The Effectiveness of Interventions for Drug-Using Offenders in the Courts, Secure Establishments and the Community: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Interventions for drug-using offenders are employed internationally to reduce subsequent drug use and criminal behavior. This paper provides information from a systematic review of 24 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted between 1980 and 2004. Thirteen of the 24 trials were included in a series of meta-analyses, and tentative conclusions are drawn on the basis of the evidence. Pretrial release with drugs testing and intensive supervision were shown to have limited success when compared to routine parole and probation, with effect sizes favoring routine parole and probation. Therapeutic community interventions showed promising results when compared to dispensation of treatment to individuals as usual, reducing risk of future offending behavior. A few studies evaluated the effectiveness of assertive case management and other community-based programs, but due to the paucity of information few inferences could be drawn from these studies. Little is known about the cost and cost effectiveness of such interventions, and the development of established protocols is required.

Alternative models of instant drug testing: evidence from an experimental trial

“…Namely, the observed partial eta-squared effect sizes in the current study were small for drug use and recidivism. Effect sizes generated from meta-analyses of various drug treatment interventions with offenders in prison or the community also tend to be small for drug use (Mitchell et al, 2012;Mitchell et al, 2007) and recidivism (Aos, Phipps, Barnoski, & Lieb, 2001;Chanhatasilpa et al, 2000;Mitchell et al, 2012;Mitchell et al, 2007;Perry et al, 2009;Prendergast, 2009). This research suggests that the effect of both types of intervention may be more similar than divergent.…”

Du sable dans l’engrenage : la motivation des clients sous contrainte judiciaire dans les traitements pour la toxicomanie

“…Néanmoins, l'analyse de l'impact des interventions sous contrainte s'avère très délicate, étant donné les différentes caractéristiques des programmes, des clients et des politiques sousjacentes aux programmes, l'extrême complexité des contextes où ces programmes sont déployés, les divers niveaux d'intensité de la coercition utilisée, ainsi que les importantes limitations méthodologiques de la plupart des recherches qui s'intéressent à leur efficacité (Klag et coll., 2005 ;Perry et coll., 2009 ;Stanford et Arrigo, 2005 ;Stevens et coll., 2005).…”

Effectiveness of Prison-based Drug Treatment Programs: A Systematic Review of Meta-analyses

“…(e) The original evaluation studies must have the following method characteristics: there must be at least one control or comparison group; the control group should be exposed to either no intervention or minimal treatment, and the control group must not include dropouts (people who had previously participated in the treatment program but later left it). Some systematic reviews which did not meet one or more of these criteria could not be included in this study (e.g., Adams, Leukefeld, & Peden, 2008;Bright & Martire, 2013;Egli, Pina, Skovbo Christensen, Aebi, & Killias, 2009;Ferri, Davoli, & Perucci, 2011;Fiestas & Ponce, 2012;Hedrich et al, 2011;Holloway, Bennett, & Farrington, 2005Koehler, Humphreys, Akoensi, Sanchez de Ribera, & Lösel, 2014;Larney, 2010;Mazerolle, Soole, & Rombouts, 2007;McMurran, 2006;Minozzi et al, 2011;Mitchell, Wilson, Eggers, & MacKenzie, 2012;Perry, 2006;Perry, Darwin, et al, 2009;Perry et al, 2013;Perry et al, 2015aPerry et al, , 2015bPerry, Newman, et al, 2009;Tripodi, Bledsoe, Kim, & Bender, 2011;Smedslund et al, 2011;Smith, Gates, & Foxcroft, 2006;Stallwitz & Stöver, 2007).…”