The association of criminal justice supervision setting with overdose mortality: a longitudinal cohort study.

Background and aimsDespite the high prevalence of substance use among people in the US criminal justice system, little is known about the incidence of overdose mortality by use patterns, drug convictions and supervision setting. We examined the associations between these characteristics and overdose mortality.DesignRetrospective cohort study.Setting and participantsIndividuals sentenced to prison, jail, probation or jail plus probation for a felony conviction in Michigan, USA from 2003 to 2006.MeasurementsUsing the National Death Index, we assessed overdose mortality to December 2012. We calculated overdose mortality rates by pre-sentence opioid use, drug convictions and supervision setting. Multivariable analyses were conducted using competing risks regression with time-varying covariates.FindingsAmong 140 266 individuals followed over a mean of 7.84 years [standard deviation (SD) = 1.52], 14.9% of the 1131 deaths were due to overdose (102.8 per 100 000 person-years). Over the follow-up, more than half of overdose deaths occurred in the community (57.7%), nearly a third (28.8%) on probation and 12.8% on parole. The adjusted risk of overdose death was lower on probation [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.60, 0.85] than in the community without probation or parole (HR = 1.00) but not significantly different on parole (HR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.87, 1.47). Pre-sentence daily opioid use (HR = 3.54, 95% CI = 3.24, 3.87) was associated with an increased risk. Drug possession (HR = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.93, 1.31) and delivery convictions (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.77, 1.09) were not significantly associated with overdose mortality.ConclusionsBased on the absolute or relative risk, parole, probation and community settings are appropriate settings for enhanced overdose prevention interventions. Ensuring that individuals with pre-sentence opioid use have access to harm reduction and drug treatment services may help to prevent overdose among people involved with the criminal justice system

From evidence-base to practice: implementation of the Nurse Family Partnership programme in England

The aims of this article are to highlight the issues that are relevant to the implementation of a rigorously evidence-based programme of support, the Nurse Family Partnership programme, into a national system of care. Methods used are semi-structured interviews with families in receipt of the programme in the first 10 sites, with the nursing staff, with members of the central team guiding the initiative and with other professionals. Analyses of data collected during programme delivery evaluate fidelity of delivery. The results indicate that the programme is perceived in a positive light and take-up is high, with delivery close to the stated US objectives. Issues pertaining to sustainability are highlighted - in particular, local concerns about cost set against long-term rather than immediate gains. However, local investment is predominantly strong, with creative methods being planned for the future. Overall, the study shows that within an NHS system of care it is possible to deliver a targeted evidence-based programme

The incredible years therapeutic dinosaur programme to build social and emotional competence in welsh primary schools: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>School interventions such as the Incredible Years <it>Classroom </it>Dinosaur Programme targets pupil behaviour across whole classrooms, yet for some children a more intense approach is needed. The Incredible Years <it>Therapeutic </it>Dinosaur Programme is effective for clinically referred children by enhancing social, problem-solving skills, and peer relationship-building skills when delivered in a clinical setting in small groups.</p> <p>The aim of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of the Therapeutic Programme, delivered with small groups of children at high-risk of developing conduct disorder, delivered in schools already implementing the Classroom Programme.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This is a pragmatic, parallel, randomised controlled trial.</p> <p>Two hundred and forty children (aged 4-8 years) rated by their teacher as above the 'borderline cut-off' for concern on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, and their parents, will be recruited.</p> <p>Randomisation is by individual within blocks (schools); 1:1 ratio, intervention to waiting list control.</p> <p>Twenty schools will participate in two phases. Two teachers per school will deliver the programme to six intervention children for 2-hours/week for 18 weeks between baseline and first follow-up. The control children will receive the intervention after first follow up.</p> <p>Phase 1 comprises three data collection points - baseline and two follow-ups eight months apart. Phase 2 includes baseline and first follow-up.</p> <p>The Therapeutic Programme includes elements on; Learning school rules; understanding, identifying, and articulating feelings; problem solving; anger management; how to be friendly; how to do your best in school.</p> <p>Primary outcomes are; change in child social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. Secondary outcomes are; teacher and parent mental wellbeing, child academic attainment, child and teacher school attendance. Intervention delivery will be assessed for fidelity.</p> <p>Intention to treat analyses will be conducted. ANCOVA, effect sizes, mediator and moderator analyses will be applied to establish differences between conditions, and for whom the intervention works best for and why.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This trial will provide information on the delivery and effectiveness of a child centred, school-based intervention delivered in small groups of children, at risk of developing more severe conduct problems. The effects on child behaviour in school and home environments, academic attainment, peer interactions, parent and teacher mental health will be assessed.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>UK Clinical Research Network UKCRNID8615</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN96803379">ISRCTN96803379</a></p

Community Justice and Public Safety: Assessing Criminal Justice Policy Through the Lens of the Social Contract

A reconceptualization of the idea of “community justice” is framed in the logic of the social contract and emphasizes the responsibility of the justice system for the provision of public safety. First, we illustrate the ways in which the criminal justice system has hindered the efforts of community residents to participate in the production of public safety by disrupting informal social networks. Then we turn to an examination of the compositional dynamics of California prison populations over time to demonstrate that the American justice system has failed to meet their obligations to provide public safety by incapacitating dangerous offenders. We argue that these policy failures represent a breach of the social contract and advocate for more effective collaboration between communities and the formal criminal justice system so that all parties can fulfill their obligations under the contract

Preventing Violence in Seven Countries: Global Convergence in Policies

Do governments take the measures that are supported by the best scientific evidence available? We present a brief review of the situation in: Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Our findings show surprisingly similar developments across countries. While all seven countries are moving towards evidence-based decision making regarding policies and programs to prevent violence, there remain a number of difficulties before this end can be achieved. For example, there continue to be few randomized controlled trials or rigorous quasi-experimental studies on aggression and violence. Results from experimental research are essential to both policy makers and researchers to determine the effectiveness of programs as well as increase our knowledge of the problem. Additionally, all noted that media attention for violence is high in their country, often leading to management by crisis with the result that policies are not based on evidence, but instead seek to appease public outrage. And perhaps because of attendant organizational problems (i.e., in many countries violence prevention was not under the guise of one particular agency or ministry), most have not developed a coordinated policy focusing on the prevention of violence and physical aggression. It is hypothesized that leaders in democratic countries, who must run for election every 4 to 6 years, may feel a need to focus on short-term planning rather than long-term preventive policies since the costs, but not the benefits for the latter would be incurred while they still served in office. We also noted a general absence of expertise beyond those within scientific circles. The need for these ideas to be more widely accepted will be an essential ingredient to real and sustaining change. This means that there must be better communication and increased understanding between researchers and policy makers. Toward those ends, the recent establishment of the Campbell Collaboration, formed to provide international systematic reviews of program effectiveness, will make these results more available and accessible to politicians, administrators and those charged with making key policy decision