Michael L Prendergast1, Kathryn McCollister2, Umme Warda3. 1. Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 11075 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90025, United States. Electronic address: mprendergast@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Department of Public Health Sciences, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Clinical Research Building, Suite 1019, 1120 N.W. 14th Street, Miami, FL 33136, United States. Electronic address: kmccolli@miami.edu. 3. Integrated Substance Abuse Programs, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 11075 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90025, United States. Electronic address: uwarda@sonnet.ucla.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based practice that has been shown to reduce alcohol and drug use in healthcare, educational, and other settings, but research on the effectiveness of SBIRT with populations involved in the criminal justice system is limited. These populations have high rates of substance use but have limited access to interventions. METHODS: The study randomized 732 jail inmates from a large urban jail to the SBIRT intervention or to the control group. Using the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), the intervention assessed the risk level for drug and alcohol misuseby inmates and provided those who were at low or medium risk with a brief intervention in jail and referred those at high risk to community treatment following release, including the opportunity to participate in a brief treatment (eight sessions) protocol. Using interview and records data from a 12-month follow-up, analyses compared the two groups with respect to the primary study outcomes of reductions in drug and alcohol use and the secondary outcomes of participation in treatment, rearrest, reduction in HIV risk behaviors, and quality of life. In addition, the costs of delivering the SBIRT intervention were calculated. RESULTS: When baseline differences were controlled, the groups did not differ at follow-up on any of the primary or secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should develop and evaluate SBIRT models that are specifically adapted to the characteristics and needs of the jail population. Until more favorable results emerge, attempts to use SBIRT with jail inmates should be implemented with caution, if at all. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01683643.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based practice that has been shown to reduce alcohol and drug use in healthcare, educational, and other settings, but research on the effectiveness of SBIRT with populations involved in the criminal justice system is limited. These populations have high rates of substance use but have limited access to interventions. METHODS: The study randomized 732 jail inmates from a large urban jail to the SBIRT intervention or to the control group. Using the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), the intervention assessed the risk level for drug and alcohol misuse by inmates and provided those who were at low or medium risk with a brief intervention in jail and referred those at high risk to community treatment following release, including the opportunity to participate in a brief treatment (eight sessions) protocol. Using interview and records data from a 12-month follow-up, analyses compared the two groups with respect to the primary study outcomes of reductions in drug and alcohol use and the secondary outcomes of participation in treatment, rearrest, reduction in HIV risk behaviors, and quality of life. In addition, the costs of delivering the SBIRT intervention were calculated. RESULTS: When baseline differences were controlled, the groups did not differ at follow-up on any of the primary or secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should develop and evaluate SBIRT models that are specifically adapted to the characteristics and needs of the jail population. Until more favorable results emerge, attempts to use SBIRT with jail inmates should be implemented with caution, if at all. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01683643.
Keywords:
Costs; HIV risk behaviors; Jail; Quality of life; Recidivism; Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT); Substance use
Authors: Ingrid A Binswanger; Joseph O Merrill; Patrick M Krueger; Mary C White; Robert E Booth; Joann G Elmore Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2009-08-20 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Dorothy Newbury-Birch; Simon Coulton; Martin Bland; Paul Cassidy; Veronica Dale; Paolo Deluca; Eilish Gilvarry; Christine Godfrey; Nick Heather; Eileen Kaner; Ruth McGovern; Judy Myles; Adenekan Oyefeso; Steve Parrott; Robert Patton; Katherine Perryman; Tom Phillips; Jonathan Shepherd; Colin Drummond Journal: Alcohol Alcohol Date: 2014-07-26 Impact factor: 2.826
Authors: Charles W Mathias; Tae-Joon Moon; Tara E Karns-Wright; Nathalie Hill-Kapturczak; John D Roache; Jillian Mullen; Donald M Dougherty Journal: Traffic Inj Prev Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 1.491
Authors: Christine E Grella; Erika Ostlie; Dennis P Watson; Christy K Scott; John Carnevale; Michael L Dennis Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2022-01-04
Authors: Bradley Ray; Dennis P Watson; Huiping Xu; Michelle P Salyers; Grant Victor; Emily Sightes; Katie Bailey; Lisa Robison Taylor; Na Bo Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2021-02-27
Authors: Dennis P Watson; Monte D Staton; Michael L Dennis; Christine E Grella; Christy K Scott Journal: Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy Date: 2021-07-14
Authors: Olivia K Sugarman; Marcus A Bachhuber; Ashley Wennerstrom; Todd Bruno; Benjamin F Springgate Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-01-21 Impact factor: 3.240