Opioid Agonist Treatment Recipients within Criminal Justice-Involved Populations.

Background: In 2014, nearly 2.5 million Americans had a substance use disorder for opioids (e.g., prescription pain medication or heroin) with over half estimated to have had prior contact with the criminal justice system. Despite strong evidence that opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is effective in reducing overdose, increasing treatment retention, and improving physical health and well-being outcomes, the use of OAT among justice-involved individuals is relatively rare. Methods: The current study uses national data of publicly funded admissions to substance abuse treatment to assess the extent to which OAT is used for cases referred to treatment by the criminal justice system. We explore the relationship between demographics, substance use severity, and access to treatment and OAT receipt. Results: Findings indicate that fewer than 6% of criminal justice cases received OAT as part of the treatment plan. Those with daily substance use, comorbid psychiatric problems, prior treatment, females, Latinos, and those who were older and those who were living independently were more likely to receive OAT, as were those living in the Northeast and with government health insurance. Conclusions: Improving the integration of the criminal justice system with substance use treatment programs would improve access to care and potentially reduce multiple health disparities faced by those in the justice system. As criminal justice responses to substance use disorder move toward a public health approach, it is imperative that the criminal justice system consider mechanisms for improving access and referrals to OAT.

A Content Analysis of Prison Websites: Exploring Approaches to Rehabilitation in Latin America.

Across much of Latin America, prison systems are characterized as having significantly high incarceration and overcrowding rates. In recent years, some of these systems have sought to address such problems by implementing rehabilitation and early release programs. However, the extent to which rehabilitation has been embraced and the nature of said efforts is not known. Using content analysis methods, this exploratory study examines the existence of language supporting rehabilitative practices and goals on official prison system websites across the region. While our findings suggest that prison systems have largely embraced rehabilitative goals, there is limited evidence to indicate that evidence-based practices are emphasized when it comes to assessment and correctional programs. As countries embrace rehabilitative efforts, it is important that they use empirically supported practices, as a perceived failure of the rehabilitative approach could shift the pendulum away from treatment and toward punishment. Implications for future research are discussed.

Cognitive Interviewing to Improve Questionnaires for Justice-Involved Youth.

This study demonstrates the utility of cognitive interviewing for survey and scale development in criminal justice research and identifies common comprehension problems with survey items for justice-involved youth. A cognitive interviewing strategy was utilized with a sample of youth who completed a survey examining risk factors for recidivism. A content analysis of interviews was used to identify patterns and to classify the nature and type of comprehension issues youth experienced. Five specific comprehension issues were identified including reading comprehension, item ambiguity, precondition binds, double-barreled questions, and double negatives. Findings illustrate the value of cognitive interviewing for pretesting survey items for justice-involved youth and provide further insight into issues surrounding word choice, question structure, and response sets. Results also point to the need to reassess the validity of established scales used in contemporary studies. Limitations of the current study and implications for future research are discussed.

Treating high-risk offenders in the community: the potential of drug courts.

The drug court model, which integrates drug treatment with community supervision and uses the authority of the court to facilitate compliance and behavioral change, provides an innovative alternative to processing as usual. While drug courts have enjoyed considerable empirical support, research suggests that they could increase their effectiveness through further refining their target population. In particular, it is hypothesized that drug courts are particularly well suited to treat drug offenders who have a high risk for recidivism. The purpose of the current study is to compare recidivism rates of high-risk drug court participants and high-risk probationers. Using new charges as a measure of recidivism, the results indicate drug court participants had significantly better outcomes than probationers. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.