Initiating buprenorphine treatment prior to versus after release from prison: Arrest outcomes
- PMID: 29783095
- PMCID: PMC5999574
- DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.04.010
Initiating buprenorphine treatment prior to versus after release from prison: Arrest outcomes
Abstract
Background: This secondary analysis of a randomized trial examines the association between initiation of buprenorphine treatment prior to, versus post-release, and rearrests during the 12-months following release.
Methods: Official rearrest data (N = 199) for the 12-months post-release were examined. Four outcomes were measured: (1) rearrested (yes/no), (2) time to rearrest, (3) number of rearrests, and (4) severity of charges (less severe vs. severe).
Results: A minority (43.1%) of the sample were rearrested (N = 91). There were no significant differences between study conditions in the proportion of rearrested participants [P = 0.28] nor in the mean number of arrests [P = 0.15]. Likewise, the condition was not a significant predictor of the hazard of rearrest [p = 0.10]. The mean number of days until rearrest for the in prison vs. post-release buprenorphine conditions were not significantly different (205.8 days (SD = 104.6) vs. 170.8 days (SD = 113.1), respectively; P = 0.13]. Treatment condition was not a significant predictor of the likelihood of rearrest for a severe crime compared to a less severe crime [P = 0.09].
Conclusion: Despite the parent study finding of higher rates of post-release drug treatment entry in the group assigned to start buprenorphine treatment prior to, compared to post-release, there were no significant differences in the proportion of individuals arrested, the mean number of arrests, the time to first arrest, or the severity of their charges.
Keywords: Buprenorphine treatment; Criminal activity; Official arrest records; Opioid use disorder; Prisoners.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
This study was supported by an unrestricted, unsolicited investigator-initiated request from Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (provided study drug only) who had no role in study design; collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this manuscript. Drs. Gordon and Fitzgerald received investigator-initiated funding and study drug from Alkermes. Dr. Blue reports no conflicts of interest. Dr. Schwartz did a one-time consultation for Reckitt-Benckiser on behalf of his employer (the Friends Research Institute). Dr. O’Grady has in the past received funding for his time from Reckitt-Benckiser. Dr. Vocci reports personal fees and other from Braeburn Pharmaceuticals; personal fees and other from Pinney Associates; personal fees and other from Indivior, personal fees and other from Demerx, personal fees from Alkermes, personal fees and other from Insys Pharmaceuticals, and stock ownership from Intratab Labs, Inc.
Figures
References
-
- Anglin MD, Speckart G. Narcotics use and crime: A multisample, multimethod analysis. Criminol. 1988;26:197–233.
-
- Ball JC, Ross A. The effectiveness of methadone maintenance treatment: Patients, programs, services, and outcome. SSBM; 2012.
-
- Binswanger IA, Blatchford PJ, Lindsay RG, Stern MF. Risk factors for all-cause, overdose and early deaths after release from prison in Washington state. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;117:1–6. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
