Search

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Poor substance use-related health outcomes after release from prison are common. Identifying people at greatest risk of substance use and related harms post-release would help to target support at those most in need. The Alcohol Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) is a validated substance use screener, but its utility in predicting substance-related hospitalisation post-release is unestablished. We measured whether screening for moderate/high-risk substance use on the ASSIST was associated with increased risk of substance-related hospitalisation. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: Prisons in Queensland and Western Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were incarcerated and within 6 weeks of expected release when recruited. A total of 2585 participants were followed up for a median of 873 days. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline survey data were combined with linked unit record administrative hospital data. We used the ASSIST to assess participants for moderate/high-risk cannabis, methamphetamine and heroin use in the 3 months prior to incarceration. We used International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes to identify substance-related hospitalisations during follow-up. We compared rates of substance-related hospitalisation between those classified as low/no-risk and moderate/high-risk on the ASSIST for each substance. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) by ASSIST risk group for each substance using Weibull regression survival analysis allowing for multiple failures. FINDINGS: During follow-up, 158 (6%) participants had cannabis-related, 178 (7%) had opioid-related and 266 (10%) had methamphetamine-related hospitalisation. The hazard rates of substance-related hospitalisation after prison were significantly higher among those who screened moderate/high-risk compared with those screening low risk on the ASSIST for cannabis (aHR 2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74, 3.24), methamphetamine (aHR 2.23, 95%CI 1.75, 2.84

INTRODUCTION: Methamphetamine use is more common than opioid use among prison entrants in some countries, including Australia, yet most research and policy focuses on opioid use. This suggests that traditional opioid-focused interventions are no longer appropriate for the majority of this group in countries such as Australia. To inform policy and practice, we compared socio-demographic characteristics and health needs of people leaving prison with a history of methamphetamine use and/or opioid use. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of incarcerated adults administered the World Health Organization Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test was used to identify moderate-/high-risk methamphetamine use (n = 909), opioid use (n = 115) or combined methamphetamine/opioid use (n = 356) before incarceration. We compared groups using modified log-linked Poisson regression with robust error variance. RESULTS: Compared to the opioid-only group, the methamphetamine-only group were: significantly more often aged <25 years; significantly more likely to identify as Indigenous; significantly less likely to have a history of prior incarceration, drug injection or overdose. A significantly lower proportion of methamphetamine-only and methamphetamine-and-opioid participants self-reported current hepatitis C infection compared to opioid-only participants. A majority of participants in all groups screened positive for current psychological distress according to the K10. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: People leaving prison with a history of methamphetamine use differ from opioid users with respect to demographics, patterns of substance use and related health concerns. Treatment and harm reduction efforts for people who experience incarceration must respond to patterns of drug use in this population, and invest at scale in coordinated, continuous services for co-occurring substance use and mental health problems.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Illicit substance use is common among people entering prisons, as is returning to substance use after release from prison. We aimed to assess the predictive validity of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) for returning to substance use after release from prison. DESIGN: A longitudinal design with baseline survey conducted between 2008 and 2010 in the 6 weeks before expected prison release and up to three follow-up surveys in the 6 months after release. SETTING: Prisons in Queensland, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1054 adults within 6 weeks of expected release from prison. MEASUREMENTS: The ASSIST was used to assess problematic use of cannabis, methamphetamine, heroin and other non-prescribed opioids in the 3 months before incarceration. Post-incarceration substance use was measured at 1, 3 and 6 months after release. We calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the optimal ASSIST cut-off score for each substance, using Youden's index (J). FINDINGS: Forty-one per cent (n = 434) of the cohort reported any substance use during follow-up: 33% (n = 344) used cannabis, 20% (n = 209) methamphetamine, 10% (n = 109) heroin and 9% (n = 97) illicit other opioids. The optimal ASSIST cut-off score was ≥ 4 for heroin, methamphetamine and cannabis and ≥ 1 for other opioids. Using these cut-offs, the AUROC was highest for heroin in predicting both any use (AUROC = 0.82) and weekly use (AUROC = 0.88) in the past 4 weeks. AUROCs for other drugs ranged from 0.73 to 0.79. CONCLUSIONS: The ASSIST shows promise as an accurate and potentially scalable tool that may be useful for predicting a return to substance use after release from prison and could inform service delivery. The substantial rates of returning to substance use after release from prison suggest that prison serves to interrupt rather than cease substance use.

INTRODUCTION: Amphetamine type stimulant (ATS) use and self-harm are both major public health concerns globally. Use of ATS is associated with a range of health and social problems, and has been increasing internationally in the last decade. Self-harm and ATS use share a number of underlying risk factors and occur at elevated rates in marginalised groups with high rates of exposure to trauma. The relationship between self-harm and ATS use is likely complex, and the causal pathway may run in either direction. A comprehensive review, synthesis and analysis of the evidence are warranted to investigate this relationship and inform policy and practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search the Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and Scopus databases for relevant observational studies published in peer-reviewed journals. The initial search was conducted on 5 February 2021, with a final search expected on 1 February 2022. All studies will be independently screened by two reviewers, first on title and abstract, and then on full-text to determine inclusion in the review. We place no restriction on the population that studies investigate, our exposure of interest is both prescription and illicit ATS use, comparators will be those not currently using ATS, and our primary outcome of interest is the prevalence of self-harm. Data will be extracted using a predesigned template, and pooled prevalence and pooled measures of effect for the association between ATS use and self-harm. If sufficient data are available, we will perform multiple meta-analyses to produce pooled measures of effect for each measure of ATS exposure, as well as different population sub-groups. The Methodological Standard for Epidemiological Research scale will be used to assess study quality, and Egger's test and I2 values will be used to assess publication bias and heterogeneity, respectively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required for this revi

BACKGROUND: The chronic use of khat, a plant with psychostimulant properties, has been associated with physical and mental health problems. Previous research found that non-khat users were more likely than khat users to perceive its use to be associated with poor health. AIMS: We aimed to identify differences in the perception of specific khat-associated health problems between khat users and non-users. METHODS: In 2012, 133 adults (≥ 18 years) from African migrant communities in 4 state capital cities in Australia completed questionnaires to ascertain their perception of whether specific health problems were associated with khat use. Multivariable log-linked Poisson regression was used to compare the perceptions of the 2 groups and identify differences, adjusting for sociodemographic factors, tobacco use and years living in Australia. RESULTS: Overall, 58 (44%) and 75 (56%) participants reported current khat use and no use respectively. Adjusted log-linked Poisson regression showed that people who use khat were less likely than non-users to perceive certain health and related problems were associated with khat use, including, poor health in general [prevalence risk ratio (PRR) = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75, 1.00]; laziness (PRR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.99); stomach and throat problems (PRR = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.96); and teeth, gum and mouth problems (PRR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Khat users are less likely to perceive use being associated with health problems than non-users. Providing information on the health problems associated with khat use may be an important component of health promotion strategies and interventions aimed at minimising khat-related harm.

ISSUES: Methamphetamine use is a problem for health and criminal justice systems (CJS) worldwide. Methamphetamine is used at higher rates in CJS-involved populations than the general community. This systematic review synthesises the evidence for health and CJS outcomes post-CJS contact for people reporting pre-CJS methamphetamine use. APPROACH: Academic databases were searched to identify peer-reviewed original studies using a longitudinal design that investigated associations between pre-CJS methamphetamine use and health and criminal justice outcomes after CJS contact. Identified studies were screened in two stages: title and abstract, then full-text. Data from the included studies were extracted and analysed. Results are reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. KEY FINDINGS: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria: five investigated health and four investigated CJS outcomes. Pre-CJS methamphetamine use was associated with subsequent hospitalisation for drug-induced psychosis, increased risk of recidivism and higher crime costs after CJS contact. Pre-CJS methamphetamine use was not associated with subsequent hospitalisation for non-drug induced psychosis or post-release mortality. IMPLICATIONS: Current evidence suggests that pre-CJS contact methamphetamine use increases the risk of subsequent drug-induced psychosis and recidivism. There is a need for more longitudinal research that measures mediators and moderators of health and criminal justice outcomes after CJS contact, to inform targeted prevention. CONCLUSION: Methamphetamine use is a major problem that is contributing to serious mental illness and recidivism among CJS-involved populations. Prioritising treatment during CJS contact is recommended. Further research to identify key opportunities during health service and CJS contact for intervention is needed.

This book gives you a deeper understanding of all these issues to help prevent you and your company from falling victim to unethical practices.

Background: The use of amphetamines is a global public health concern. We summarise global data on use of amphetamines and mental health outcomes. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD 42017081893). We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo for methamphetamine or amphetamine combined with psychosis, violence, suicidality, depression or anxiety. Included studies were human empirical cross-sectional surveys, case-control studies, cohort studies and randomised controlled trials that assessed the association between methamphetamine and one of the mental health outcomes. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool results for any use of amphetamines and amphetamine use disorders. Findings: 149 studies were eligible and 59 were included in meta-analyses. There was significant heterogeneity in effects. Evidence came mostly from cross-sectional studies. Any use of amphetamines was associated with higher odds of psychosis (odds ratio [OR] = 2.0, 95%CI 1.3–3.3), violence (OR = 2.2, 95%CI 1.2–4.1; adjusted OR [AOR] = 1.4, 95%CI 0.8–2.4), suicidality OR = 4.4, 95%CI 2.4–8.2; AOR = 1.7, 95%CI 1.0–2.9) and depression (OR = 1.6, 95%CI 1.1–2.2; AOR = 1.3, 95%CI 1.2–1.4). Having an amphetamine use disorder was associated with higher odds of psychosis (OR = 3.0, 95%CI 1.9–4.8; AOR = 2.4, 95%CI 1.6–3.5), violence (OR = 6.2, 95%CI 3.1–12.3), and suicidality (OR = 2.3, 95%CI 1.8–2.9; AOR = 1.5, 95%CI 1.3–1.8). Interpretation: Methamphetamine use is an important risk factor for poor mental health. High quality population-level studies are needed to more accurately quantify this risk. Clinical responses to methamphetamine use need to address mental health harms.

BACKGROUND: The use of amphetamines is a global public health concern. We summarise global data on use of amphetamines and mental health outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD 42017081893). We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo for methamphetamine or amphetamine combined with psychosis, violence, suicidality, depression or anxiety. Included studies were human empirical cross-sectional surveys, case-control studies, cohort studies and randomised controlled trials that assessed the association between methamphetamine and one of the mental health outcomes. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool results for any use of amphetamines and amphetamine use disorders. FINDINGS: 149 studies were eligible and 59 were included in meta-analyses. There was significant heterogeneity in effects. Evidence came mostly from cross-sectional studies. Any use of amphetamines was associated with higher odds of psychosis (odds ratio [OR] = 2.0, 95%CI 1.3-3.3), violence (OR = 2.2, 95%CI 1.2-4.1; adjusted OR [AOR] = 1.4, 95%CI 0.8-2.4), suicidality OR = 4.4, 95%CI 2.4-8.2; AOR = 1.7, 95%CI 1.0-2.9) and depression (OR = 1.6, 95%CI 1.1-2.2; AOR = 1.3, 95%CI 1.2-1.4). Having an amphetamine use disorder was associated with higher odds of psychosis (OR = 3.0, 95%CI 1.9-4.8; AOR = 2.4, 95%CI 1.6-3.5), violence (OR = 6.2, 95%CI 3.1-12.3), and suicidality (OR = 2.3, 95%CI 1.8-2.9; AOR = 1.5, 95%CI 1.3-1.8). INTERPRETATION: Methamphetamine use is an important risk factor for poor mental health. High quality population-level studies are needed to more accurately quantify this risk. Clinical responses to methamphetamine use need to address mental health harms.

BACKGROUND: Intellectual disability and patient activation may be important drivers of inequities in health service access and health outcomes for people with intellectual disability transitioning from prison to the community. We assessed the association between intellectual disability and patient activation after prison release and examined whether this association varied, depending on whether intellectual disability was identified prior to prison release. METHODS: Overall, 936 prisoners were screened for intellectual disability by using the Hayes Ability Screening Index and completed the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) within 6 weeks of prison release and again at 1, 3 and 6 months post-release. We estimated the association between intellectual disability status and PAM scores by using a multilevel linear model, adjusting for sociodemographic, behavioural, health and criminogenic factors. We used propensity score matching to estimate the impact of being identified with intellectual disability prior to release from prison on the change in mean PAM score after prison release. RESULTS: Compared with those who screened negative for intellectual disability, ex-prisoners who screened positive, both with and without prior identification of intellectual disability, had significantly decreased mean PAM scores [(B = -4.3; 95% CI: -6.3, -2.4) and (B = -4.5; 95% CI: -6.8, -2.3), respectively] over 6 months of follow-up. Among those who reported being identified with intellectual disability prior to release from prison, a significant increase in PAM score at the 6-month follow-up interview (B = 5.89; 95% CI: 2.35, 9.42; P = 0.001) was attributable to being identified with intellectual disability prior to release. CONCLUSIONS: Ex-prisoners screening positive for possible intellectual disability have decreased patient activation for at least 6 months after release from prison. However, individuals whose possible intellectual disability is unidentified appear to be particularly

© 2017 MENCAP and International Association of the Scientific Study of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and John Wiley & Sons Ltd Background: Intellectual disability and patient activation may be important drivers of inequities in health service access and health outcomes for people with intellectual disability transitioning from prison to the community. We assessed the association between intellectual disability and patient activation after prison release and examined whether this association varied, depending on whether intellectual disability was identified prior to prison release. Methods: Overall, 936 prisoners were screened for intellectual disability by using the Hayes Ability Screening Index and completed the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) within 6 weeks of prison release and again at 1, 3 and 6 months post-release. We estimated the association between intellectual disability status and PAM scores by using a multilevel linear model, adjusting for sociodemographic, behavioural, health and criminogenic factors. We used propensity score matching to estimate the impact of being identified with intellectual disability prior to release from prison on the change in mean PAM score after prison release. Results: Compared with those who screened negative for intellectual disability, ex-prisoners who screened positive, both with and without prior identification of intellectual disability, had significantly decreased mean PAM scores [(B = -4.3; 95% CI: -6.3, -2.4) and (B = -4.5; 95% CI: -6.8, -2.3), respectively] over 6 months of follow-up. Among those who reported being identified with intellectual disability prior to release from prison, a significant increase in PAM score at the 6-month follow-up interview (B = 5.89; 95% CI: 2.35, 9.42; P = 0.001) was attributable to being identified with intellectual disability prior to release. Conclusions: Ex-prisoners screening positive for possible intellectual disability have decreased patient activation for at lea

BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine use is associated with a range of poor health, social and justice outcomes. In many parts of the world increased methamphetamine use has been identified as a major public health concern. Methamphetamine treatment programmes have been effective in reducing and ceasing use, however a range of barriers have prevented these programmes being widely adopted by methamphetamine users. This review examines the barriers to accessing meth/amphetamine treatment identified in the literature. METHODS: Databases were systematically searched using relevant terms for peer-reviewed articles describing original research exploring the barriers to accessing treatment for meth/amphetamine use. Reviews and grey literature were excluded. Eleven studies conducted in 5 countries were included in data synthesis; this involved a systematic review of all 11 studies, and meta-analysis of the prevalence of barriers reported in 6 studies that published sufficient quantitative data. RESULTS: Psychosocial/internal barriers to accessing methamphetamine treatment were most prevalent across studies (10/11 studies). Meta-analysis confirmed the four most commonly endorsed barriers to treatment access across studies all psychosocial barriers were embarrassment or stigma (60%, 95% CI: 54-67%); belief that treatment was unnecessary (59%, 95% CI:54-65%); preferring to withdraw alone without assistance (55%, 95% CI:45-65); and privacy concerns (51%, 95% CI:44-59%). CONCLUSIONS: The primary barriers to accessing methamphetamine treatment are psychosocial/internal. Services and treatment models that address these barriers are urgently required. There is a growing need for methamphetamine-appropriate treatment services. Further research evaluating treatment engagement and effectiveness for methamphetamine and polysubstance use, including the development of effective pharmacotherapies is warranted.