Systematic review of the impact of adult drug-treatment courts

Abstract

The U.S. correctional system is overburdened by individuals suffering from substance use disorders. These illnesses also exact a heavy toll in individual and public health and well-being. Effective methods for reducing the negative impact of substance use disorders comprise critical concerns for policy makers. Drug court treatment programs (DTCs) are present in over 1800 county, tribal, and territorial jurisdictions in the United States, as an alternative to incarceration for offenders with substance use disorders. This review article summarizes available descriptive information on representative drug treatment court populations, summarizes observational studies of drug court participants, and specifically reviews available experimental effectiveness literature on drug treatment courts. The review concludes by examining limitations of the current literature, challenges to conducting research in drug court samples, and potential future directions for research on drug treatment court interventions. Review of non-experimental and quasi-experimental literature regarding the impact of drug treatment courts point toward benefit vs. traditional adjudication in averting future criminal behavior and in reducing future substance use, at least in the short term. Randomized effectiveness studies of drug treatment courts are scant (three identified in the literature on U.S. adult drug courts), and methodological issues arise in combining their findings. These randomized trials failed to demonstrate consistent effect upon re-arrest rates for drug-involved offenders participating in drug treatment court vs. typical adjudication. The two studies examining reconviction and reincarceration, however, demonstrated reductions for the drug treatment court group vs. those typically adjudicated.

A Review of Opportunities to Improve the Health of People Involved in the Criminal Justice System in the United States

“…Most studies examining drug court effectiveness are conducted as program evaluations and suggest that during participation, which is coerced by mandate and juxtaposed with incarceration as the only alternative, incarceration and substance use are reduced (11,93). A systematic review of reports published through 2009 found mixed results from experimental trials testing these outcomes, noting that even though incarceration was reduced, rearrests were not (18).…”

The U.S. Drug Policy Landscape: Insights and Opportunities for Improving the View

“…But merely expanding traditional treatment approaches would not quickly or dramatically reduce stimulant problems. Reviews of the evidence on drug courts, an alternative to traditional sentences (e.g., incarceration) requiring defendants to undergo treatment and intensive judicial supervision, are generally positive (Wilson, Mitchell, and MacKenzie, 2006;Brown, 2010). More recently, the National Institute of Justice Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation found that drug courts reduce drug use and criminal behavior (Rossman et al, 2011).…”

Medication assisted treatment in US drug courts: Results from a nationwide survey of availability, barriers and attitudes

“…In the US, drug treatment courts (drug courts), have become increasingly popular as a means of diverting non-violent drug offenders away from jails and prisons into more treatmentoriented settings (Brown, 2010;Chandler et al, 2009;Kushel et al, 2005;Marlowe, 2003). People who have drug problems and have been arrested for either a drug-related (or in some cases an unrelated) offense may be eligible to enter a drug court program, which typically follows the individual for 12 to 18 months.…”

“…The effectiveness of drug court programs varies by court location, but aggregated data suggest drug courts help reduce crime and illicit drug use (Aos et al, 2006;Lowencamp et al, 2005;Shaffer, 2006Shaffer, , 2011. Recidivism among drug court participants is estimated to be 8 to 26% lower than for other criminal justice dispositions (Carey et al, 2008), and is achieved both by decreasing drug use and increasing time until re-arrest (Marlowe, 2003;Brown, 2010).…”