Randomized trial of a reentry modified therapeutic community for offenders with co-occurring disorders: Crime outcomes

Interventions to reduce harms related to drug use among people who experience incarceration: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mortality, suicide, self-harm, and substance use are elevated among people who are incarcerated. There is a wide range of heterogeneous interventions aimed at reducing these harms in this population. Previous reviews have focused on specific interventions or limited their findings to drug use and recidivism and have not explored interventions delivered after release from prison. Our aim is to examine the effect of interventions delivered to people who use drugs during incarceration or after release from incarceration, on a wide range of outcomes.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases up until Sept 12, 2023 for studies published from Jan 1, 1980 onwards. All studies evaluating the effectiveness of any intervention on drug use, recidivism outcomes, sexual or injecting risk behaviours, or mortality among people who use psychoactive drugs and who were currently or recently incarcerated were included. Studies without a comparator or measuring only alcohol use were excluded. Data extracted from each study included demographic characteristics, interventions, and comparisons. Pooled odds ratios and risk ratios were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses.

FINDINGS

We identified 126 eligible studies (47 randomised controlled trials and 79 observational studies) encompassing 18 interventions; receiving opioid-agonist treatment (OAT) in prison reduced the risk of death in prison (one study; hazard ratio 0·25; 95% CI 0·13-0·48), whereas receiving OAT in the first 4 weeks following release reduced risk of death in the community (two studies; relative risk 0·24; 95% CI 0·15-0·37). Therapeutic community interventions reduced re-arrest at 6-12 months (six studies; odds ratio [OR] 0·72; 95% CI 0·55-0·95) and reincarceration at 24 months (two studies; OR 0·66; 95% CI 0·48-0·96). There was scarce evidence that OAT and syringe service provision are effective in reducing injecting risk behaviours and needle and syringe sharing.

INTERPRETATION

There are effective interventions to reduce mortality and recidivism for people who use drugs who have been incarcerated. Nonetheless, there are also substantial gaps in the research examining the effect of interventions on risk behaviours and mortality during incarceration and a need for randomised designs examining outcomes for people who use drugs after release.

FUNDING

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

The prison-based Therapeutic Community: Resident recommendations for program improvement

INTRODUCTION

The prison-based Therapeutic Community (TC) is widely used within correctional institutions to address substance use disorders (SUDs). While most evaluations of the prison-based TC find the program to be effective, recent mixed evidence and the continued surge of the opioid crisis call for deeper investigation into program operations, barriers to engagement, and sources of treatment effect heterogeneity. Notably lacking from prior evaluations, and critical to our understanding of variable program engagement, is first-hand experiences and perceptions from program participants.

METHODS

To assess prison-based TC resident perceptions of the program and their recommendations for improvement, we utilize data from the Therapeutic Community Prison Inmate Network Study (TC-PINS), a longitudinal data collection effort conducted in one prison-based TC unit within a Pennsylvania state prison. Specifically, we assess resident responses to the open-ended item "What can the TC do better?" Analyzing 470 responses to this question by 177 residents, two independent coders identified seven substantive categories of recommended changes or improvements to their TC program.

RESULTS

Residents provided tangible recommendations for improvement of their prison-based TC program based on their experiences and perceptions. Importantly, a number of their recommendations directly counter the intended model of the TC, which highlights imperative issues underlying the translation of the TC model within the prison environment. Resident suggestions include enhanced structure, increased individualization, expanded curriculum, stricter enforcement of rules, and improved or more experienced staff. Additionally, many question the coercive nature of TC program participation within this prison system.

CONCLUSIONS

Resident recommendations for program improvement unveil important sources of treatment effect heterogeneity and highlight tangible program changes that can be implemented to reduce barriers to treatment engagement. We provide suggested changes to this prison-based TC based on resident perceptions and discuss both the importance and relative ease of eliciting this critical participant feedback.

Duration of stay and rate of subsequent criminal conviction and hospitalisation for substance use among young people admitted to a short-term residential program

INTRODUCTION

This study examined the association between program duration and rate of criminal conviction and hospitalisation for substance use up to 15 years later among young people admitted to a short-term residential program for drug and alcohol use.

METHODS

Data were derived from linked administrative records of all clients referred to a modified therapeutic community for young people from January 2001 to December 2016 in New South Wales, Australia (n = 3059). Cox proportional hazards regression analyses examined the rate of conviction (separately for any offence, violent offence, non-violent offence and administrative offence) and hospitalisation for substance use, up to 15 years post-program among young people who attended treatment for 1-29 days, 30-59 days, 60-89 days and 90-120 days.

RESULTS

Thirty days or more in treatment was independently associated with a lower rate of conviction for any offence and a non-violent offence, as well as hospitalisation for substance use, while 60 days or more was associated with a lower rate of conviction for a violent and administrative offence, relative to those who spent 1-29 days in the program. Additional months in the program were also associated with reduced rates of conviction and hospitalisation, although 90-120 days appeared to confer no additional benefits than 60-89 days.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

At least 60 days may be the minimum duration needed for short-term, therapeutic community programs to reduce the risk of conviction across all crime types and hospitalisation for substance use.

Prison-based democratic therapeutic communities, medication, and the power to exclude

In 1962, the first custodial Democratic Therapeutic Community (DTC) was established in the English prison estate at HMP Grendon. Today, the Category B male prison estate in England and Wales has three DTCs and three 'TC+' units for prisoners with learning disabilities. There is one DTC in the female estate at HMP Send. The services fall under the remit of the Offender Personality Disorder Pathway, a jointly commissioned initiative that aims to provide a pathway of psychologically informed services for a highly complex and challenging group of prisoners who are likely to have a severe personality disorder. Several of these units make clear that prisoners prescribed psychotropic medicines are specifically excluded from entry and participation in the available therapy. This analysis paper explores whether an evidence-based rationale exists for this practice and examines the impact on those whose care pathways may comprise hospitals and prisons.

Interventions to improve social circumstances of people with mental health conditions: a rapid evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Poor social circumstances can induce, exacerbate and prolong symptoms of mental health conditions, while having a mental health condition can also lead to worse social outcomes. Many people with mental health conditions prioritise improvement in social and functional outcomes over reduction in clinical symptoms. Interventions that improve social circumstances in this population should thus be considered a priority for research and policy.

METHODS

This rapid evidence synthesis reports on randomised controlled trials of interventions to improve social circumstances across eight social domains (Housing and homelessness; money and basic needs; work and education; social isolation and connectedness; family, intimate and caring relationships; victimisation and exploitation; offending; and rights, inclusion and citizenship) in people with mental health conditions. Economic evaluations were also identified. A comprehensive, stepped search approach of the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus was conducted.

RESULTS

One systematic review and 102 randomised controlled trials were included. We did not find RCT evidence for interventions to improve family, intimate and caring relationships and only one or two trials for each of improving money and basic needs, victimisation and exploitation, and rights, inclusion and citizenship. Evidence from successful interventions in improving homelessness (Housing First) and employment (Individual Placement and Support) suggests that high-intensity interventions which focus on the desired social outcome and provide comprehensive multidisciplinary support could influence positive change in social circumstances of people with mental health conditions. Objective social isolation could be improved using a range of approaches such as supported socialisation and social skills training but interventions to reduce offending showed few benefits. Studies with cost and cost-effectiveness components were generally supportive of interventions to improve housing and vocational outcomes. More research is needed to ensure that social circumstances accompanied by high risks of further exacerbation of mental health conditions are adequately addressed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is a large body of literature examining how to support some aspects of life for people with mental health conditions, more high-quality evidence is required in other social domains. Integration into mental health services of interventions targeting social circumstances could significantly improve a number of social outcomes.

Substance Use Disorders as a Critical Element for Decision-Making in Forensic Assertive Community Treatment: A Systematic Review

Introduction: The prevalence of substance use disorders in forensic populations is high. They are an important factor linked to negative outcomes in mentally ill offenders and are detrimental to forensic or non-forensic outcome measures. In contrast, substance use disorders are often underdiagnosed and undertreated, especially in forensic settings. Forensic Assertive Community Treatment is a forensic adaptation of regular assertive community treatment, combined with essential elements of forensic rehabilitation theories. Little is known however on the effectivity of forensic assertive community treatment when it comes to substance use disorders or what their exact role is on the outcome measures. In this paper, we explore how SUD is treated in Forensic assertive community treatment and how it relates to the forensic and non-forensic outcome measures. Methods: We performed a systematic review (PRISMA) of forensic Assertive community treatment teams that followed the main evidence-based principles of regular assertive community treatment and added basic elements of forensic rehabilitation. We analyzed articles the Psychinfo and Medline databases dating from 2005 to 2020. Fifteen studies fit the search criteria and were included in the analysis. The Quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: SUD was highly prevalent in all studies. Patients entered FACT through two pathways, either from a care continuum or directly from prison. The severity of SUD at intake emerges as a critical element when deciding which pathway to choose, as a high severity-score at the start of FACT follow-up was linked to recidivism. While differing in method all studies offered integrated SUD treatment. These included evidence-based techniques like CBT, therapeutic communities, and Substance Abuse Management Module. Though results on SUD outcomes were mixed 4 studies mentioned abstinence in 50-75%. The severity of SUD tended to increase initially and to stabilize afterwards. Conclusion: Severity of SUD at intake emerges as a decisive element in decision-making on entering FACT teams directly from prison or through a care-continuum. The ways to provide SUD treatment varied and outcomes for SUD were mixed. SUD was found to be detrimental to forensic and non-forensic outcome measures, such as recidivism or hospitalizations during FACT treatment.

Effectiveness of psychological interventions in prison to reduce recidivism: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Repeat offending, also known as criminal recidivism, in people released from prison has remained high over many decades. To address this, psychological treatments have been increasingly used in criminal justice settings; however, there is little evidence about their effectiveness. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions in prison to reduce recidivism after release.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Global Health, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar for articles published from database inception to Feb 17, 2021, without any language restrictions. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of psychological interventions, delivered to adolescents and adults during incarceration, on recidivism outcomes after release. We excluded studies of solely pharmacological interventions and of participants in secure psychiatric hospitals or special residential units, or attending therapies mainly delivered outside of the prison setting. We extracted summary estimates from eligible RCTs. Data were extracted and appraised according to a prespecified protocol, with effect sizes converted to odds ratios. We used a standardised form to extract the effects of interventions on recidivism and estimated risk of bias for each RCT. Planned sensitivity analyses were done by removing studies with fewer than 50 participants. Our primary outcome was recidivism. Data from individual RCTs were combined in a random-effects meta-analysis as pooled odds ratios (ORs) and we explored sources of heterogeneity by comparing effect sizes by study size, control group, and intervention type. The protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020167228.

FINDINGS

Of 6345 articles retrieved, 29 RCTs (9443 participants, 1104 [11·7%] females, 8111 [85·9%] males, and 228 [2·4%] unknown) met the inclusion criteria for the primary outcome. Mean ages were 31·4 years (SD 4·9, range 24·5-41·5) for adult participants and 17·5 years (SD 1·9; range 14·6-20·2) for adolescent participants. Race or ethnicity data were not sufficiently reported to be aggregated. If including all 29 RCTs, psychological interventions were associated with reduced reoffending outcomes (OR 0·72, 95% CI 0·56-0·92). However, after excluding smaller studies (<50 participants in the intervention group), there was no significant reduction in recidivism (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0·68-1·11). Based on two studies, therapeutic communities were associated with decreased rates of recidivism (OR 0·64, 95% CI 0·46-0·91). These risk estimates did not significantly differ by type of control group and other study characteristics.

INTERPRETATION

Widely implemented psychological interventions for people in prison to reduce offending after release need improvement. Publication bias and small-study effects appear to have overestimated the reported modest effects of such interventions, which were no longer present when only larger studies were included in analyses. Findings suggest that therapeutic communities and interventions that ensure continuity of care in community settings should be prioritised for future research. Developing new treatments should focus on addressing modifiable risk factors for reoffending.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust, Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé.

Investigating Mental Health Implications for Drug Court Participants

Drug Court Treatment (DCT) Programs seek to integrate substance abuse treatment into the criminal justice system by providing a structured environment for offenders who engage in treatment in lieu of incarceration. DCT has shown successes in reducing drug/alcohol use, recidivism, and cost, but the impact of DCT on non-substance-related mental health outcomes is less clear. This study evaluated mental health correlates within a DCT sample through analyses of participants' pre-entry and pre-graduation Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Second Edition (MMPI-2) profiles. When diagnostic information was available, mood disorders had the highest comorbidity with alcohol/substance use diagnoses. Comparisons across administrations of the MMPI-2 indicated significant differences among mean scores on 6 Clinical scales, and mean profile elevation scores significantly decreased. Results suggest a significant presence of mental health comorbidities in DCT programs, and significant mental health improvements were seen for graduates, suggesting the utility of DCT for treating mental health problems in addition to substance use.

Reentry interventions that address substance use: A systematic review

Justice-involved individuals with substance use problems have heightened risk of relapse and recidivism after release from incarceration, making reentry a critical time to provide evidence-based treatments (EBTs) for substance use; however, the extent to which reentry interventions incorporate EBTs for substance use is unclear. This systematic review identified studies of reentry interventions in the past 10 years that address substance use, assessed whether EBTs were used, and explored which interventions were effective in reducing substance use and recidivism postrelease. Eligible studies included interventions that began during incarceration and continued postrelease or began within 3 months of release and addressed substance use in some capacity. One hundred twelve full text articles were reviewed and 38 met inclusion criteria, representing 34 unique interventions. Of the 34 interventions, 21 provided substance use treatment whereas 13 facilitated connections to treatment. Of the 21 interventions providing treatment, the primary modalities were cognitive-behavioral therapy (n = 6), motivational interviewing (n = 2), medication assisted treatment (n = 2), therapeutic community (n = 2), psychoeducation or 12-step (n = 5), and four did not specify the modality. Of the 31 studies that assessed recidivism outcomes, 18 found reduced recidivism for the treatment group on at least one indicator (e.g., rearrest, reincarceration). Of the 13 studies that assessed substance use outcomes, 7 found reduced substance use for the treatment group on at least one indicator. Results were not consistent for any particular treatment approach or modality and highlight the need for consistent integration of EBTs for substance use into reentry interventions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems

BACKGROUND

This review represents one from a family of three reviews focusing on interventions for drug-using offenders. Many people under the care of the criminal justice system have co-occurring mental health problems and drug misuse problems; it is important to identify the most effective treatments for this vulnerable population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.This review addresses the following questions.• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce drug use?• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce criminal activity?• Does the treatment setting (court, community, prison/secure establishment) affect intervention outcome(s)?• Does the type of treatment affect treatment outcome(s)?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 databases up to February 2019 and checked the reference lists of included studies. We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials designed to prevent relapse of drug use and/or criminal activity among drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane .

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 studies with a total of 2606 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (eight studies; 61%), in court (two studies; 15%), in the community (two studies; 15%), or at a medium secure hospital (one study; 8%). Main sources of bias were unclear risk of selection bias and high risk of detection bias.Four studies compared a therapeutic community intervention versus (1) treatment as usual (two studies; 266 participants), providing moderate-certainty evidence that participants who received the intervention were less likely to be involved in subsequent criminal activity (risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.84) or returned to prison (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.67); (2) a cognitive-behavioural therapy (one study; 314 participants), reporting no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.32), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09), criminal activity (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.05), or drug-related crime (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.36), yielding low-certainty evidence; and (3) a waiting list control (one study; 478 participants), showing a significant reduction in return to prison for those people engaging in the therapeutic community (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79), providing moderate-certainty evidence.One study (235 participants) compared a mental health treatment court with an assertive case management model versus treatment as usual, showing no significant reduction at 12 months' follow-up on an Addictive Severity Index (ASI) self-report of drug use (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), conviction for a new crime (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.22), or re-incarceration to jail (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.01), providing low-certainty evidence.Four studies compared motivational interviewing/mindfulness and cognitive skills with relaxation therapy (one study), a waiting list control (one study), or treatment as usual (two studies). In comparison to relaxation training, one study reported narrative information on marijuana use at three-month follow-up assessment. Researchers reported a main effect < .007 with participants in the motivational interviewing group, showing fewer problems than participants in the relaxation training group, with moderate-certainty evidence. In comparison to a waiting list control, one study reported no significant reduction in self-reported drug use based on the ASI (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and on abstinence from drug use (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43), presenting low-certainty evidence at six months (31 participants). In comparison to treatment as usual, two studies (with 40 participants) found no significant reduction in frequency of marijuana use at three months post release (MD -1.05, 95% CI -2.39 to 0.29) nor time to first arrest (MD 0.87, 95% CI -0.12 to 1.86), along with a small reduction in frequency of re-arrest (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.01) up to 36 months, yielding low-certainty evidence; the other study with 80 participants found no significant reduction in positive drug screens at 12 months (MD -0.7, 95% CI -3.5 to 2.1), providing very low-certainty evidence.Two studies reported on the use of multi-systemic therapy involving juveniles and families versus treatment as usual and adolescent substance abuse therapy. In comparing treatment as usual, researchers found no significant reduction up to seven months in drug dependence on the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test (DUDIT) score (MD -0.22, 95% CI -2.51 to 2.07) nor in arrests (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36), providing low-certainty evidence (156 participants). In comparison to an adolescent substance abuse therapy, one study (112 participants) found significant reduction in re-arrests up to 24 months (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.28), based on low-certainty evidence.One study (38 participants) reported on the use of interpersonal psychotherapy in comparison to a psychoeducational intervention. Investigators found no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50), providing very low-certainty evidence. The final study (29 participants) compared legal defence service and wrap-around social work services versus legal defence service only and found no significant reductions in the number of new offences committed at 12 months (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.07 to 6.01), yielding very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic community interventions and mental health treatment courts may help people to reduce subsequent drug use and/or criminal activity. For other interventions such as interpersonal psychotherapy, multi-systemic therapy, legal defence wrap-around services, and motivational interviewing, the evidence is more uncertain. Studies showed a high degree of variation, warranting a degree of caution in interpreting the magnitude of effect and the direction of benefit for treatment outcomes.

Evaluating peer-influence processes in a prison-based therapeutic community: a dynamic network approach

BACKGROUND

The Therapeutic Community (TC) is a common treatment modality for incarcerated individuals with substance use disorders. TCs rely on peer group processes to promote lasting behavioral and identity change, yet prior research has not adequately tested the peer influence mechanisms underlying the theoretical model. This study applied dynamic network analysis to estimate peer influence processes central to TC philosophy.

METHODS

A stochastic actor-oriented model (SAOM) was applied to ten months of social network data collected from prisoner surveys within a TC unit (N = 62) in a medium-security Pennsylvania prison. Respondents (N = 177, 84% of unit) completed at least one prison survey and provided network and community role model nominations.

RESULTS

Although residents' levels of treatment engagement were significantly correlated with their nominated peers, estimates of peer influence for treatment engagement were non-significant in longitudinal network models. Nor were estimates of peer influence significantly greater for peers perceived as community role models. Rather, inmates connected with peers who were of similar treatment engagement as themselves (i.e., a peer selection process), and the latter primarily resulted from racial homophily in the TC social network.

CONCLUSIONS

Inconsistent with the desired treatment model, treatment engagement diffusion was not evident in the sampled TC. Results suggested that highly-engaged residents clustered together at the center of the TC's social structure but had little impact on less-engaged and peripheral inmates. The relatively short (i.e., four-month) program length and moderate-to-low treatment fidelity likely contributed to the lack of peer influence processes.

Co-Occurring Substance Use, PTSD, and IPV Victimization: Implications for Female Offender Services

The co-occurrence of substance use disorders (SUDs) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among women who have been the victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) is complex and causal associations cannot be assumed. Although the presence of co-occurring disorders among IPV victims is a well-established research finding, there is a need for improved understanding of their prevalence and related mental health treatment requirements among female offenders. We review research indicating that service providers working with IPV victims can expect to encounter women with extensive concurrent problems and examine evidence for integrated treatment for SUD, PTSD, and IPV. We propose an outline for assessing and treating SUD and PTSD among female offenders who have experienced IPV victimization. We intend this review to build on previous calls in the co-occurring disorders literature and help integrate the research and treatment evaluation literatures in a way that points to practical implications for policy and practice in female offender services.

Treatment engagement in a prison-based Therapeutic Community: A mixed-methods approach

Given the high proportion of inmates with histories of substance use disorders in the era of mass incarceration, many correctional institutions have integrated the prison-based Therapeutic Community (TC) into their programming. While most evaluations provide evidence of lowered rates of relapse and recidivism, the majority of TC graduates still have negative outcomes post-release. Filling an important gap in the TC treatment literature, we analyze quantitative measures of treatment engagement alongside qualitative narratives from prison-based TC residents, providing an essential look into the black box of TC treatment mechanisms. Quantitative results show more between-person variation than within-person change, reflecting trivial increases in treatment engagement throughout time in the program. Qualitative results unpack these findings, pointing to processes of selection bias, heterogeneous treatment effects, and program fidelity lapses. In combination, our mixed data identify tangible modifications to program implementation that could strengthen desired post-release outcomes.

A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Case Management for Substance Use Disorders: A Recovery Perspective

Background: Case management is a client-centered approach to improve the coordination and continuity of service delivery, especially for persons with substance use disorders (SUD) and multiple and complex support needs. This intervention supports individuals by helping them identify needed services, facilitate linkage with services, and promote participation and retention in services. However, it is questionable whether case management is equally effective in promoting recovery and aspects of personal functioning. The objective was to conduct an updated meta-analysis and to assess whether case management was more effective than treatment as usual (TAU) among persons with SUD for improving treatment-related (e.g., successful linkage with and retention in treatment) as well as personal functioning outcomes (e.g., substance use). Methods: This meta-analysis focuses on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included persons with alcohol or drug use disorders and compared case management with TAU. To be eligible, interventions had to meet core case management functions as defined in the literature. We conducted searches of the following databases to May 2017: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Specialized Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Also, reference lists of retrieved publications were scanned for relevant (un)published studies. Results: The overall effect size for case management compared to TAU across all outcome categories and moments was small and positive (SMD = 0.18, 95% CI 0.07-0.28), but statistically significant. Effects were considerably larger for treatment tasks (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.48) than for personal functioning outcomes (SMD = 0.06, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.15). The largest effect sizes were found for retention in substance abuse treatment and linkage with substance abuse services. Moderator effects of case management models and conditions were assessed, but no significant differences were observed. Conclusions: The primary results from earlier meta-analyses were supported: case management is more effective than TAU conditions for improving outcomes, but this effect is significantly larger for treatment-related tasks than for personal functioning outcomes. Case management can be an important supplement to available services for improving linkage and retention, although further research is needed to assess its potential for supporting recovery from a longitudinal perspective.

Evidence-based treatment and supervision practices for co-occurring mental and substance use disorders in the criminal justice system

BACKGROUND

Over seven million persons in the United States are supervised by the criminal justice system, including many who have co-occurring mental and substance use disorders (CODs). This population is at high risk for recidivism and presents numerous challenges to those working in the justice system.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a contemporary review of the existing research and examine key issues and evidence-based treatment and supervision practices related to CODs in the justice system.

METHODS

We reviewed COD research involving offenders that has been conducted over the past 20 years and provide an analysis of key findings.

RESULTS

Several empirically supported frameworks are available to guide services for offenders who have CODs, including Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment (IDDT), the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model, and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT). Evidence-based services include integrated assessment that addresses both sets of disorders and the risk for criminal recidivism. Although several evidence-based COD interventions have been implemented at different points in the justice system, there remains a significant gap in services for offenders who have CODs. Existing program models include Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT), day reporting centers, specialized community supervision teams, pre- and post-booking diversion programs, and treatment-based courts (e.g., drug courts, mental health courts, COD dockets). Jail-based COD treatment programs provide stabilization of acute symptoms, medication consultation, and triage to community services, while longer-term prison COD programs feature Modified Therapeutic Communities (MTCs).

CONCLUSION

Despite the availability of multiple evidence-based interventions that have been implemented across diverse justice system settings, these services are not sufficiently used to address the scope of treatment and supervision needs among offenders with CODs.

Interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems: a systematic review and economic appraisal

BACKGROUND

Drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems are common in the criminal justice system. A combination of drug use and mental health problems makes people more likely to be arrested for criminal involvement after release compared to offenders without a mental health problem. Previous research has evaluated interventions aimed broadly at those with a drug problem but rarely with drug use and mental health problems. This systematic review considers the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases up to May 2014 and five Internet resources. The review included randomised controlled trials designed to reduce, eliminate, or prevent relapse of drug use and/or criminal activity. Data were reported on drug and crime outcomes, the identification of mental health problems, diagnoses and resource information using the Drummond checklist. The systematic review used standard methodological procedures as prescribed by the Cochrane collaboration.

RESULTS

Eight trials with 2058 participants met the inclusion criteria. These evaluated: case management (RR, 1.05, 95 % CI 0.90 to 1.22, 235 participants), motivational interviewing and cognitive skills, (MD-7.42, 95 % CI-0.20.12 to 5.28, 162 participants) and interpersonal psychotherapy (RR 0.67, 95 % CI 0.3 to 1.5, 38 participants). None of these trials reported significant reductions in self-report drug misuse or crime. Four trials evaluating differing therapeutic community models showed reductions in re-incarceration (RR 0.28, 95 % CI 0.13 to 0.63, 139 participants) but not re-arrest (RR 1.65, 95 % CI 0.83 to 3.28, 370 participants) or self-report drug use (RR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.53 to 1.01, 370 participants). Mental health problems were identified across the eight trials and 17 different diagnoses were described. Two trials reported some resource information suggesting a cost-beneficial saving when comparing therapeutic communities to a prison alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the studies showed a high degree of variation, warranting a degree of caution in the interpretation of the magnitude of effect and direction of benefit for treatment outcomes. Specifically, tailored interventions are required to assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

Are Non-Pharmacological Interventions Effective in Reducing Drug Use and Criminality? A Systematic and Meta-Analytical Review with an Economic Appraisal of These Interventions

Background: The numbers of incarcerated people suffering from drug dependence has steadily risen since the 1980s and only a small proportion of these receive appropriate treatment. A systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and economic evidence of non-pharmacological interventions for drug using offenders was conducted. Methods: Cochrane Collaboration criteria were used to identify trials across 14 databases between 2004 and 2014. A series of meta-analyses and an economic appraisal were conducted. Results: 43 trials were identified showing to have limited effect in reducing re-arrests RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.89-1.07) and drug use RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.80-1.00) but were found to significantly reduce re-incarceration RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.85). Therapeutic community programs were found to significantly reduce the number of re-arrests RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.56-0.87). 10 papers contained economic information. One paper presented a cost-benefit analysis and two reported on the cost and cost effectiveness of the intervention. Conclusions: We suggest that therapeutic community interventions have some benefit in reducing subsequent re-arrest. We recommend that economic evaluations should form part of standard trial protocols.

Psychiatric Rehabilitation of Persons With Co-Occurring Disorders and Corrections Involvement

Purpose: Today, the criminal justice system is annually placing more than 300,000 people with severe mental illness (SMI) in prisons and jails which are neither equipped nor staffed to respond to the unique challenges of this population. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the literature that focuses on treating inmates with psychiatric disabilities who have co-occurring substance use (CODx) histories.

Method: Based on a critical analysis of the literature and theoretical integration, this article focuses on reasons for the high prevalence of SMI and CODx in corrections facilities.

Results: This article highlights that research has shown that effective treatment can be provided both as an in-jail service as well as through jail diversion within the community using integrated CODx treatment (Draine, Blank, Kottsieper, & Solomon, 2005). Some models focused on moving individuals with psychiatric disabilities and CODx from prison to release have shown improved recidivism rates and increased eligibility and use of postrelease treatment services (Buck, Brown, & Hickey, 2011; Wenzlow, Ireys, Mann, Irvin, & Teich, 2011).

Conclusion: National alternative and innovative models, integrated treatment of CODx treatment within corrections through jail diversion and community-based services, and reentry rehabilitation challenges and approaches are discussed.

Challenges and Rewards of Conducting Research on Recovery Residences for Alcohol and Drug Disorders

Although research shows treatment for alcohol and drug problems can be effective, persons without stable housing that supports recovery are at risk for relapse. Recovery residences (RRs) for drug and alcohol problems are a growing response to the need for alcohol- and drug-free living environments that support sustained recovery. Research on RRs offers an opportunity to examine how integration of these individuals into a supportive, empowering environment has beneficial impacts on substance use, housing, and other outcomes, as well as benefits for the surrounding community. Research can also lead to the identification of operations and practices within houses that maximize favorable outcomes for residents. However, research on RRs also presents significant obstacles and challenges. Based on our experiences conducting recovery home research for decades, we present suggestions for addressing some of the unique challenges encountered in this type of research.

Effectiveness of Using Incentives to Improve Parolee Admission and Attendance in Community Addiction Treatment

This study is a randomized effectiveness trial of the use of incentives to improve treatment utilization among parolees in community treatment. In prison, Admission phase parolees were randomized to Admission Incentive (N=31) or Education (N=29). Attendance phase parolees entering community treatment were randomized to Attendance Incentive (N=104) or Education (N=98). There was no main effect for incentives in either study phase. Neither admission to community treatment (Incentive 60%, Education 64%; p =.74), nor intervention completion (Incentive 22%; Education 27%; p =.46) appeared to be impacted. Time-in-treatment was predicted by age, first arrest age, and type of parole status (Cox regression p<.05), but not by treatment group. Providing incentives did not increase the likelihood that parolees enrolled in or stayed in community treatment. In light of this finding, criminal justice practitioners who are considering incentives to increase admission or retention should be aware that they may not produce the desired outcomes.

Mental Health Services and Public Safety: Substance Abuse Outpatient Visits Were Associated with Reduced Crime Rates in a Swedish Cohort

Substance abuse is related to offending and substance abuse treatment has been associated with reductions in criminal behavior. This cohort study aimed to explore the relationship between participation in substance abuse interventions and general criminal recidivism among offenders with a combination of mental health problems and substance use problems. In total, 150 Swedish offenders with self-reported mental health and substance use problems were followed for approximately three years with regard to participation in substance abuse interventions and criminal recidivism. Participants with at least three planned visits to specialized outpatient substance abuse clinics had a substantially reduced risk of reoffending as compared to those with fewer than three such visits (HR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.29-0.77). For those with at least three planned visits, general criminal recidivism was reduced by 75% during periods of participation in outpatient visits, as compared to periods of non-participation (HR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.11-0.60). For offenders with mental health problems and substance use problems, outpatient substance abuse interventions could be regarded as important from a clinical risk management perspective, and be encouraged.

Factors Associated with Recidivism among Corrections-Based Treatment Participants in Rural and Urban Areas

The majority of corrections-based treatment outcome studies focus on individuals paroling to urban areas; thus there is a significant gap in the literature on outcomes, including recidivism, among individuals paroling to non-urban and rural communities. This study examines differences in factors associated with recidivism among former corrections-based treatment participants living in urban and rural communities following release. Analyses focused on secondary data collected from treatment participants in one southeastern state over a four year period between July 2006 and June 2010 including both baseline (treatment intake) and follow-up data (12-months post-release). Findings indicated that individuals in urban areas were 2.4 times more likely to recidivate than rural individuals. Other factors identified in separate rural and urban analyses also emerged as significant predictors in the overall model including age, gender, race, employment and drug use. Overall, these findings suggest that corrections-based treatment participants living in urban and rural areas following release may share similar risk factors for recidivism. However, rural areas may be protective for returning to custody despite the presence of some of these risks.

Therapeutic Community Treatment of an Inmate Population with Substance Use Disorders: Post-Release Trends in Re-Arrest, Re-Incarceration, and Drug Misuse Relapse

This systematic literature review maps the evidence for the effectiveness of the therapeutic community interventions (TCI) in reducing re-arrest, re-incarceration or drug misuse following release from prison, including the extent to which these effects are retained over time. The databases searched for the review included PsychINFO, Medline and Scopus and reference lists from relevant articles published between 2007 and 2014. Only quantitative studies that examined the effectiveness of TCI for a prisoner population with drug dependence at the time of initial incarceration were considered. Fourteen studies were identified for inclusion in the review. Three-quarters of the studies reported TCI were effective in reducing rates of re-incarceration. About 70% of studies that examined follow-up rates of drug misuse relapse found TCI effective in reducing rates of drug misuse amongst participants. TCI participation reduced re-arrests events in 55% of the studies. Results suggest TCI effective in the short-term rather than longer term for reducing rates of re-incarceration among participants, and to a slightly lesser extent, drug misuse relapse.

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on a range of different interventions for drug-using offenders. This specific review considers pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing drug use or criminal activity, or both, for illicit drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Fourteen electronic bibliographic databases up to May 2014 and five additional Web resources (between 2004 and November 2011). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of any pharmacological intervention a component of which is designed to reduce, eliminate or prevent relapse of drug use or criminal activity, or both, in drug-using offenders. We also report data on the cost and cost-effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials with 2647 participants met the inclusion criteria. The interventions included in this review report on agonistic pharmacological interventions (buprenorphine, methadone and naltrexone) compared to no intervention, other non-pharmacological treatments (e.g. counselling) and other pharmacological drugs. The methodological trial quality was poorly described, and most studies were rated as 'unclear' by the reviewers. The biggest threats to risk of bias were generated through blinding (performance and detection bias) and incomplete outcome data (attrition bias). Studies could not be combined all together because the comparisons were too different. Only subgroup analysis for type of pharmacological treatment were done. When compared to non-pharmacological, we found low quality evidence that agonist treatments are not effective in reducing drug use or criminal activity, objective results (biological) (two studies, 237 participants (RR 0.72 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.00); subjective (self-report), (three studies, 317 participants (RR 0.61 95% CI 0.31 to 1.18); self-report drug use (three studies, 510 participants (SMD: -0.62 (95% CI -0.85 to -0.39). We found low quality of evidence that antagonist treatment was not effective in reducing drug use (one study, 63 participants (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.70) but we found moderate quality of evidence that they significantly reduced criminal activity (two studies, 114 participants, (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.74).Findings on the effects of individual pharmacological interventions on drug use and criminal activity showed mixed results. In the comparison of methadone to buprenorphine, diamorphine and naltrexone, no significant differences were displayed for either treatment for self report dichotomous drug use (two studies, 370 participants (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.55), continuous measures of drug use (one study, 81 participants, (mean difference (MD) 0.70, 95% CI -5.33 to 6.73); or criminal activity (one study, 116 participants, (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.88) between methadone and buprenorphine. Similar results were found for comparisons with diamorphine with no significant differences between the drugs for self report dichotomous drug use for arrest (one study, 825 participants, (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.51) or naltrexone for dichotomous measures of reincarceration (one study, 44 participants, (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.26), and continuous outcome measure of crime, (MD -0.50, 95% CI -8.04 to 7.04) or self report drug use (MD 4.60, 95% CI -3.54 to 12.74).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared to non-pharmacological treatment, agonist treatments did not seem effective in reducing drug use or criminal activity. Antagonist treatments were not effective in reducing drug use but significantly reduced criminal activity. When comparing the drugs to one another we found no significant differences between the drug comparisons (methadone versus buprenorphine, diamorphine and naltrexone) on any of the outcome measures. Caution should be taken when interpreting these findings, as the conclusions are based on a small number of trials, and generalisation of these study findings should be limited mainly to male adult offenders. Additionally, many studies were rated at high risk of bias.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in Issue 3, 2006 (Perry 2006). The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders. This specific review considers interventions for female drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity, or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases up to May 2014 and five additional Website resources (between 2004 and November 2011). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) designed to reduce, eliminate or prevent relapse of drug use or criminal activity in female drug-using offenders. We also reported data on the cost and cost-effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials with 1792 participants met the inclusion criteria. Trial quality and risks of bias varied across each study. We rated the majority of studies as being at 'unclear' risk of bias due to a lack of descriptive information. We divided the studies into different categories for the purpose of meta-analyses: for any psychosocial treatments in comparison to treatment as usual we found low quality evidence that there were no significant differences in arrest rates, (two studies; 489 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 1.52) or drug use (one study; 77 participants; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.12), but we found moderate quality evidence that there was a significant reduction in reincarceration, (three studies; 630 participants; RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.64). Pharmacological intervention using buprenorphine in comparison to a placebo did not significantly reduce self reported drug use (one study; 36 participants; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35). No cost or cost-effectiveness evidence was reported in the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Three of the nine trials show a positive trend towards the use of any psychosocial treatment in comparison to treatment as usual showing an overall significant reduction in subsequent reincarceration, but not arrest rates or drug use. Pharmacological interventions in comparison to a placebo did not significantly reduce drug use and did not measure criminal activity. Four different treatment comparisons showed varying results and were not combined due to differences in the intervention and comparison groups. The studies overall showed a high degree of heterogeneity for types of comparisons and outcome measures assessed, which limited the possibility to pool the data. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required to identify the important elements for treatment success in drug-using female offenders. More trials are required to increase the precision of confidence with which we can draw conclusions about the effectiveness of treatments for female drug-using offenders.

Predictors of Psychiatric Hospitalization in Ex-Prisoners With Substance Use Problems

This study analyzed predictors of psychiatric hospitalization in ex-prisoners with substance use problems ( N = 4,081) assessed with the Addiction Severity Index and followed post-release for hospitalizations with psychiatric diagnoses (including suicide attempts). Thirty-four percent were hospitalized, and in Cox regression, several substance-related variables predicted hospitalization, including use of heroin, sedatives, and polysubstance. A secondary analysis, with a psychiatric non-substance focus, excluded hospitalizations involving only substance-related disorders or only a personality disorder in addition to a substance-related disorder. With this definition, 10% were hospitalized, and significant baseline predictors were previous psychiatric hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.83), previous suicide attempt (HR = 1.91), depression (HR = 1.33), anxiety (HR = 1.37), sedative use (HR = 1.46), and, negatively, amphetamine use (HR = 0.71). Substance-related variables may predict all-cause psychiatric hospitalizations in prisoners with substance use problems, whereas non-substance-related psychiatric hospitalization may be predicted by baseline psychiatric problems, which calls for attention to psychiatric problems in this setting.

A systematic review of studies examining effectiveness of therapeutic communities

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to systematically review quantitative research since 2000 on the effectiveness of residential therapeutic communities (TCs) for the treatment of substance-use disorders with reference to substance-use, crime, mental health and social engagement outcomes.

Design/methodology/approach

– A systematic search with broad inclusion criteria resulted in the review of 11 studies. The studies investigated community-based TCs, as well as TCs modified for prisoners, prisoners transitioning to community living and TCs for individuals with co-occurring substance-use and mental health issues.

Findings

– Results were analysed by comparing the findings of the studies under investigation, of which three studies investigated within-subjects outcomes, four compared TC treatment with a no-treatment control condition and four compared TC treatment with another treatment condition. Conclusion: consistent with previous systematic reviews of TCs, outcomes varied across studies but indicated TCs are generally effective as a treatment intervention, with reductions in substance-use and criminal activity, and increased improvement in mental health and social engagement evident in a number of studies reviewed.

Research limitations/implications

– Variability in outcomes suggests further TC research and research syntheses focusing on a second key research question in the evaluation of complex interventions – how the intervention works – could play an important role in understanding TC effectiveness, and for whom it is effective and in what contexts.

Practical implications

– Although there is some variability in treatment populations included in this review, evidence reported in other studies suggests individuals with severe substance-use disorders, mental health issues, forensic involvement and trauma histories, will benefit from TC treatment. This is supported by the literature which has found a general relationship between severity of substance use and treatment intensity (Darke et al., 2012; De Leon et al., 2008) with outcomes further enhanced by self-selection into treatment and appropriate client-treatment matching (see De Leon, 2010; De Leon et al., 2000, 2008). The weight of evidence gleaned from multiple sources of research, including randomised control trials and field outcome studies (De Leon, 2010) suggests TCs are an important and effective treatment for clients in improving at least some aspects of their quality of life, specifically mental health and social engagement, and in reducing harmful behaviours, including substance-use and crime. Variability in treatment setting and populations reflect the real-world setting in which TC treatment is delivered, providing a multifaceted treatment modality to a complex population in variable circumstances.

Originality/value

– The strength of the current study is that it provided a broad evaluation of TC effectiveness across a range of outcomes (substance-use, criminal activity, mental health and social engagement), and is therefore valuable in updating the current literature and providing context for future research in this area. It aimed to address a key question in evaluating complex interventions: whether they are effective as they are delivered. Findings suggest that TC treatment is generally effective for the populations of concern in reducing substance use and criminal activity and contributing to some improvement in mental health and social engagement outcomes.

“I know if I drink I won’t feel anything”: substance use relapse among depressed women leaving prison

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to explore treatment needs and factors contributing to engagement in substance use and sobriety among women with co-occurring substance use and major depressive disorders (MDDs) as they return to the community from prison.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The paper used qualitative methods to evaluate the perspectives of 15 women with co-occurring substance use and MDDs on the circumstances surrounding their relapse and recovery episodes following release from a US prison. Women were recruited in prison; qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews conducted after prison release and were analyzed using grounded theory analysis. Survey data from 39 participants supplemented qualitative findings.

FINDINGS

Results indicated that relationship, emotion, and mental health factors influenced women's first post-prison substance use. Women attributed episodes of recovery to sober and social support, treatment, and building on recovery work done in prison. However, they described a need for comprehensive pre-release planning and post-release treatment that would address mental health, family, and housing/employment and more actively assist them in overcoming barriers to care.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

In-prison and aftercare treatment should help depressed, substance using women prisoners reduce or manage negative affect, improve relationships, and obtain active and comprehensive transitional support.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

Women with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders are a high-risk population for negative post-release outcomes, but limited information exists regarding the processes by which they relapse or retain recovery after release from prison. Findings inform treatment and aftercare development efforts.

Offenders with mental health problems and problematic substance use: affective psychopathic personality traits as potential barriers to participation in substance abuse interventions

Substance abuse is related to re-offending, and treatment of substance abuse may reduce criminal recidivism. Offender characteristics including problem severity, violence risk and psychopathic personality traits may be positively or negatively associated with participation in substance abuse treatment. We explored the relationships between such characteristics and participation in substance abuse interventions among Swedish offenders with mental health problems and problematic substance use. Our analyses revealed that problem severity regarding drugs, employment, and family/social situations predicted intervention participation, and that affective psychopathic personality traits were negatively associated with such participation. Thus, affective psychopathic personality traits could be considered as potential barriers to participation in substance abuse interventions. Among offenders with mental health problems and problematic substance use, such personality traits should be taken into account in order to optimize treatment participation and treatment outcome. Approaches used in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT) could be applicable for these patients.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in Issue 3, 2006 (Perry 2006). The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders. This specific review considers interventions for female drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases (between 2004 and 21st March 2013) and five additional web resources (between 2004 and November 2011). We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We include randomised controlled trials designed to reduce, eliminate or prevent relapse in female drug-using offenders. We also report data on the cost and cost effectiveness of interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 76 trials across the four reviews. Following a process of prescreening, we judged that 11 trials met the inclusion criteria of the specified review; four of the 11 trials are awaiting classification in the review. The remaining seven trials cover 1236 participants. The interventions included in this review report on therapeutic communities (TCs), gender-responsive treatment (GRT), use of case management and cognitive skills, and a pharmacological intervention using buprenorphine. Trial quality and risks of bias varied across each study. The majority of studies were rated as being at 'unclear' risk of bias due to a lack of descriptive information. Overall the interventions showed statistically significant reductions in self-reported drug use, (four studies, 734 participants, risk ratio (RR) 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.80) and re-incarceration, (four studies, 745 participants, RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.72). We found a statistically non-significant result for re-arrest (three studies, 803 participants, RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.19). Individual treatment results found that TCs and a GRT programme showed a statistically significant reduction in re-incarceration (one study, 509 participants, RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.60) but not for re-arrest, (one study, 314 participants, RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03) and self-reported drug use (two studies, 825 participants, RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.14 to 1.53). Case management and cognitive skills programmes did not significantly reduce re-arrests, (one study, 183 participants RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.41) or self-reported drug use, (one study, 77 participants, RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.20 to 2.12), but did show a statistically significant reduction in re-incarceration, (three studies, 236 participants, RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.81). Buprenorphine did not significantly reduce self-reported drug use (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35), but this result came from a single study with only 36 participants. Due to the small number of studies we were unable to analyse the impact of treatment setting on outcome. No cost and cost effectiveness evidence was reported in the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The seven trials show some positive results for the use of treatments to reduce self-reported drug use and subsequent re-incarceration. However, the studies overall showed a high degree of statistical variation, requiring a degree of caution in the interpretation of the magnitude of effect and direction of benefit for treatment outcomes. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required to identify the important elements for treatment success in drug-using female offenders. More trials are required to increase the confidence with which we can draw conclusions about the effectiveness of treatments for female drug-using offenders.

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

The review represents one in a family of four reviews focusing on a range of different interventions for drug-using offenders. This specific review considers pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing drug use and/or criminal activity for illicit drug-using offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity and/or drug use.

SEARCH METHODS

Fourteen electronic bibliographic databases (searched between 2004 and 21 March 2013) and five additional Web resources (searched between 2004 and 11 November 2011) were searched. Experts in the field were contacted for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of any pharmacological interventions for reducing, eliminating or preventing relapse in drug-using offenders were included. Data on the cost and cost-effectiveness of interventions were reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 76 trials across the four reviews were identified. After a process of prescreening had been completed, 17 trials were judged to meet the inclusion criteria for this specific review (six of the 17 trials are awaiting classification for the review). The remaining 11 trials contained a total of 2,678 participants. Nine of the eleven studies used samples with a majority of men. The interventions (buprenorphine, methadone and naltrexone) were compared to non pharmacological treatments (e.g., counselling) and other pharmacological drugs. The methodological trial quality was poorly described, and most studies were rated as 'unclear' by the reviewers. The biggest threats to risk of bias were generated through blinding (performance and detection bias) and incomplete outcome data (attrition bias). When combined, the results suggest that pharmacological interventions do significantly reduce subsequent drug use using biological measures, (three studies, 300 participants, RR 0.71 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.97)), self report dichotomous data (three studies, 317 participants, RR 0.42, (95% CI 0.22 to 0.81)) and continuous measures (one study, MD -59.66 (95% CI -120.60 to 1.28)) . In the subgroups analysis for community setting, (two studies, 99 participants: RR 0.62 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.09)) and for secure establishment setting, (one study, 201 participants: RR 0.76 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.10)), the results are no longer statistically significant. Criminal activity was significantly reduced favouring the dichotomous measures of re arrest, (one study, 62 participants, RR 0.60 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.14)), re-incarceration, (three studies, 142 participants, RR 0.33 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.56)) and continuous measures (one study, 51 participants, MD -74.21 (95% CI -133.53 to -14.89)). Findings on the effects of individual pharmacological interventions on drug use and criminal activity show mixed results. Buprenorphine in comparison to a non pharmacological treatment seemed to favour buprenorphine but not significantly with self report drug use, (one study, 36 participants, RR 0.58 (95% CI 0.25 to 1.35)). Methadone and cognitive behavioural skills in comparison to standard psychiatric services, did show a significant reduction for self report dichotomous drug use (one study, 253 participants, RR 0.43 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.56)) but not for self report continuous data (one study 51 participants) MD -0.52 (95% CI -1.09 to 0.05)), or re incarceration RR 1.23 (95% CI 0.53 to 2.87)). Naltrexone was favoured significantly over routine parole and probation for re incarceration (two studies 114 participants, RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.69)) but no data was available on drug use. Finally, we compared each pharmacological treatment to another. In each case we compared methadone to: buprenorphine, diamorphine and naltrexone. No significant differences were displayed for either treatment for self report dichotomous drug use (one study, 193 participants RR 1.23 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.76)), continuous measures of drug use MD 0.70 (95% CI -5.33 to 6.73) or criminal activity RR 1.25 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.88)) between methadone and buprenorphine. Similiar results were found for comparisons with Diamorphine with no significant differences between the drugs for self report dichotomous drug use for arrest (one study, 825 participants RR 1.25 (95% CI 1.03-1.51)) or Naltrexone for dichotomous measures of re incarceration (one study, 44 participants, RR 1.10 (95% CI 0.37 to 3.26)), and continuous outcome measure of crime MD -0.50 (95% CI -8.04 to 7.04)) or self report drug use MD 4.60 (95% CI -3.54 to 12.74)).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders do appear to reduce overall subsequent drug use and criminal activity (but to a lesser extent). No statistically significant differences were displayed by treatment setting. Individual differences are displayed between the three pharmacological interventions (buprenorphine, methadone and naltrexone) when compared to a non pharmacological intervention, but not when compared to each other. Caution should be taken when interpreting these findings, as the conclusions are based on a small number of trials, and generalisation of these study findings should be limited mainly to male adult offenders. Additionally, many studies were rated at high risk of bias because trial information was inadequately described.

Therapeutic communities for addictions: a review of their effectiveness from a recovery-oriented perspective

Therapeutic communities (TCs) for addictions are drug-free environments in which people with addictive problems live together in an organized and structured way to promote change toward recovery and reinsertion in society. Despite a long research tradition in TCs, the evidence base for the effectiveness of TCs is limited according to available reviews. Since most of these studies applied a selective focus, we made a comprehensive systematic review of all controlled studies that compared the effectiveness of TCs for addictions with that of a control condition. The focus of this paper is on recovery, including attention for various life domains and a longitudinal scope. We searched the following databases: ISI Web of Knowledge (WoS), PubMed, and DrugScope. Our search strategy revealed 997 hits. Eventually, 30 publications were selected for this paper, which were based on 16 original studies. Two out of three studies showed significantly better substance use and legal outcomes among TC participants, and five studies found superior employment and psychological functioning. Length of stay in treatment and participation in subsequent aftercare were consistent predictors of recovery status. We conclude that TCs can promote change regarding various outcome categories. Since recovering addicts often cycle between abstinence and relapse, a continuing care approach is advisable, including assessment of multiple and subjective outcome indicators.