Pharmacological interventions for drug-using offenders

Abstract

When compared to non-pharmacological treatment, agonist treatments did not seem effective in reducing drug use or criminal activity. Antagonist treatments were not effective in reducing drug use but significantly reduced criminal activity. When comparing the drugs to one another we found no significant differences between the drug comparisons (methadone versus buprenorphine, diamorphine and naltrexone) on any of the outcome measures. Caution should be taken when interpreting these findings, as the conclusions are based on a small number of trials, and generalisation of these study findings should be limited mainly to male adult offenders. Additionally, many studies were rated at high risk of bias.

Evidence on the Effectiveness of Heroin-Assisted Treatment

“…One of the ten reviews that met inclusion criteria for patient-level treatment outcomes was an overview of systematic reviews (Amato et al, 2005). Table 3 briefly describes the other nine (Ali et al, 2017;Dalsbo et al, 2010;Egli et al, 2009;Ferri et al, 2011;Fingleton et al, 2015;Koehler et al, 2014;Perry et al, 2015;Strang et al, 2015;Timko et al, 2016).…”

“…All nine reviews were published between 2009 and 2017, and over half (n=5) were published from 2015 onward. Five were published as peer-reviewed journal articles, two as Cochrane reviews (Ferri et al, 2011;Perry et al, 2015), one as a Campbell review (Egli et al, 2009), and one as a research report (Dalsbo et al, 2010). The number of heroin-assisted treatment studies included in each review ranged from one (Perry et al, 2015) to eight (Ferri et al, 2011).…”

“…Six of the nine only included results from RCTs (Ali et al, 2017;Dalsbo et al, 2010;Ferri et al, 2011;Perry et al, 2015;Strang et al, 2015) or from controlled evaluations (Koehler et al, 2014). One only included RCTs and national cohort studies that had a follow-up period of at least 12 months (Fingleton et al, 2015).…”

The Criminal Justice Experience of African American Cocaine Users in Arkansas

“…This is particularly the case for individuals with substance use disorders who may have insufficient access to addiction treatment within correctional settings and poor linkage to substance use treatment upon release (McKenzie, Macalino, McClung, Shield, & Rich, 2005). The incarcerated setting represents a significant public health opportunity to engage drug-involved offenders in substance use treatment as well as other evidence based re-entry services (Boutwell, Nijhawan, Zaller, & Rich, 2007; Perry et al, 2013; Zaller et al, 2013). …”

Effectiveness of Prison-based Drug Treatment Programs: A Systematic Review of Meta-analyses

“…(e) The original evaluation studies must have the following method characteristics: there must be at least one control or comparison group; the control group should be exposed to either no intervention or minimal treatment, and the control group must not include dropouts (people who had previously participated in the treatment program but later left it). Some systematic reviews which did not meet one or more of these criteria could not be included in this study (e.g., Adams, Leukefeld, & Peden, 2008;Bright & Martire, 2013;Egli, Pina, Skovbo Christensen, Aebi, & Killias, 2009;Ferri, Davoli, & Perucci, 2011;Fiestas & Ponce, 2012;Hedrich et al, 2011;Holloway, Bennett, & Farrington, 2005Koehler, Humphreys, Akoensi, Sanchez de Ribera, & Lösel, 2014;Larney, 2010;Mazerolle, Soole, & Rombouts, 2007;McMurran, 2006;Minozzi et al, 2011;Mitchell, Wilson, Eggers, & MacKenzie, 2012;Perry, 2006;Perry, Darwin, et al, 2009;Perry et al, 2013;Perry et al, 2015aPerry et al, , 2015bPerry, Newman, et al, 2009;Tripodi, Bledsoe, Kim, & Bender, 2011;Smedslund et al, 2011;Smith, Gates, & Foxcroft, 2006;Stallwitz & Stöver, 2007).…”