Public spending for illegal drug and alcohol treatment in hospitals: an EU cross-country comparison

Background: In view of the current economic crisis and the resulting austerity measures being implemented by governments across Europe, public expenditure for substance abuse treatment has increasingly become a subject of discussion. An EU cross-country comparison would allow an estimation of the total amount of public resources spent on substance abuse treatment, compare various substance abuse treatment funding options, and evaluate the division of expenditures between alcohol and illegal drugs. The purpose of this study is to estimate the public spending of EU countries for alcohol and illegal drug abuse treatment in hospitals. Methods: Our study uses a uniform methodology in order to enable valid cross-national comparisons. Our data are drawn from the Eurostat database, which provides anno 2010 data on government spending for the treatment of illegal drug and alcohol abuse in 21 EU member states. The cross-country comparison is restricted to hospitals, since data were unavailable for other types of treatment providers. The systematic registration of in- and outpatient data is essential to monitoring public expenditures on substance abuse treatment using international databases. Results: Total public spending for hospital-based treatment of illegal drug and alcohol abuse in the 21 EU member states studied is estimated to be 7.6 billion euros. Per capita expenditures for treatment of illegal drug abuse vary, ranging from 0.1 euros in Romania to 13 euros in Sweden. For alcohol abuse, that figure varied from 0.9 euros in Bulgaria to 24 euros in Austria. These results confirm other studies indicating that public expenditures for alcohol treatment exceed that for illegal drug treatment. Conclusions: Multiple factors may influence the number of hospital days for alcohol or illegal substance abuse treatment, and expenditures fluctuate accordingly. In this respect, we found a strong correlation between gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and public expenditures per hospital day. The prevalence of problematic ( illegal or legal) drug use in a country did not correlate significantly with the number of hospital days. Other factors must be included in the analysis of public expenditures for the treatment of substance abuse, such as the drug policy in a given country and the social norms regarding alcohol consumption

What differentiates prisoners who attempt suicide from those who experience suicidal ideation? A nationally representative study

Objective: Many people who think about suicide do not engage in suicidal behavior. Identifying risk factors implicated in the process of behavioral enaction is crucial for suicide prevention, particularly in high-risk groups such as prisoners. Method: Cross-sectional data were drawn from a nationally representative sample of 17,891 prisoners (79% men) in the United States. We compared prisoners who attempted suicide (attempters; n = 2,496) with those who thought about suicide but never made an attempt (ideators; n = 1,716) on a range of established risk factors. Results: More than half (59%) of participants who experienced suicidal ideation had also attempted suicide. Violent offending, trauma, brain injury, alcohol abuse, and certain mental disorders distinguished attempters from ideators. Conclusion: Our results fit within recent ideation-to-action theories that emphasize the role of a capability for suicide in the transition from thoughts to acts of suicide