Hospitalisation following therapeutic community drug and alcohol treatment for young people with and without a history of criminal conviction

Duration of stay and rate of subsequent criminal conviction and hospitalisation for substance use among young people admitted to a short‐term residential program

“…Nonetheless, similar durations of stay reduced the risk of both criminal conviction and substance use outcomes. These findings provide support to the body of evidence indicating that 1–3 months may be the minimum therapeutic threshold for stays in a therapeutic community [18, 28, 30].…”

“…Comparison 1 1-29 days 1.00 (reference) 1.00 (reference) 1.00 (reference) 1.00 (reference) 1.00 (reference) both criminal conviction and substance use outcomes. These findings provide support to the body of evidence indicating that 1-3 months may be the minimum therapeutic threshold for stays in a therapeutic community [18,28,30]. Unlike what was found for the other offence types, 60-89 days in treatment was not associated with a reduction in the rate of conviction for an administrative offence compared to 30-59 days in treatment.…”

“…Complicating matters further is that therapeutic communities have relatively low retention rates; the average time to drop-out is 38-180 days [26] and the likelihood of attrition is greatest within the first 30 days [24]. Yet adolescents in communitybased programs appear to experience significant benefit from as little as 1-3 months [18,[27][28][29], leading some to suggest that 90 days may be an appropriate minimum duration of care [30].…”

Age at first alcohol‐related hospital separation or emergency department presentation and rate of re‐admission: A retrospective data linkage cohort of young Australians

“…Thus, addressing alcohol‐related issues in young people, especially adolescents, can have the added benefit of reducing overall rates of injury. Indeed, a record linkage study of young people in NSW who were treated for alcohol problems between 2001 to 2016 showed that those who spent at least 30 days in treatment were much less likely to be subsequently hospitalised for physical injuries (hazard ratio 0.77 [95% confidence interval 0.61–0.98]) and also range of other reasons [ 41 ]. This is particularly important given that accidental injuries are one of the leading causes of death among 15 to 24 year‐olds in Australia, contributing to 32% of deaths in this age group from 2017 to 2019 [ 42 ].…”

Was ist wirksam in forensischer Suchtbehandlung? – Ein nicht-systematischer Einblick in die Evidenzbasierung von Behandlungsansätzen und Interventionen im Kontext des § 64 StGB

“…Neben deutlicher meta-analytischer Evidenz, dass TG in der Straftäterbehandlung allgemein mit niedrigeren Raten an Re-Delinquenz und erneuter Inhaftierung korreliert [20], liegen entsprechende Befunde mittlerweile auch für forensische Suchttherapie vor [16,21,22] -teilweise mit eindrücklichen Langzeiteffekten [23]. Darüber hinaus weist das TG-Konzept einige Vorzüge auf, die seine Eignung für institutionelle forensische Suchtbehandlung unterstreichen: ▪ So lassen sich durch den im Kern partizipativen Ansatz kulturspezifische Besonderheiten relativ leicht integrieren, was die Akzeptanz der Intervention bei Minderheiten erhöhen kann (exemplarisch hierzu zwei qualitative Studien zur kulturellen Adaptation von TG auf die Maori-Kultur in Neuseeland [24] und auf die Aborigine-Kultur in Australien [25]).…”