risk mitigation strategies implemented in California prisons and the impact of these policies on the mental health of incarcerated women.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The authors conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with ten women who were over the age of 50 and/or had a chronic illness and had been incarcerated in California prisons during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors also interviewed ten health-care providers working in California jails or prisons during the pandemic. Interviews were analyzed using a grounded theory coding framework and triangulated with fieldnotes from ethnographic observations of medical and legal advocacy efforts during the pandemic.

FINDINGS

Participants described being locked in their cells for 23 hours per day or more, often for days, weeks or even months at a time in an effort to reduce the spread of COVID-19. For many participants, these lockdowns and the resulting isolation from loved ones both inside and outside of the prison were detrimental to both their physical and mental health. Participants reported that access to mental health care for those in the general population was limited prior to the pandemic, and that COVID-19 risk mitigation strategies, including the cessation of group programs and shift to cell-front mental health services, created further barriers.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

There has been little qualitative research on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on incarcerated populations. This paper provides insight into the mental health effects of both the COVID-19 pandemic and COVID-19 risk mitigation strategies for the structurally vulnerable older women incarcerated in California prisons.

The COVID-19 pandemic behind bars: Experimental evidence showing higher support for decarceration when framed as risk to correctional staff

This study examined the effect of framing COVID-19 spread in correctional facilities as impacting imprisoned individuals or impacting correctional staff on public support for decarceration. I employed an experiment in the 2021 Empire State Poll (n = 765) in which participants were randomly assigned to a treatment condition, which highlighted information about the number of COVID-19 cases among imprisoned individuals, or a control condition, which highlighted correctional staff instead. Participants reported how supportive or unsupportive they are of releasing imprisoned individuals to curb the spread of COVID-19. Overall, 35% of New Yorkers supported decarceration. A higher percentage of respondents supported decarceration when the impact on correctional staff was highlighted (40%) relative to imprisoned individuals (31%). There was also higher support among non-Hispanic Black (54%) and Hispanic (51%) participants relative to non-Hispanic White (28%) participants. Within racial/ethnic groups support for decarceration was higher when the impact on correctional staff was highlighted among non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanics, and those of another race, but not among non-Hispanic Blacks where support for decarceration was higher when the impact on imprisoned individuals was highlighted. Inferential analysis using log binomial regression found that the association between treatment condition assignment and support for decarceration was not significant. Public health practitioners and policy makers should consider leveraging the higher support associated with concerns over the health and wellbeing of correction staff found among some racial/ethnic groups to fight the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 Preventive Measures in Northern California Jails: Perceived Deficiencies, Barriers, and Unintended Harms

Background

Carceral facilities are high-risk settings for COVID-19 transmission. Little is known about the hidden burden of infection or practical barriers to infection control in these settings, especially in jails. There is also limited research on the mental health impacts of the pandemic among people living and working in carceral facilities.

Methods

Between July 8, 2020 and April 30, 2021, we performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antibody testing and administered a questionnaire among residents and staff of four Northern California jails. We utilized multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for demographic and carceral characteristics, to analyze factors associated with prior infection, including perceived likelihood of prior infection and access to new masks. We additionally assessed the implementation of, perceptions toward, and impacts of COVID-19 policies in practice. We engaged stakeholder representatives, including incarcerated individuals, to guide study design, procedures, and results interpretation.

Results

We enrolled 788 jail residents and 380 jail staff. Nearly half of residents and two-thirds of staff who were antibody-positive had not previously tested positive for COVID-19. Among residents without a prior COVID-19 diagnosis, antibody positivity was significantly associated with perceived likelihood of prior infection (adjusted OR = 8.9; 95% CI, 3.6–22.0). Residents who had flu-like illness in jail cited inadequate responses to reported illness and deterrents to symptom reporting, including fears of medical isolation and perceptions of medical neglect. Residents also disclosed deficient access to face masks, which was associated with antibody positivity (adjusted OR = 13.8, 95% CI, 1.8–107.0). Worsened mental health was pervasive among residents, attributed not only to fear of COVID-19 and unsanitary jail conditions but also to intensified isolation and deprivation due to pandemic restrictions on in-person visitation, programs, and recreation time.

Conclusion

Carceral settings present significant challenges to maintaining infection control and human rights. Custody officials should work diligently to transform the conditions of medical isolation, which could mitigate deterrents to symptom reporting. Furthermore, they should minimize use of restrictive measures like lockdowns and suspension of visitation that exacerbate the mental health harms of incarceration. Instead, custody officials should ensure comprehensive implementation of other preventive strategies like masking, testing, and vaccination, in conjunction with multisector efforts to advance decarceration.

Respiratory pandemic preparedness learnings from the June 2020 COVID-19 outbreak at San Quentin California State Prison

PURPOSE

This study aims to characterize the June 2020 COVID-19 outbreak at San Quentin California State Prison and to describe what made San Quentin so vulnerable to uncontrolled transmission.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Since its onset, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed and exacerbated the profound health harms of carceral settings, such that nearly half of state prisons reported COVID-19 infection rates that were four or more times (and up to 15 times) the rate found in the state's general population. Thus, addressing the public health crises and inequities of carceral settings during a respiratory pandemic requires analyzing the myriad factors shaping them. In this study, we reported observations and findings from environmental risk assessments during visits to San Quentin California State Prison. We complemented our assessments with analyses of administrative data.

FINDINGS

For future respiratory pathogens that cannot be prevented with effective vaccines, this study argues that outbreaks will no doubt occur again without robust implementation of additional levels of preparedness - improved ventilation, air filtration, decarceration with emergency evacuation planning - alongside addressing the vulnerabilities of carceral settings themselves.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This study addresses two critical aspects that are insufficiently covered in the literature: how to prepare processes to safely implement emergency epidemic measures when needed, such as potential evacuation, and how to address unique challenges throughout an evolving pandemic for each carceral setting.

Decarceration of older adults with mental illness in the USA - beyond the COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

Aging and mental illness both represent significant public health challenges for incarcerated people in the USA. The COVID-19 pandemic has further highlighted the vulnerabilities of incarcerated people because of the risks of infectious disease transmission in correctional facilities. Focusing on older adults with mental illness, this paper aims to examine efforts to decarcerate US correctional facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic and whether these approaches may lead to sustainable reforms beyond the pandemic.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A narrative literature review was conducted using numerous online resources, including PubMed, Google Scholar and LexisNexis. Search terms used included "decarceration pandemic," "COVID-19 decarceration," "aging mental illness decarceration," "jails prisons decarceration," "early release COVID-19" and "correctional decarceration pandemic," among others. Given the rapidly changing nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, this narrative literature review included content from not only scholarly articles and federal and state government publications but also relevant media articles and policy-related reports. The authors reviewed these sources collaboratively to synthesize a review of existing evidence and opinions on these topics and generate conclusions and policy recommendations moving forward.

FINDINGS

To mitigate the risks of COVID-19, policymakers have pursued various decarceration strategies across the USA. Some efforts have focused on reducing inflow into correctional systems, including advising police to reduce numbers of arrests and limiting use of pretrial detention. Other policies have sought to increase outflow from correctional systems, such as facilitating early release of people convicted of nonviolent offenses or those nearing the end of their sentences. Given the well-known risks of COVID-19 among older individuals, age was commonly cited as a reason for diverting or expediting release of people from incarceration. In contrast, despite their vulnerability to complications from COVID-19, people with serious mental illness (SMI), particularly those with acute treatment needs, may have been less likely in some instances to be diverted or released early from incarceration.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

Although much has been written about decarceration during the COVID-19 pandemic, little attention has been paid to the relevance of these efforts for older adults with mental illness. This paper synthesizes existing proposals and evidence while drawing attention to the public health implications of aging and SMI in US correctional settings and explores opportunities for decarceration of older adults with SMI beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 outbreak in a state prison: a case study on the implementation of key public health recommendations for containment and prevention

BACKGROUND

People incarcerated in US prisons have been disproportionately harmed by the COVID-19 pandemic. That prisons are such efficient superspreading environments can be attributed to several known factors: small, communal facilities where people are confined for prolonged periods of time; poor ventilation; a lack of non-punitive areas for quarantine/medical isolation; and staggeringly high numbers of people experiencing incarceration, among others. While health organizations have issued guidance on preventing and mitigating COVID-19 infection in carceral settings, little is known about if, when, and how recommendations have been implemented. We examined factors contributing to containment of one of the first California prison COVID-19 outbreaks and remaining vulnerabilities using an adapted multi-level determinants framework to systematically assess infectious disease risk in carceral settings.

METHODS

Case study employing administrative data; observation; and informal discussions with: people incarcerated at the prison, staff, and county public health officials.

RESULTS

Outbreak mitigation efforts were characterized by pre-planning (e.g., designation of ventilated, single-occupancy quarantine) and a quickly mobilized inter-institutional response that facilitated systematic, voluntary rapid testing. However, several systemic- and institutional-level vulnerabilities were unaddressed hindering efforts and posing significant risk for future outbreaks, including insufficient decarceration, continued inter-facility transfers, incomplete staff cohorting, and incompatibility between built environment features (e.g., dense living conditions) and public health recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our adapted framework facilitates systematically assessing prison-based infectious disease outbreaks and multi-level interventions. We find implementing some recommended public health strategies may have contributed to outbreak containment. However, even with a rapidly mobilized, inter-institutional response, failure to decarcerate created an overreliance on chance conditions. This left the facility vulnerable to future catastrophic outbreaks and may render standard public health strategies - including the introduction of effective vaccines - insufficient to prevent or contain those outbreaks.

A Global View of Women, Prison, and Aftercare: A Call for Reform

Ending violence against women-part of the priority theme of the CSW65-is an international human rights issue. We must prevent and combat violence against all women, including those who are incarcerated worldwide. Incarcerated women are among the most marginalized populations; they have suffered numerous victimizations without ever seeing their perpetrators brought to justice. Though most incarcerated women have committed non-violent offenses, they are locked away in prisons, far away from their loved ones, and subject to inhumane conditions. According to international human rights law, preventing VAW is the responsibility of the State in all contexts, including prisons. In this article, we acknowledge the global treatment of women in prison as a form of State violence against women and provide policy reform for incarcerated women worldwide. We propose four strategies to reform women's incarceration worldwide: (1) recognizing and dismantling systemic and institutionalized discrimination and biases; (2) abolition of prison sentences for non-violent offenders; (3) restorative approaches to aftercare (or reentry); and (4) making children the priority.

COVID-19 in corrections: Quarantine of incarcerated people

Carceral settings in the United States have been the source of many single site COVID-19 outbreaks. Quarantine is a strategy used to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in correctional settings, and specific quarantine practices differ state to state. To better understand how states are using quarantine in prisons, we reviewed each state's definition of quarantine and compared each state's definition to the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) definition and recommendations for quarantine in jails and prisons. Most prison systems, 45 of 53, define quarantine, but definitions vary widely. No state published definitions of quarantine that align with all CDC recommendations, and only 9 states provide quarantine data. In these states, the highest recorded quarantine rate occurred in Ohio in May 2020 at 843 per 1,000. It is necessary for prison systems to standardize their definitions of quarantine and to utilize quarantine practices in accordance with CDC recommendations. In addition, data transparency is needed to better understand the use of quarantine and its effectiveness at mitigating COVID-19 outbreaks in carceral settings.

"Ubuntu" I am because we are: COVID-19 and the legal framework for addressing communicable disease in the South African prison system

PURPOSE

The purpose of the paper was to conduct a legal-realist assessment of the South African prison system response to COVID-19. Severely congested and ill-resourced prison systems in Africa face unprecedented challenges amplified by COVID-19. South Africa has recorded the highest COVID-19 positivity rate in Africa and, on March 15th 2020, declared a national state of disaster. The first prison system case was notified on April 6th 2020.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A legal-realist assessment of the South African prison system response to COVID-19 in the 12 months following initial case notification focused on the minimum State obligations to comply with human rights norms, and the extent to which human, health and occupational health rights of prisoners and staff were upheld during disaster measures.

FINDINGS

A legal-realist account was developed, which revealed the indeterminate nature of application of South African COVID-19 government directives, ill-resourced COVID-19 mitigation measures, alarming occupational health and prison conditions and inadequate standards of health care in prisons when evaluated against the rule of law during State declaration of disaster.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This legal-realist assessment is original by virtue of its unique evaluation of the South African prison system approach to tackling COVID-19. It acknowledged State efforts, policymaking processes and outcomes and how these operated within the prison system itself. By moving beyond the deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the already precarious South African prison system, the authors argue for rights assurance for those who live and work in its prisons, improved infrastructure and greater substantive equality of all deprived of their liberty in South Africa.

COVID-19 in the California State Prison System: an Observational Study of Decarceration, Ongoing Risks, and Risk Factors

BACKGROUND

Correctional institutions nationwide are seeking to mitigate COVID-19-related risks.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify changes to California's prison population since the pandemic began and identify risk factors for COVID-19 infection.

DESIGN

For California state prisons (March 1-October 10, 2020), we described residents' demographic characteristics, health status, COVID-19 risk scores, room occupancy, and labor participation. We used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate the association between rates of COVID-19 infection and room occupancy and out-of-room labor, respectively.

PARTICIPANTS

Residents of California state prisons.

MAIN MEASURES

Changes in the incarcerated population's size, composition, housing, and activities. For the risk factor analysis, the exposure variables were room type (cells vs. dormitories) and labor participation (any room occupant participating in the prior 2 weeks) and the outcome variable was incident COVID-19 case rates.

KEY RESULTS

The incarcerated population decreased 19.1% (119,401 to 96,623) during the study period. On October 10, 2020, 11.5% of residents were aged ≥60, 18.3% had high COVID-19 risk scores, 31.0% participated in out-of-room labor, and 14.8% lived in rooms with ≥10 occupants. Nearly 40% of residents with high COVID-19 risk scores lived in dormitories. In 9 prisons with major outbreaks (6,928 rooms; 21,750 residents), dormitory residents had higher infection rates than cell residents (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 2.51 95% CI, 2.25-2.80) and residents of rooms with labor participation had higher rates than residents of other rooms (AHR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.39-1.74).

CONCLUSION

Despite reductions in room occupancy and mixing, California prisons still house many medically vulnerable residents in risky settings. Reducing risks further requires a combination of strategies, including rehousing, decarceration, and vaccination.

Care for Incarcerated Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped health care delivery for all patients but has distinctly affected the most marginalized people in society. Incarcerated patients are both more likely to be infected and more likely to die from COVID-19. There is a paucity of guidance for the care of incarcerated patients hospitalized with COVID-19. This article will discuss how patient privacy, adequate communication, and advance care planning are rights that incarcerated patients may not experience during this pandemic. We highlight the role of compassionate release and note how COVID-19 may affect this prospect. A number of pragmatic recommendations are made to attenuate the discrepancy in hospital care experienced by those admitted from prisons and jails. Physicians must be familiar with the relevant hospital policies, be prepared to adapt their practices in order to overcome barriers to care, such as continuous shackling, and advocate to change these policies when they conflict with patient care. Stigma, isolation, and concerns over staff safety are shared experiences for COVID-19 and incarcerated patients, but incarcerated patients have been experiencing this treatment long before the current pandemic. It is crucial that the internist demand the equitable care that we seek for all our patients.

Is There a Temporal Relationship between COVID-19 Infections among Prison Staff, Incarcerated Persons and the Larger Community in the United States?

Background: Our objective was to examine the temporal relationship between COVID-19 infections among prison staff, incarcerated individuals, and the general population in the county where the prison is located among federal prisons in the United States. Methods: We employed population-standardized regressions with fixed effects for prisons to predict the number of active cases of COVID-19 among incarcerated persons using data from the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for the months of March to December in 2020 for 63 prisons. Results: There is a significant relationship between the COVID-19 prevalence among staff, and through them, the larger community, and COVID-19 prevalence among incarcerated persons in the US federal prison system. When staff rates are low or at zero, COVID-19 incidence in the larger community continues to have an association with COVID-19 prevalence among incarcerated persons, suggesting possible pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic transmission by staff. Masking policies slightly reduced COVID-19 prevalence among incarcerated persons, though the association between infections among staff, the community, and incarcerated persons remained significant and strong. Conclusion: The relationship between COVID-19 infections among staff and incarcerated persons shows that staff is vital to infection control, and correctional administrators should also focus infection containment efforts on staff, in addition to incarcerated persons.

COVID-19 and incarcerated older adults: a commentary on risk, care and early release in Australia

PURPOSE

The purpose of this commentary is to draw upon available literature and practices related to COVID-19 and management of older incarcerated adults in Australia to highlight key matters for better risk management and care of this population during this and future infectious disease pan/epidemics.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The present commentary draws on current policies, practices and literature regarding the health, needs and management of older incarcerated adults in Australia to discuss risk, care and early release for this population during the COVID-19 pandemic.

FINDINGS

Incarcerated persons experience poorer health and accelerated age-related decline compared to those in the general community. The present situation offers the opportunity to fill knowledge and practice gaps, including policies for staff training, identification of dementia and cognitive decline, assessment of mobility issues, addressing barriers to health-seeking, possibilities of medical or compassionate release, risk assessment and release protocols and post-release needs.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

While Australian prisons have acknowledged the vulnerability of older persons, more focused adaptation of COVID-19-related policies to consider adults as young as 45 years are needed. Appropriate ethical identification and management of cases in this population is needed, as is discussion on issues of decarceration and medical release. Re-conceptualisation of incarcerated adults as "citizens in need of care", rather than as "offenders to be secured", will be beneficial. Robust, local evidence is needed to assist decision-making.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This is a comprehensive, focused review of relevant evidence, policies and practices for a growing subpopulation of prisoners worldwide with complex needs and particular vulnerability to the COVID-19.

Experiences of COVID-19 isolation in Northern Ireland prisons: a qualitative study

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to capture the experience of people after completing their period of COVID-19 14-day isolation in prison. This study used in-depth interviews to assess the impact of the restricted regime.

Design/methodology/approach

This was a cross-sectional qualitative study using an adapted regional survey to record people’s experiences of COVID-19 isolation on entry into prison. This study began in April 2020 and continued to run over eight months. A weekly capture of people’s stories was conducted using a convenience sample. A total of 168 people participated in the study, with in-depth interviews conducted by the health-care team. Content conceptual analysis was used to quantify and analyse the themes of impact of COVID-19 isolation. This information was then used to shape iterative health-care service development.

Findings

A number of key themes have emerged from the experiences of COVID-19 isolation, including connection, communication and support. Stories highlighted how isolation had exacerbated depression, anxiety or feelings of self-harm. This was amplified by the uncertainty of the pandemic and lack of information about accessing services in the altered prison regime. A priority for people in COVID-19 isolation was contact with family. Telephone calls and virtual visits were cited as mitigating the mental health impact of social isolation. People who felt supported by health-care or prison staff reported coping with their time in isolation better. Timely, accessible information was pivotal in support, leading to development of Engagement Lead check-ins on the isolation landings. It is crucial that a public health approach is core to the COVID-19 response in prisons. The thematic analysis of the experiences has enabled a focused understanding of the impact of COVID-19 isolation and an accountability of care provision through organisational collaboration and iterative improvements to service delivery.

Originality/value

There is a paucity of real-time evidence of the impact of restricted regimes in prison owing to COVID-19. This study gives an important insight.

Scoping review of mental health in prisons through the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent, nature and quality of literature on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of imprisoned people and prison staff.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane, PsycINFO, PsychExtra, Web of Science and Scopus were searched for any paper from 2019 onwards that focused on the mental health impact of COVID-19 on imprisoned people and prison staff. A grey literature search focused on international and government sources and professional bodies representing healthcare, public health and prison staff was also performed. We also performed hand searching of the reference lists of included studies.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF STUDIES

All papers, regardless of study design, were included if they examined the mental health of imprisoned people or prison staff specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Imprisoned people could be of any age and from any countries. All languages were included. Two independent reviewers quality assessed appropriate papers.

RESULTS

Of 647 articles found, 83 were eligible for inclusion, the majority (58%) of which were opinion pieces. The articles focused on the challenges to prisoner mental health. Fear of COVID-19, the impact of isolation, discontinuation of prison visits and reduced mental health services were all likely to have an adverse effect on the mental well-being of imprisoned people. The limited research and poor quality of articles included mean that the findings are not conclusive. However, they suggest a significant adverse impact on the mental health and well-being of those who live and work in prisons.

CONCLUSIONS

It is key to address the mental health impacts of the pandemic on people who live and work in prisons. These findings are discussed in terms of implications for getting the balance between infection control imperatives and the fundamental human rights of prison populations.

Ten Urgent Priorities Based on Lessons Learned From More Than a Half Million Known COVID-19 Cases in US Prisons

COVID-19 is ravaging US prisons. Prison residents and staff must be prioritized for vaccination, but a rapidly mutating virus and high rates of continued spread require an urgent, coordinated public health response.Based on knowledge accumulated from the pandemic thus far, we have identified 10 pressing public health priorities for responding to COVID-19 in prisons: (1) accelerate population reduction coupled with community reentry support, (2) improve prison ventilation systems, (3) ensure appropriate mask use, (4) limit transfers between facilities, (5) strengthen partnerships between public health departments and prison leadership, (6) introduce or maintain effective occupational health programs, (7) ensure access to advance care planning processes for incarcerated patients and delineation of patient health care rights, (8) strengthen partnerships between prison leadership and incarcerated people, (9) provide emergency mental health support for prison residents and staff, and (10) commit to public accountability and transparency.Dedicated prison leaders cannot accomplish these public health priorities alone. We must mobilize prison leaders, staff, and residents; public health departments; community advocates; and policymakers to work together to address the pandemic's outsized impact in US prisons.

Incarceration as a Fundamental Social Cause of Health Inequalities: Jails, Prisons and Vulnerability to COVID-19

Although research has established the disproportionate health burdens among incarcerated persons, the literature has yet to identify a theoretical framework for outlining the harms of incarceration associated with pandemics. We advance the literature theoretically by arguing two points. First, we assert that incarceration is a potent structural driver of health inequalities that must be considered as a fundamental social cause of disease. To underscore this point, we review how incarceration meets each of the four fundamental social cause criteria originally proposed by Link and Phelan. Second, given that incarceration is a fundamental social cause of disease, both currently and formerly incarcerated populations are likely to face heightened vulnerabilities to pandemics, including COVID-19, further exacerbating health disparities among incarceration-exposed groups.

Covid-19 in the California State Prison System: An Observational Study of Decarceration, Ongoing Risks, and Risk Factors

Background:

Correctional institutions nationwide are seeking to mitigate Covid-19-related risks.

Objective:

To quantify changes to California’s prison population since the pandemic began and identify risk factors for Covid-19 infection.

Design:

We described residents’ demographic characteristics, health status, Covid-19 risk scores, room occupancy, and labor participation. We used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate the association between rates of Covid-19 infection and room occupancy and out-of-room labor, respectively.

Setting:

California state prisons (March 1-October 10, 2020).

Participants:

Residents of California state prisons.

Measurements:

Changes in the incarcerated population’s size, composition, housing, and activities. For the risk factor analysis, the exposure variables were room type (cells vs dormitories) and labor participation (any room occupant participating in the prior 2 weeks) and the outcome variable was incident Covid-19 case rates.

Results:

The incarcerated population decreased 19.1% (119,401 to 96,623) during the study period. On October 10, 2020, 11.5% of residents were aged ≤60, 18.3% had high Covid-19 risk scores, 31.0% participated in out-of-room labor, and 14.8% lived in rooms with ≤10 occupants. Nearly 40% of residents with high Covid-19 risk scores lived in dormitories. In 9 prisons with major outbreaks (6,928 rooms; 21,750 residents), dormitory residents had higher infection rates than cell residents (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 2.51 95%CI, 2.25-2.80) and residents of rooms with labor participation had higher rates than residents of other rooms (AHR, 1.56; 95%CI, 1.39-1.74).

Limitations:

Inability to measure density of residents’ living conditions or contact networks among residents and staff.

Conclusion:

Despite reductions in room occupancy and mixing, California prisons still house many medically vulnerable residents in risky settings. Reducing risks further requires a combination of strategies, including rehousing, decarceration, and vaccination.

Funding Sources:

Horowitz Family Foundation; National Institute on Drug Abuse; National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship; Open Society Foundations.

Shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in feces and urine and its potential role in person-to-person transmission and the environment-based spread of COVID-19

The recent detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in feces has led to speculation that it can be transmitted via the fecal-oral/ocular route. This review aims to critically evaluate the incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, the quantity and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in feces and urine, and whether these pose an infection risk in sanitary settings, sewage networks, wastewater treatment plants, and the wider environment (e.g. rivers, lakes and marine waters). A review of 48 independent studies revealed that severe GI dysfunction is only evident in a small number of COVID-19 cases, with 11 ± 2% exhibiting diarrhea and 12 ± 3% exhibiting vomiting and nausea. In addition to these cases, SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be detected in feces from some asymptomatic, mildly- and pre-symptomatic individuals. Fecal shedding of the virus peaks in the symptomatic period and can persist for several weeks, but with declining abundances in the post-symptomatic phase. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is occasionally detected in urine, but reports in fecal samples are more frequent. The abundance of the virus genetic material in both urine (ca. 102-105 gc/ml) and feces (ca. 102-107 gc/ml) is much lower than in nasopharyngeal fluids (ca. 105-1011 gc/ml). There is strong evidence of multiplication of SARS-CoV-2 in the gut and infectious virus has occasionally been recovered from both urine and stool samples. The level and infectious capability of SARS-CoV-2 in vomit remain unknown. In comparison to enteric viruses transmitted via the fecal-oral route (e.g. norovirus, adenovirus), the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 being transmitted via feces or urine appears much lower due to the lower relative amounts of virus present in feces/urine. The biggest risk of transmission will occur in clinical and care home settings where secondary handling of people and urine/fecal matter occurs. In addition, while SARS-CoV-2 RNA genetic material can be detected by in wastewater, this signal is greatly reduced by conventional treatment. Our analysis also suggests the likelihood of infection due to contact with sewage-contaminated water (e.g. swimming, surfing, angling) or food (e.g. salads, shellfish) is extremely low or negligible based on very low predicted abundances and limited environmental survival of SARS-CoV-2. These conclusions are corroborated by the fact that tens of million cases of COVID-19 have occurred globally, but exposure to feces or wastewater has never been implicated as a transmission vector.

Shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in feces and urine and its potential role in person-to-person transmission and the environment-based spread of COVID-19

The recent detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in feces has led to speculation that it can be transmitted via the fecal-oral/ocular route. This review aims to critically evaluate the incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, the quantity and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in feces and urine, and whether these pose an infection risk in sanitary settings, sewage networks, wastewater treatment plants, and the wider environment (e.g. rivers, lakes and marine waters). A review of 48 independent studies revealed that severe GI dysfunction is only evident in a small number of COVID-19 cases, with 11 ± 2% exhibiting diarrhea and 12 ± 3% exhibiting vomiting and nausea. In addition to these cases, SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be detected in feces from some asymptomatic, mildly- and pre-symptomatic individuals. Fecal shedding of the virus peaks in the symptomatic period and can persist for several weeks, but with declining abundances in the post-symptomatic phase. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is occasionally detected in urine, but reports in fecal samples are more frequent. The abundance of the virus genetic material in both urine (ca. 10²-10⁵ gc/ml) and feces (ca. 10²-10⁷ gc/ml) is much lower than in nasopharyngeal fluids (ca. 10⁵-10¹¹ gc/ml). There is strong evidence of multiplication of SARS-CoV-2 in the gut and infectious virus has occasionally been recovered from both urine and stool samples. The level and infectious capability of SARS-CoV-2 in vomit remain unknown. In comparison to enteric viruses transmitted via the fecal-oral route (e.g. norovirus, adenovirus), the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 being transmitted via feces or urine appears much lower due to the lower relative amounts of virus present in feces/urine. The biggest risk of transmission will occur in clinical and care home settings where secondary handling of people and urine/fecal matter occurs. In addition, while SARS-CoV-2 RNA genetic material can be detected by in wastewater, this signal is greatly reduced by conventional treatment. Our analysis also suggests the likelihood of infection due to contact with sewage-contaminated water (e.g. swimming, surfing, angling) or food (e.g. salads, shellfish) is extremely low or negligible based on very low predicted abundances and limited environmental survival of SARS-CoV-2. These conclusions are corroborated by the fact that tens of million cases of COVID-19 have occurred globally, but exposure to feces or wastewater has never been implicated as a transmission vector.

Shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in feces and urine and its potential role in person-to-person transmission and the environment-based spread of COVID-19

The recent detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in feces has led to speculation that it can be transmitted via the fecal-oral/ocular route. This review aims to critically evaluate the incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, the quantity and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in feces and urine, and whether these pose an infection risk in sanitary settings, sewage networks, wastewater treatment plants, and the wider environment (e.g. rivers, lakes and marine waters). A review of 48 independent studies revealed that severe GI dysfunction is only evident in a small number of COVID-19 cases, with 11 ± 2% exhibiting diarrhea and 12 ± 3% exhibiting vomiting and nausea. In addition to these cases, SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be detected in feces from some asymptomatic, mildly- and pre-symptomatic individuals. Fecal shedding of the virus peaks in the symptomatic period and can persist for several weeks, but with declining abundances in the post-symptomatic phase. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is occasionally detected in urine, but reports in fecal samples are more frequent. The abundance of the virus genetic material in both urine (ca. 10²-10⁵ gc/ml) and feces (ca. 10²-10⁷ gc/ml) is much lower than in nasopharyngeal fluids (ca. 10⁵-10¹¹ gc/ml). There is strong evidence of multiplication of SARS-CoV-2 in the gut and infectious virus has occasionally been recovered from both urine and stool samples. The level and infectious capability of SARS-CoV-2 in vomit remain unknown. In comparison to enteric viruses transmitted via the fecal-oral route (e.g. norovirus, adenovirus), the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 being transmitted via feces or urine appears much lower due to the lower relative amounts of virus present in feces/urine. The biggest risk of transmission will occur in clinical and care home settings where secondary handling of people and urine/fecal matter occurs. In addition, while SARS-CoV-2 RNA genetic material can be detected by in wastewater, this signal is greatly reduced by conventional treatment. Our analysis also suggests the likelihood of infection due to contact with sewage-contaminated water (e.g. swimming, surfing, angling) or food (e.g. salads, shellfish) is extremely low or negligible based on very low predicted abundances and limited environmental survival of SARS-CoV-2. These conclusions are corroborated by the fact that tens of million cases of COVID-19 have occurred globally, but exposure to feces or wastewater has never been implicated as a transmission vector.

COVID-19 Risk Management and Screening in the Penitentiary Facilities of the Salerno Province in Southern Italy

(1) Background: The emergency linked to the spread of COVID-19 in Italy has led to inevitable consequences on the penitentiary system. The risks of this emergency in prisons is mainly related to the problem of persistent overcrowding that makes social distancing difficult and the isolation of any contagion hard to arrange. The Department of Protection for Adults and Minors of the ASL Salerno Criminal Area has taken steps in order to perform screening operations and minimize the risks for prisoners and operators. (2) Methods: We conducted a two-phase observational study. In the first phase, we offered and then executed serum COVID-19 screening to all the convicted inmates. For those who had a doubtful or positive result, a swab was executed in the shortest time possible. In the second phase, a pharyngeal swab was offered and executed to all the police officers, the penitentiary administrative staff and the medical personnel working in the prison. (3) Results: In the first phase, we executed 485 COVID-19 blood tests on prisoners, 3 (0.61%) of which were positive. The three positive inmates underwent nasopharyngeal swabbing, which ultimately were negative. After that, we executed 276 nasopharyngeal swabs on the prison personnel, penitentiary administrative staff and medical personnel—all were negative. (4) Conclusion: All tests (blood tests and swabs) that were carried out on the prisoners and on the staff were negative for COVID-19. We believe that all prisons in Italy and in the world should take action to ensure preventive and control measures in order to safeguard the health of the prison population and of all the people who work there.