Decreased Mortality Rates of Inmates With Mental Illness After a Tobacco-Free Prison Policy.

OBJECTIVE: Negative health consequences of smoking have prompted many correctional facilities to become tobacco free, including the New Jersey Department of Corrections, and this study examined the results of implementing tobacco-free policies. METHODS: Mortality rates in the total population of inmates and in a subgroup with identified special mental health needs or mental illnesses (referred to in this article as persons with special needs) were measured from January 2005 through June 2014, a period during which tobacco use was significantly reduced and then eliminated. RESULTS: The total mortality rate of all causes of death combined was three times higher for persons with special needs in 2005 compared with those without special needs. The total annual mortality rate decreased by 13%, from 232 to 203 per 100,000 population between 2005 and 2013. The mortality rate for persons identified as having special needs decreased by 48%, from an average of 676 per 100,000 population over the eight-year period before the ban to 353 per 100,000 in the 18 months after the ban. Reduced mortality among persons with special needs between 2005 and 2014 in half-year increments was correlated with the reduction and elimination of tobacco products (median bootstrapped Pearson r=.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] =.21 to .86). In strong contrast, however, the bootstrapped correlation between the mortality rate of persons not identified as having special needs and tobacco sales over the same period was not significant (median Pearson r=-.13, CI=-.50 to .28). No other major medical intervention occurred during these years. CONCLUSIONS: This striking correlation of quick and substantial reduction of mortality among individuals with a mental illness in association with the reduction and subsequent ban of smoking suggests that smoking may play a major role in the reduced life span of persons with mental illness.

Behind bars: the compelling case for academic health centers partnering with correctional facilities.

Academic health centers (AHCs), particularly those that are publicly funded institutions, have as their mission the treatment of disadvantaged populations, the training of the next generation of clinicians, and the development and dissemination of new knowledge to reduce the burden of disease and improve the health of individuals and populations. Incarcerated populations have the most prevalent and acute disease burden and health disparities in the United States, even in comparison with inner-city populations. Yet, only a small proportion of AHCs have reached out to incarcerated populations to fulfill their mission. Those AHCs that have partnered with correctional facilities have overcome concerns about the value and popularity of "training behind bars"; the cost, liability, and pragmatics of caring for a medically complicated population; and the viability of correctional health research and extramural research funding. They have done so to great benefit to patients, students, and faculty. Partnering with correctional facilities to provide health care offers opportunities for AHCs to fulfill their core missions of clinical service, education, and research, while also enhancing their financial stability, to the benefit of all. In this Commentary, the authors discuss, based on their experiences, these concerns, how existing partnerships have overcome them, and the benefits of such relationships to both AHCs and correctional facilities.

Benefits of a department of corrections partnership with a health sciences university: New Jersey's experience.

More than half of the state prisons in the United States outsource health care. While most states contract with private companies, a small number of states have reached out to their health science universities to meet their needs for health care of prisoners. New Jersey is the most recent state to form such an agreement. This article discusses the benefits of such a model for New Jersey's Department of Corrections and for New Jersey's health sciences university, the Rutgers University, formerly the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. The benefits for both institutions should encourage other states to participate in such affiliations.

Impact of new therapeutics for hepatitis C virus infection in incarcerated populations.

Inmate populations bear a disproportionate share of the burden of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. With more than 90% of prisoners released back to their communities within a few years of sentencing, incarceration can be viewed as an opportunity to provide HCV screening and therapeutic interventions to benefit the individual, reduce the costs of HCV management to the health care system from a societal perspective, and improve overall public health. Although optimal medical management of HCV within prison settings would increase the current cost of correctional health care, it could decrease transmission within the community, reduce overall disease burden, and lower the future societal health care costs associated with end-stage liver disease. Nonetheless, most prison systems treat only a small fraction of infected inmates. Current and emerging therapeutic agents will cure HCV infection in the vast majority of patients. Mathematical modeling also shows that expanded HCV screening and treatment are cost-effective from the societal perspective. In this article, we will describe appropriate treatment regimens, propose strategies to lessen the burden of these costly HCV therapies on correctional health care systems, and address the challenges of expanded HCV screening in correctional settings.