There goes the neighborhood? The public safety enhancing effects of a mobile harm reduction intervention.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is a gold-standard treatment for opioid use disorders, but most people with these disorders do not access it. Barriers to treatment access may be diminished by low-threshold mobile treatment programs but concern regarding their impact on local public safety challenges their adoption. METHODS: This quasi-experimental study uses difference-in-differences analyses to measure the impact of four mobile buprenorphine clinics in Pittsburgh on neighborhood arrest rates. The study period spans 2018 to 2022, with a pre-intervention period of 11 to 12 quarters and a post-intervention period of 7 to 8 quarters (dependent on neighborhood). A treatment group of 84 census block groups in the areas surrounding clinics during the time period after their establishment were compared to a control group of city census blocks not within one mile of a clinic plus treated block groups in the two years prior to clinic establishment. Outcome variables include drug, non-drug, and total arrests, measured quarterly per 100 in population. RESULTS: Compared to block groups further than 1 mile from a clinic, arrests fell by 34.13 % (b = -0.358, 95 % CI = -0.557, -0.158), drug arrests by 33.85 % (b = -0.087, 95 % CI = -0.151, -0.023), and non-drug related arrests by 22.29 % (b = -0.179, 95 % CI = -0.302, -0.057). Drug arrests declined significantly on days when the clinics were not present (b = -0.015, 95 % CI = -0.025, -0.006), with no significant change on clinic operational days (b = -0.002, 95 % CI = -0.016, -0.013). Total arrests declined significantly on days when clinics were and were not present (b = -0.045, 95 % CI = -0.078, -0.012; and b = -0.052, CI = -0.082, -0.023, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Mobile clinics providing medication for opioid use disorders were associated with reduced neighborhood arrest rates. Expansion of mobile services could promote health equity and public safety.

Risk Factors for Criminal Recidivism Among Persons With Serious Psychiatric Diagnoses: Disentangling What Matters for Whom.

Reducing criminal legal system involvement requires an understanding of the factors that promote repeat offending (i. e., recidivism), and the dissemination of relevant interventions to those most likely to benefit. A growing body of research has established common recidivism risk factors for persons with serious psychiatric disorder diagnoses. However, research to date has not examined the degree to which these risks apply to those with serious psychiatric disorders with and without co-occurring substance use disorders. To clarify what risk and need factors are greatest and for whom, this cross-sectional study drew from an original dataset containing data on 14 social and economic, psychological, and criminal risk areas for a cohort of people on probation (n = 4,809). Linear regression models indicated that, compared to those without a serious psychiatric disorder, people on probation with a serious psychiatric disorder are at greater risk in a minority of areas and those areas are mostly social and economic in nature. Meanwhile, those withco-occurring disorders are at relatively high risk across almost all areas. The results from this study suggest that justice involved persons with serious psychiatric disorders will benefit from interventions that increase social support and economic well-being and that interventions that broadly reduce risk among people with co-occurring serious psychiatric and substance use disorders will likely yield meaningful reductions in system involvement. Ultimately, understanding and intervening upon risk for recidivism among persons with serious psychiatric disorders requires differentiating between those with and without co-occurring substance use disorders.