The benefits and implementation challenges of the first state-wide comprehensive medication for addictions program in a unified jail and prison setting.

The prevalence of opioid use disorders among people who are incarcerated is high. People who are released from incarceration are at increased risk for overdose. The current study details the first year of implementation of a state-wide medications for addiction treatment (MAT) program in a unified jail and prison setting at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections in Cranston, Rhode Island. We conducted 40 semi-structured, qualitative interviews with people who were incarcerated and concurrently enrolled in the MAT program. Analysis employed a general, inductive approach in NVivo 12. We found that a majority of participants discussed program benefits such as reduced withdrawal symptoms, decreased prevalence of illicit drug use in the facility, improved general environment at the RIDOC, and increased post-release intentions to continue MAT. Suggested areas of improvement include reducing delays to first dose, increasing access to other recovery services in combination with MAT, improving staff training on stigma, and earlier access to medical discharge planning information prior to release. Our findings suggest that correctional MAT programs are acceptable to targeted populations and are a feasible intervention that may be transferable to other states.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis awareness and interest among participants in a medications for addiction treatment program in a unified jail and prison setting in Rhode Island.

People who are incarcerated are at increased risk for HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) acquisition upon release, and one possible intervention for prevention is the use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) upon release. The present study assessed HIV risk perceptions as well as PrEP awareness and interest among 39 people who were incarcerated and enrolled in a structured Medication for Addiction Treatment (MAT) program at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections using semi-structured, qualitative interviews. Analysis was conducted using a generalized, inductive method in NVivo 12. While PrEP awareness was low across the study sample, some participants were interested in PrEP uptake or learning more about PrEP after they were provided with an overview of it. PrEP interest strongly related to current perceived HIV risk. Potential barriers included side effects, adherence, and reluctance to take medications in general. MAT programs for people who are criminal justice (CJ) involved may serve as useful linkage spaces to PrEP information, access, and retention.

"One guy goes to jail, two people are ready to take his spot": Perspectives on drug-induced homicide laws among incarcerated individuals.

BACKGROUND: As overdose deaths have increased in the United States, some lawmakers have explored punitive, "supply-side" interventions aimed at reducing the supply of fentanyl. While a rationale of seeking to protect people who use drugs is often given to justify harsh sentences for fentanyl distribution, there is no research to our knowledge on perceptions of the effect of drug-induced homicide laws among people who use drugs. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 40 people with opioid use disorder (OUD) who were enrolled in a medication for addiction treatment (MAT) program in a unified jail and prison system in Rhode Island on attitudes surrounding increased sentences for distribution of fentanyl, including recently enacted drug-induced homicide laws. Codes were developed using a generalized, inductive method and interviews analyzed in NVivo 12 after being coded by two coders. RESULTS: Most participants stated that drug-induced homicide laws would not be an effective strategy to stem the overdose crisis. We identified key themes, including discussions surrounding the autonomy of people who use drugs, widespread fentanyl prevalence as a barrier to implementation of drug-induced homicide laws, discussions of mass incarceration as ineffective for addressing substance use disorders, feelings that further criminalization could lead to violence, criminalization as a justification for interpersonal loss, and intention as meaningful to categorizing an act as homicide. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the importance of centering the experiences of people with OUD in creating policies surrounding the overdose epidemic, potential unintended health consequences of drug-induced homicides laws such as deterrence from calling 911 and increased violence, and how drug-induced homicide laws may undermine advances made in expanding access to OUD treatment for people who are criminal justice-involved.