Short-term trajectories of substance use in a sample of drug-involved probationers

Abstract

The current study estimates trajectories of illegal substance use in a sample of 251 drug-involved probationers to identify risk profiles that predict group membership and explores the impact of treatment participation across these trajectories. Trajectory analyses reveal five patterns of drug use during probation supervision. Age and the use of hard drugs are identified as the strongest predictors of involvement in illicit drug use while on probation. The effect of participation in substance use treatment varies across treatment settings and trajectory groups. Prior research has tended to treat drug abusers as a homogeneous population, but the current study findings suggest considerable heterogeneity amongst drug users involved in the criminal justice system. Identifying trajectories of drug use during supervision can help identify individuals who may be more likely to persist in drug use, can inform practice by identifying individuals in need of more intensive treatment services, and can assist in developing new drug treatment strategies.

Treatment outcomes of drug users in probation period: three months follow-up

“…Hence, it may also be asserted that the three-month follow-up process is important. Even though long-term studies are considered to be more significant in understanding substance users' behaviour, understanding substance users' behaviour in the first months of the probation process has also been stated to be necessary for the success of the treatment process [33].…”

Rethinking Court‐Sanctioned Reintegration Processes: Redemption Rituals as an Alternative to the Drug Court Graduation

“…Programme staff commonly lack the credentials, professional training and programme procedures to facilitate individual‐level change and influence participants’ motivation to engage in treatment (Caudy et al . ; Holdsworth et al . ).…”

“…They are not generally structured to provide more sophisticated broader services (for example, cognitive‐based therapy, motivational enhancement therapy, behavioural modification, contingency management) (Caudy et al . ), to deliver adaptive programming (see Marlowe et al . ) to concurrent disorders or medical conditions, or to respond to the comprehensive needs of criminal offenders (see Grella et al .…”

“…Based on the work of Caudy et al . (): ‘findings indicate that special conditions mandating participation in substance abuse treatment and referrals to community treatment are often ineffective means for facilitating individual‐level change in substance use or motivation for treatment participation . .…”

“…While all have engaged in criminal activities and have substance abuse problems, participants vary in the intensity of their problems as well as related concerns in other domains of functioning which also may require intervention' (p.75). Based on the work of Caudy et al (2014): 'findings indicate that special conditions mandating participation in substance abuse treatment and referrals to community treatment are often ineffective means for facilitating individual-level change in substance use or motivation for treatment participation . .…”