Literature DB >> 18618265

Impact of court-mandated substance abuse treatment on clinical decision making.

Noosha Niv1, Alison Hamilton, Yih-Ing Hser.   

Abstract

California's Proposition 36 offers nonviolent drug offenders community-based treatment as an alternative to incarceration or probation without treatment. The study objective was to examine how substance abuse treatment providers perceive the impact of Proposition 36 on their clinical decision making. Program surveys were completed by 115 treatment programs in five California counties to assess the impact of the law on clinical decision making, and five focus groups were conducted with 37 treatment providers to better understand their perspectives. Compared to residential programs, outpatient programs reported that the policy impacted them to a greater extent in terms of drug testing, reporting to criminal justice personnel, and determining client discharge. Providers in the focus groups particularly highlighted their changing roles in assessing clients' treatment needs and determining the best routes of care for them. The findings indicate that alternate strategies for determining treatment placement and continuing care should be developed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18618265      PMCID: PMC2821668          DOI: 10.1007/s11414-008-9129-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res        ISSN: 1094-3412            Impact factor:   1.505


  13 in total

Review 1.  Treatment inside the drug treatment court: the who, what, where, and how of treatment services.

Authors:  Faye S Taxman; Jeffrey Bouffard
Journal:  Subst Use Misuse       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.164

2.  Substance abuse counselors' treatment philosophy and the content of treatment services provided to offenders in drug court programs.

Authors:  Faye S Taxman; Jeffrey A Bouffard
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2003-09

3.  Early implementation of Proposition 36: criminal justice and treatment system issues in eight counties.

Authors:  Richard Speiglman; Dorie Klein; Robin Miller; Amanda Noble
Journal:  J Psychoactive Drugs       Date:  2003-05

4.  Federal demonstration funds at the interface of mental health and criminal justice.

Authors:  Richard K Sherman; Larry K Irvin; Paul Yovanoff; Susan Sowards
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2004-09

5.  Impact of California's Proposition 36 on the drug treatment system: treatment capacity and displacement.

Authors:  Yih-Ing Hser; Cheryl Teruya; Alison H Brown; David Huang; Elizabeth Evans; M Douglas Anglin
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-11-30       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Benefit-cost in the California treatment outcome project: does substance abuse treatment "pay for itself"?

Authors:  Susan L Ettner; David Huang; Elizabeth Evans; Danielle Rose Ash; Mary Hardy; Mickel Jourabchi; Yih-Ing Hser
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Linking substance abuse and serious mental illness service delivery systems: initiating a statewide collaborative.

Authors:  P Barreira; B Espey; R Fishbein; D Moran; R B Flannery
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 1.505

8.  Perceptions of mental health and substance abuse program administrators and staff on service delivery to persons with co-occurring substance abuse and mental disorders.

Authors:  Christine E Grella; Virginia Gil-Rivas; Leslie Cooper
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2004 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.505

9.  Treating drug-abusing offenders. Initial findings from a five-county study on the impact of California's Proposition 36 on the treatment system and patient outcomes.

Authors:  Yih-Ing Hser; Cheryl Teruya; Elizabeth A Evans; Douglas Longshore; Christine Grella; David Farabee
Journal:  Eval Rev       Date:  2003-10

10.  Integrating substance abuse treatment and criminal justice supervision.

Authors:  Douglas B Marlowe
Journal:  Sci Pract Perspect       Date:  2003-08
View more
  3 in total

1.  Comparative Effectiveness of California's Proposition 36 and Drug Court Programs Before and After Propensity Score Matching.

Authors:  Elizabeth Evans; Libo Li; Darren Urada; M Douglas Anglin
Journal:  Crime Delinq       Date:  2014-09

2.  Promising practices for delivery of court-supervised substance abuse treatment: perspectives from six high-performing California counties operating Proposition 36.

Authors:  Elizabeth Evans; M Douglas Anglin; Darren Urada; Joy Yang
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  2010-09-29

3.  Do cultural and linguistic competence matter in Latinos' completion of mandated substance abuse treatment?

Authors:  Erick G Guerrero; Michael Campos; Darren Urada; Joy C Yang
Journal:  Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy       Date:  2012-08-16
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.