Rethinking standards on prison cell size in a (post)pandemic world: a scoping review

Abstract

ObjectiveTo describe the current international, regional and national standards on prison cell spatial density and the evidence for the association between COVID-19 transmission and prison crowding measures to provide recommendations on prison cell spatial density standards for a (post) pandemic world.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, ProQuest, Informit, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Google were searched up to November 2021.Eligibility criteriaGuidelines were included provided they described standards of prison accommodation with respect to prison cells. Studies were included provided they examined an association between COVID-19 cases and a crowding measure.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted by one reviewer and cross-checked by another. Quantitative and qualitative data on prison cell standards and characteristics of studies examining an association between COVID-19 and prison crowding were collected.Findings were synthesised qualitatively.ResultsSeventeen reports and six studies met eligibility criteria. International and regional standards on cell spatial density were mostly qualitative, with two quantifiable international standards located (3.4 m2and 3.5 m2per person for multiple occupancy cells), and two quantifiable regional standards located (4 m2per person (Europe) and 5.75 m2or 4 m2per person (Australia and New Zealand)). Country-based standards varied substantially, ranging from 1.25 m2per person (Pakistan) to 10 m2per person (Netherlands). Consideration of airborne transmission of disease in prisons were mostly overlooked or absent to rationalise standards. There was consistent evidence that prison crowding measures were associated with COVID-19 transmission/cases.ConclusionConsidering the physics of respiratory emissions, we recommend prison cell spatial density standards be updated to reflect graded levels of risk that consider other factors that combine to inform airborne transmission risk. Decarceration strategies should be considered and become vital if standards are not met.

Global prevalence and predictors of scabies among prisoners: systematic review and meta-analysis

“…For single cells, the range of space recommendations is from 2.4 square meters in Korea to 16 square meters in Switzerland, while for multiple-occupancy cells, the range is from 1.25 square meters in Pakistan to 10 square meters in the Netherlands. Moreover, prison cell sizes in African countries vary, with Kenya having 3.7 square meters for double cells, Senegal with 3.55 square meters, Guinea with 2 square meters, Malawi with 2–4 square meters, Mauritius with 4.08 square meters, and South Africa with 5.5 square meters for single cells and 3.5 square meters for multiple cells [ 9 ].…”

Infection Prevention and Control in Correctional Settings

“…Infectious disease transmission in the carceral setting is amplified by crowded living conditions ( 4 ), poor ventilation, and the incarceration of vulnerable patient populations. Those populations include persons with low socioeconomic status, migrant populations, aging patients with chronic diseases, patients with substance use disorders and serious mental illness, and those living with bloodborne-pathogen infections ( 5 – 10 ).…”