Helen Willey1, Brian Eastwood2, Ivan L Gee3, John Marsden4. 1. Alcohol, Drug and Tobacco Division, Health and Wellbeing Directorate, Public Health England, United Kingdom. 2. Alcohol, Drug and Tobacco Division, Health and Wellbeing Directorate, Public Health England, United Kingdom; Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London,United Kingdom. 3. Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University, United Kingdom. 4. Alcohol, Drug and Tobacco Division, Health and Wellbeing Directorate, Public Health England, United Kingdom; Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London,United Kingdom. Electronic address: john.marsden@kcl.ac.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This is the first English national study of change in criminal offending following treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD). METHODS: All adults treated for AUD by all publicly funded treatment services during April 2008-March 2009 (n=53,017), with data linked to the Police National Computer (April 2006-November 2011). Pre-treatment offender sub-populations were identified by Latent Profile Analysis. The outcome measure was the count of recordable criminal offences during two-year follow-up after admission. A mixed-effects, Poisson regression modelled outcome, adjusting for demographics and clinical information, the latent classes, and treatment exposure covariates. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of the cohort committed one or more offences in the two years pre-treatment (n=11,742; crude rate, 221.5 offenders per 1000). During follow-up, the number of offenders and offences fell by 23.5% and 24.0%, respectively (crude rate, 69.4 offenders per 1000). During follow-up, a lower number of offences was associated with: completing treatment (adjusted incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.85); receiving inpatient detoxification (IRR 0.84; CI 0.80-0.89); or community pharmacological therapy (IRR 0.89; CI 0.84-0.96). Reconviction was reduced in the sub-population characterised by driving offences (n=1,140; 11.7%), but was relatively high amongst acquisitive (n=768; 58.3% reconvicted) and violent offending sub-populations (n=602; 77.6% reconvicted). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced offending was associated with successful completion of AUD treatment and receiving inpatient and pharmacological therapy, but not enrolment in psychological and residential interventions. Treatment services (particularly those providing psychological therapy and residential care) should be alert to offending, especially violent and acquisitive crime, and enhance crime reduction interventions.
BACKGROUND: This is the first English national study of change in criminal offending following treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD). METHODS: All adults treated for AUD by all publicly funded treatment services during April 2008-March 2009 (n=53,017), with data linked to the Police National Computer (April 2006-November 2011). Pre-treatment offender sub-populations were identified by Latent Profile Analysis. The outcome measure was the count of recordable criminal offences during two-year follow-up after admission. A mixed-effects, Poisson regression modelled outcome, adjusting for demographics and clinical information, the latent classes, and treatment exposure covariates. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of the cohort committed one or more offences in the two years pre-treatment (n=11,742; crude rate, 221.5 offenders per 1000). During follow-up, the number of offenders and offences fell by 23.5% and 24.0%, respectively (crude rate, 69.4 offenders per 1000). During follow-up, a lower number of offences was associated with: completing treatment (adjusted incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.85); receiving inpatient detoxification (IRR 0.84; CI 0.80-0.89); or community pharmacological therapy (IRR 0.89; CI 0.84-0.96). Reconviction was reduced in the sub-population characterised by driving offences (n=1,140; 11.7%), but was relatively high amongst acquisitive (n=768; 58.3% reconvicted) and violent offending sub-populations (n=602; 77.6% reconvicted). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced offending was associated with successful completion of AUD treatment and receiving inpatient and pharmacological therapy, but not enrolment in psychological and residential interventions. Treatment services (particularly those providing psychological therapy and residential care) should be alert to offending, especially violent and acquisitive crime, and enhance crime reduction interventions.
Authors: Brian Eastwood; Colin Drummond; Emmert Roberts; James C Doidge; Katie L Harron; Matthew Hotopf; Jonathan Knight; Martin White Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-11-26 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Alice Dawson; Verity Wainwright; Jenny Shaw; Jane Senior; Seena Fazel; Amanda Perry; Tammi Walker; Daniel Pratt Journal: Int J Popul Data Sci Date: 2021-06-08