Rolling back the prison estate: The pervasive impact of macroeconomic austerity on prisoner health in England

Prisons offer policymakers an opportunity to address the pre-existing high prevalence of physical and mental health issues among prisoners. This notion has been widely integrated into international and national prison health policies, including the Healthy Prisons Agenda, which calls for governments to address the health needs of prisoners and safeguard their health entitlement during imprisonment, and the Sustainable Development Goals 2030 concerning reducing inequality among disadvantaged populations.However, the implementation of the austerity policy in the United Kingdom since the re-emergence of the global financial crisis in 2008 has impeded this aspiration. This interdisciplinary paper critically evaluates the impact of austerity on prison health. The aforementioned policy has obstructed prisoners’ access to healthcare, exacerbated the degradation of their living conditions, impeded their purposeful activities and subjected them to an increasing level of violence.This paper calls for alternatives to imprisonment, initiating a more informed economic recovery policy, and relying on transnational and national organizations to scrutinize prisoners’ entitlement to health. These systemic solutions could act as a springboard for political and policy discussions at national and international forums with regard to improving prisoners’ health and simultaneously meeting the aspirations of the Healthy Prisons Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals

Restraining Good Practice: Reviewing evidence of the effects of restraint from the perspective of service users and mental health professionals in the United Kingdom (UK)

Safeguarding, balancing the concept of risk with the need for public protection and its implication for the lives of individuals, is an important facet of contemporary mental health care. Integral to safeguarding is the protection of human rights; the right to live free from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, and having the right to liberty, security, respect and privacy. Professionals are required to recognise all of these rights when delivering care to vulnerable people. In the United Kingdom (UK) there has been growing public concern regarding abusive practices in institutions, with a number of unacceptable methods of restraint being identified as a feature of care, particularly in mental health care. In keeping with the service user movement, and following a review of the literature, this paper discusses the evidence regarding restraint from the perspectives of service users and professionals within mental health services and considers the implications for future practice and research. In reviewing the literature findings revealed restraint can be a form of abuse, it’s inappropriate use often being a consequence of fear, neglect and lack of using de-escalation techniques. Using restraint in this way can have negative implications for the well-being of service users and mental health professionals alike

The role of evidence and the expert in contemporary processes of governance: the case of opioid substitution treatment policy in England

Background This paper is based on research examining stakeholder involvement in substitution treatment policy which was undertaken as part of the EU funded FP7 ALICE-RAP (Addictions and Lifestyles in Contemporary Europe – Reframing Addictions Project). In England, the research coincided with a policy shift towards a recovery orientated drug treatment framework and a heated debate surrounding the role of substitute prescribing. The study aimed to explore the various influences on the development of the new ‘recovery’ policy from the perspectives of the key stakeholders involved. Methods The paper is based on documentary analyses and key informant interviews with a range of stakeholders, including representatives of user organisations, treatment providers, civil servants, and members of expert committees. Results Drawing on the theoretical insights offered by Backstrand’s ‘civic science’ framework, the changing role of evidence and the position of experts in the processes of drugs policy governance are explored. ‘Evidence’ was used to problematise the issue of substitution treatment and employed to legitimise, justify and construct arguments around the possible directions of policy and practice. Conflicting beliefs about drug treatment and about motivation for policy change emerge in the argumentation, illustrating tensions in the governance of drug treatment and the power differentials separating different groups of stakeholders. Their role in the production of evidence also illustrates issues of power regarding the definition and development of ‘usable knowledge’. There were various attempts at greater representation of different forms of evidence and participation by a wider group of stakeholders in the debates surrounding substitution treatment. However, key national and international experts and the appointment of specialist committees continued to play dominant roles in building consensus and translating scientific evidence into policy discourse. Conclusion Substitution treatment policy has witnessed a challenge to the dominance of ‘scientific evidence’ within policy decision making, but in the absence of alternative evidence with an acceptable credibility and legitimacy base, traditional notions of what constitutes evidence based policy persist and there is a continuing lack of recognition of ‘civic science’

Prevention of suicidal behaviour in prisons: an overview of initiatives based on a systematic review of research on near-lethal suicide attempts

Background: Worldwide, prisoners are at high risk of suicide. Research on near-lethal suicide attempts can provide important insights into risk and protective factors, and inform suicide prevention initiatives in prison. Aims: To synthesize findings of research on near-lethal attempts in prisons, and consider their implications for suicide prevention policies and practice, in the context of other research in custody and other settings. Method: We searched two bibliographic indexes for studies in any language on near-lethal and severe self-harm in prisoners, supplemented by targeted searches over the period 2000–2014. We extracted information on risk factors descriptively. Data were not meta-analyzed owing to heterogeneity of samples and methods. Results: We identified eight studies reporting associations between prisoner near-lethal attempts and specific factors. The latter included historical, prison-related, and clinical factors, including psychiatric morbidity and comorbidity, trauma, social isolation, and bullying. These factors were also identified as important in prisoners' own accounts of what may have contributed to their attempts (presented in four studies). Conclusion: Factors associated with prisoners' severe suicide attempts include a range of potentially modifiable clinical, psychosocial, and environmental factors. We make recommendations to address these factors in order to improve detection, management, and prevention of suicide risk in prisoners

Youth social behaviour and network therapy (Y-SBNT) : adaptation of a family and social network intervention for young people who misuse alcohol and drugs – a randomised controlled feasibility trial

Background: Family interventions appear to be effective at treating young people’s substance misuse. However, implementation of family approaches in UK services is low. This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of recruiting young people to an intervention based on an adaptation of adult social behaviour and network therapy. It also sought to involve young people with experience of using substance misuse services in the research process. Objectives: To demonstrate the feasibility of recruiting young people to family and social network therapy and to explore ways in which young people with experience of using substance misuse services could be involved in a study of this nature. Design: A pragmatic, two-armed, randomised controlled open feasibility trial. Setting: Two UK-based treatment services for young people with substance use problems, with recruitment taking place from May to November 2014. Participants: Young people aged 12–18 years, newly referred and accepted for structured interventions for drug and/or alcohol problems. Interventions: A remote, web-based computer randomisation system allocated young people to adapted youth social behaviour and network therapy (Y-SBNT) or treatment as usual (TAU). Y-SBNT participants were intended to receive up to six 50-minute sessions over a maximum of 12 weeks. TAU participants continued to receive usual care delivered by their service. Main outcome measures: Feasibility was measured by recruitment rates, retention in treatment and follow-up completion rates. The main clinical outcome was the proportion of days on which the main problem substance was used in the preceding 90-day period as captured by the Timeline Follow-Back interview at 3 and 12 months. Results: In total, 53 young people were randomised (Y-SBNT, n = 26; TAU, n = 27) against a target of 60 (88.3%). Forty-two young people attended at least one treatment session [Y-SBNT 22/26 (84.6%); TAU 20/27 (74.1%)]; follow-up rates were 77.4% at month 3 and 73.6% at month 12. Data for nine young people were missing at both months 3 and 12, so the main clinical outcome analysis was based on 24 young people (92.3%) in the Y-SBNT group and 20 young people (74.1%) in the TAU group. At month 12, the average proportion of days that the main problem substance was used in the preceding 90 days was higher in the Y-SBNT group than in the TAU group (0.54 vs. 0.41; adjusted mean difference 0.13, 95% confidence interval –0.12 to 0.39; p = 0.30). No adverse events were reported. Seventeen young people with experience of substance misuse services were actively involved throughout the study. They informed key elements of the intervention and research process, ensuring that the intervention was acceptable and relevant to our target groups; contributing to the design of key trial documents, ideas for a new model of public involvement and this report. Two parents were also involved. Conclusions: The adapted intervention could be delivered in young people’s services, and qualitative interviews found that Y-SBNT was acceptable to young people, family members and staff. Engagement of family and network members proved difficult within the intervention and research aspects. The study proved the feasibility of this work in routine services but outcome measurement based on narrow substance use variables may be limited and may fail to capture other important changes in wider areas of functioning for young people. Validation of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions for young people aged 12–18 years should be considered and flexible models for involvement of young people in research are required to achieve inclusive representation throughout all aspects of the research process. Although recommendation of a full trial of the Y-SBNT intervention compared with TAU is not supported, this study can inform future intervention development and UK research within routine addiction services. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN93446265. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Routine administration of anti-D: The ethical case for offering pregnant women fetal RHD genotyping and a review of policy and practice

BACKGROUND: Since its introduction in the 1960s Anti-D immunoglobulin (Anti-D Ig) has been highly successful in reducing the incidence of haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) and achieving improvements to maternal and fetal health. It has protected women from other invasive interventions during pregnancy and prevented deaths and damage amongst newborns and is a technology which has been adopted worldwide. Currently about one third of pregnant women with the blood group Rhesus D (RhD) negative in the UK (approximately 40,000 women per year in England and Wales), receive antenatal Anti-D Ig in pregnancy when they do not require it because they are carrying a RhD negative fetus. Since 1997, a test using cell free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal blood has been developed to identify the genotype of the fetus and can be used to predict the fetal RhD blood group. DISCUSSION: This paper considers whether it is ethically acceptable to continue administering antenatal Anti-D Ig to all RhD negative women when fetal RHD genotyping using maternal blood could identify those women who do not need this product. SUMMARY: The antenatal administration of Anti-D Ig to a third of RhD negative pregnant women who carry a RhD negative fetus and therefore do not need it raises important ethical issues. If fetal RHD genotyping using maternal blood was offered to all RhD negative pregnant women it would assist them to make an informed choice about whether or not to have antenatal Anti-D Ig

A population-based investigation into inequalities amongst Indigenous mothers and newborns by place of residence in the Northern Territory, Australia

BACKGROUND: Comparisons of birth outcomes between Australian Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations show marked inequalities. These comparisons obscure Indigenous disparities. There is much variation in terms of culture, language, residence, and access to services amongst Australian Indigenous peoples. We examined outcomes by region and remoteness for Indigenous subgroups and explored data for communities to inform health service delivery and interventions. METHODS: Our population-based study examined maternal and neonatal outcomes for 7,560 mothers with singleton pregnancies from Australia’s Northern Territory Midwives’ Data Collection (2003–2005) using uni- and multivariate analyses. Groupings were by Indigenous status; region (Top End (TE)/Central Australia (CA)); Remote/ Urban residence; and across two large TE communities. RESULTS: Of the sample, 34.1% were Indigenous women, of whom 65.6% were remote-dwelling versus 6.7% of non- Indigenous women. In comparison to CA Urban mothers: TE Remote (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.47, 95%CI: 1.13, 1.90) and TE Urban mothers (aOR 1.36 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.80) were more likely, but CA Remote mothers (aOR 0.43; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.58) less likely to smoke during pregnancy; CA Remote mothers giving birth at >32 weeks gestation were less likely to have attended ≥ five antenatal visits (aOR 0.55; 95%CI: 0.36, 0.86); TE Remote (aOR 0.71; 95%CI: 0.53, 0.95) and CA Remote women (aOR 0.68; 95%CI: 0.49, 0.95) who experienced labour had lower odds of epidural/ spinal/narcotic pain relief; and TE Remote (aOR 0.47; 95%CI: 0.34, 0.66), TE Urban (aOR 0.67; 95%CI: 0.46, 0.96) and CA Remote mothers (aOR 0.52; 95%CI: 0.35, 0.76) all had lower odds of having a ‘normal’ birth. The aOR for preterm birth for TE Remote newborns was 2.09 (95%CI: 1.20, 3.64) and they weighed 137 g (95%CI: -216 g, -59 g) less than CA Urban babies. There were few significant differences for communities, except for smoking prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: This paper is one of few quantifying inequalities between groups of Australian Indigenous women and newborns at a regional level. Indigenous mothers and newborns do worse on some outcomes if they live remotely, especially if they live in the TE. Smoking prevention and high-quality antenatal care is fundamental to addressing many of the adverse outcomes identified in this paper.Malinda Steenkamp, Alice Rumbold, Lesley Barclay and Sue Kilde