Search

The article reflects on prescription drug monitoring programs aimed at preventing drug misuse in the U.S. In New York and California, prescribers are required to track their prescription by creating three copies of prescription sent to drug stores and a central government-authorized location. It states that the programs impede drug access and misidentify high-frequency and high-volume use of prescriptions. It argues that such programs will not totally prevent patients from obtaining medication.

Aims: This study of participants in a US drug treatment court describes the relationship between the imposition of short-term jail sanctions and substance abuse treatment dropout, and examines offender characteristics moderating or modifying the impact of jail sanctions on treatment dropout., Methods: Data were derived from administrative information collected by the Dane County Wisconsin Drug Treatment Court from 1996-2004 on all 573 participants achieving a final disposition of treatment completion or failure during those program years. Iterative Cox proportional hazards models of time to treatment failure were created; jail sanctions during drug court participation were framed as time-dependent covariates. A theoretical framework and specific statistical criteria guided construction of a final parsimonious model of time to treatment drop-out., Findings: Treatment failure was associated with unemployment [hazard ratio (HR) in unemployed versus employed = 1.41, P-value 0.0079], lower educational attainment (HR in high school non-graduate versus graduate = 1.41, P = 0.02) and application of the first jail sanction (HR 2.71, P < 0.001). The association between treatment failure and a first sanction was considerably stronger for sanctions administered earlier in participation (HR for sanction 1 at <30 days 11.34, P-value 0.0002). Conclusions  An initial jail sanction for non-adherence may be more likely to foster treatment compliance in less refractory individuals (i.e. those not already acclimated or socialized to incarceration or other corrections interventions). More stringent supervisory conditions and individualized services may be required to reintegrate such offenders and promote longer-term public safety., (© 2010 The Authors, Addiction © 2010 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

The U.S. correctional system is overburdened with individuals suffering from substance use disorders. These illnesses also exact a heavy toll on 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 treatment court (DTC) programs are present in more than 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 the available descriptive information on representative DTC populations and the observational studies of drug court participants, and it specifically reviews the available experimental effectiveness literature on DTCs. The review concludes by examining the limitations of the current literature, challenges to conducting research in drug court samples, and potential future directions for research on DTC interventions. A review of nonexperimental and quasi-experimental literature regarding the impact of DTCs points toward benefit versus traditional adjudication in averting future criminal behavior and in reducing future substance use, at least in the short term. Randomized effectiveness studies of DTCs are scant (3 were identified in the literature on U.S. adult drug courts), and methodological issues develop in combining their findings. These randomized trials failed to demonstrate a consistent effect on rearrest rates for drug-involved offenders participating in DTC versus typical adjudication. The 2 studies examining reconviction and reincarceration, however, demonstrated reductions for the DTC group versus those typically adjudicated.