The impact of a Housing First intervention and health-related risk factors on incarceration among people with experiences of homelessness and mental illness in Canada

The effectiveness of abstinence-based and harm reduction-based interventions in reducing problematic substance use in adults who are experiencing homelessness in high income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review

Background

Homelessness is a traumatic experience, and can have a devastating effect on those experiencing it. People who are homeless often face significant barriers when accessing public services, and have often experienced adverse childhood events, extreme social disadvantage, physical, emotional and sexual abuse, neglect, low self-esteem, poor physical and mental health, and much lower life expectancy compared to the general population. Rates of problematic substance use are disproportionately high, with many using drugs and alcohol to deal with the stress of living on the street, to keep warm, or to block out memories of previous abuse or trauma. Substance dependency can also create barriers to successful transition to stable housing.

Objectives

To understand the effectiveness of different substance use interventions for adults experiencing homelessness.

Search Methods

The primary source of studies for was the 4th edition of the Homelessness Effectiveness Studies Evidence and Gaps Maps (EGM). Searches for the EGM were completed in September 2021. Other potential studies were identified through a call for grey evidence, hand-searching key journals, and unpacking relevant systematic reviews.

Selection Criteria

Eligible studies were impact evaluations that involved some comparison group. We included studies that tested the effectiveness of substance use interventions, and measured substance use outcomes, for adults experiencing homelessness in high income countries.

Data Collection and Analysis

Descriptive characteristics and statistical information in included studies were coded and checked by at least two members of the review team. Studies selected for the review were assessed for confidence in the findings. Standardised effect sizes were calculated and, if a study did not provide sufficient raw data for the calculation of an effect size, author(s) were contacted to obtain these data. We used random-effects meta-analysis and robust-variance estimation procedures to synthesise effect sizes. If a study included multiple effects, we carried out a critical assessment to determine (even if only theoretically) whether the effects are likely to be dependent. Where dependent effects were identified, we used robust variance estimation to determine whether we can account for these. Where effect sizes were converted from a binary to continuous measure (or vice versa), we undertook a sensitivity analysis by running an additional analysis with these studies omitted. We also assessed the sensitivity of results to inclusion of non-randomised studies and studies classified as low confidence in findings. All included an assessment of statistical heterogeneity. Finally, we undertook analysis to assess whether publication bias was likely to be a factor in our findings. For those studies that we were unable to include in meta-analysis, we have provided a narrative synthesis of the study and its findings.

Main Results

We included 48 individual papers covering 34 unique studies. The studies covered 15, 255 participants, with all but one of the studies being from the United States and Canada. Most papers were rated as low confidence (n = 25, or 52%). By far the most common reason for studies being rated as low confidence was high rates of attrition and/or differential attrition of study participants, that fell below the What Works Clearinghouse liberal attrition standard. Eleven of the included studies were rated as medium confidence and 12 studies as high confidence. The interventions included in our analysis were more effective in reducing substance use than treatment as usual, with an overall effect size of -0.11 SD (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.27, 0.05). There was substantial heterogeneity across studies, and the results were sensitive to the removal of low confidence studies (-0.21 SD, 95% CI [-0.59, 0.17] - 6 studies, 17 effect sizes), the removal of quasi-experimental studies (-0.14 SD, 95% CI [-0.30, 0.02] - 14 studies, 41 effect sizes) and the removal of studies where an effect size had been converted from a binary to a continuous outcome (-0.08 SD, 95% CI [-0.31, 0.15] - 10 studies, 31 effect sizes). This suggests that the findings are sensitive to the inclusion of lower quality studies, although unusually the average effect increases when we removed low confidence studies. The average effect for abstinence-based interventions compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU) service provision was -0.28 SD (95% CI, -0.65, 0.09) (6 studies, 15 effect sizes), and for harm reduction interventions compared to a TAU service provision is close to 0 at 0.03 SD (95% CI, -0.08, 0.14) (9 studies, 30 effect sizes). The confidence intervals for both estimates are wide and crossing zero. For both, the comparison groups are primarily abstinence-based, with the exception of two studies where the comparison group condition was unclear. We found that both Assertative Community Treatment and Intensive Case Management were no better than treatment as usual, with average effect on substance use of 0.03 SD, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.13] and -0.47 SD, 95% CI [-0.72, -0.21] 0.05 SD, 95% CI [-0.28, 0.39] respectively. These findings are consistent with wider research, and it is important to note that we only examined the effect on substance use outcomes (these interventions can be effective in terms of other outcomes). We found that CM interventions can be effective in reducing substance use compared to treatment as usual, with an average effect of -0.47 SD, 95% CI (-0.72, -0.21). All of these results need to be considered in light of the quality of the underlying evidence. There were six further interventions where we undertook narrative synthesis. These syntheses suggest that Group Work, Harm Reduction Psychotherapy, and Therapeutic Communities are effective in reducing substance use, with mixed results found for Motivational Interviewing and Talking Therapies (including Cognitive Behavioural Therapy). The narrative synthesis suggested that Residential Rehabilitation was no better than treatment as usual in terms of reducing substance use for our population of interest.

Authors' Conclusions

Although our analysis of harm reduction versus treatment as usual, abstinence versus treatment as usual, and harm reduction versus abstinence suggests that these different approaches make little real difference to the outcomes achieved in comparison to treatment as usual. The findings suggest that some individual interventions are more effective than others. The overall low quality of the primary studies suggests that further primary impact research could be beneficial.

The Associations Between Medical and Mental Health Conditions and Health Care Utilization in US Adults with Past-Year Criminal Legal Involvement

BACKGROUND

Every year, millions of US adults return home from prison or jail, and they visit the emergency department and experience hospitalizations at higher rates than the general population. Little is known about the primary conditions that drive this acute care use.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the individual and combined associations between medical and mental health conditions and acute health care utilization among individuals with recent criminal legal involvement in a nationally representative sample of US adults.

DESIGN

We examined the association between having medical or mental, or both, conditions (compared to none), and acute care utilization using negative binomial regression models adjusted for relevant socio-demographic covariates.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult respondents to the National Survey of Drug Use and Health (2015-2019) who reported past year criminal legal involvement.

MAIN MEASURES

Self-reported visits to the emergency department and nights spent hospitalized.

RESULTS

Among 9039 respondents, 12.4% had a medical condition only, 34.6% had a mental health condition only, and 19.2% had both mental and medical conditions. In adjusted models, incident rate ratio (IRR) for ED use for medical conditions only was 1.32 (95% CI 1.05, 1.66); for mental conditions only, the IRR was 1.36 (95% CI 1.18, 1.57); for both conditions, the IRR was 2.13 (95% CI 1.81, 2.51). For inpatient use, IRR for medical only: 1.73 (95% CI 1.08, 2.76); for mental only, IRR: 2.47 (95% CI 1.68, 3.65); for both, IRR: 4.26 (95% CI 2.91, 6.25).

CONCLUSION

Medical and mental health needs appear to contribute equally to increased acute care utilization among those with recent criminal legal involvement. This underscores the need to identify and test interventions which comprehensively address both medical and mental health conditions for individuals returning to the community to improve both health care access and quality.

Risk of homelessness after prison release and recidivism in Denmark: a nationwide, register-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Transitional periods between and across services have been linked to homelessness. We aimed to investigate the association of previous history of homelessness and psychiatric disorders with risk of homelessness after release from prison. Additionally, we examined the association between homelessness after release and risk of recidivism.

METHODS

We did a nationwide, register-based cohort study of people aged 15 years or older who were released from prison for the first time in Denmark between Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2021. We obtained data using the Danish Civil Registration System with data linked across other registries (the Danish Central Criminal Register, the Danish Homeless Register, the Danish National Patient Register, and the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register) on release date, homeless shelter contacts, psychiatric disorders, and new convictions. Outcomes were homelessness after release from prison, defined as first homeless shelter contact following release from first imprisonment, and recidivism within 2 years of release, defined as the first police-recorded criminal conviction after prison release. We calculated incidence rates per 1000 person-years, incidence rate ratios (IRRs) using Poisson regression analysis, and probability of homelessness and recidivism after release. Sex, age, calendar year, country of origin, highest educational level, relationship status, and length of index imprisonment were included as confounders.

FINDINGS

The study cohort included 37 382 individuals (34 792 males [93·1%] and 2590 females [6·9%]) aged 15-41 years, who were released from prison between Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2021, contributing 202 197 person-years at risk. Mean follow-up duration was 5·4 person-years (SD 5·6). Overall, 1843 (4·9%) of 37 382 individuals became homeless. 1 year after release from prison, 788 (2·1%) of 37 382 individuals had at least one homeless shelter contact, and among 1761 individuals with previous history of homelessness before index imprisonment, 357 (20·7%) became homeless. The incidence of homelessness after release was 102·5 cases per 1000 person-years for individuals with previous history of homelessness and 6·7 cases per 1000 person-years in individuals without (IRR 16·4, 95% CI 14·8-18·2; adjusted for sex, age, and calendar year). Individuals who additionally had a mental illness had a higher risk of homelessness (IRR 22·6, 19·7-25·9) compared with those without either previous homelessness or mental illness, and a substantially higher risk was observed for those with previous homelessness and drug use disorder (25·0, 21·6-28·9) compared with those without. Within 2 years of release from prison, the probability of recidivism was 73·2% (95% CI 72·8-73·7). The risk of recidivism was higher among people experiencing homelessness after release from prison than those who did not experience homelessness after release (IRR 1·5, 95% CI 1·3-1·7), adjusted for sex, age, and calendar year.

INTERPRETATION

Criminal justice services should review approaches to reduce risk of homelessness, and consider improving liaison with mental health and substance misuse services to prevent adverse outcomes on release from prison. Clinical guidelines applied to criminal justice settings should address the health of individuals who experience homelessness.

FUNDING

Lundbeck Foundation.

Experience delivering an integrated service model to people with criminal justice system involvement and housing insecurity

BACKGROUND

People returning to communities from prison or jail face stressors related to securing housing, including discrimination, restrictions based on prior felony convictions, and limited economic and social resources. Existing housing programs can effectively reduce housing instability but often do not fully address the needs of people involved in the criminal justice system experiencing homelessness who often have co-occurring chronic medical issues, and psychiatric and substance use disorders.

METHODS

Project CHANGE is an ongoing program to deliver person-centered, integrated care and services to individuals involved with the criminal justice system and experiencing homelessness. Applying a Screening, Brief Intervention, (Referral to) Treatment framework, a comprehensive needs assessment is followed by delivery of intensive housing and vocational case management; and psychiatric, substance use, and medical services in a single location by an interdisciplinary team. Participants are followed with study interviews for 12 months. The current analysis was designed to assess the baseline characteristics and needs of the sample population, and the intensity of contact required for integrated service delivery.

RESULTS

Between November 2019 and September 2021, 86 participants were enrolled, of whom 64% had been released from prison/jail in the past 6 months; the remainder were on parole, probation, or intensive pretrial supervision. Participants were unstably housed (64%) or residing outdoors (26.7%) or in a shelter (24.4%). Most participants had high medical need and frequent healthcare engagement through outpatient and emergency department visits. Most participants were at-risk for clinical depression, and half were diagnosed with anxiety, dissociative, stress-related, somatoform, and other non-psychotic psychiatric disorders. Over 12-month follow-up, the interdisciplinary team made over 500 contact encounters, over half of which resulted in direct services provided, including obtaining vital documents for homelessness verification, housing applications, and employment coaching.

CONCLUSION

Navigation of services can be particularly challenging for individuals experiencing criminal justice involvement, homelessness, and co-occurring medical, psychiatric, and substance use issues, which can be addressed holistically in an integrated service model. Integrated service delivery was time-, resource-, and staffing-intensive, and challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic, requiring innovative solutions to sustain participant engagement.

Rehabilitation among individuals with traumatic brain injury who intersect with the criminal justice system: A scoping review

Traumatic brain injury (TBI), a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, is highly prevalent among individuals who intersect with the criminal justice system (CJS). It is well-established that TBI negatively impacts individuals' interactions both within the CJS and upon release and is associated with serious disciplinary charges and higher recidivism rates. Although rehabilitation is fundamental to TBI recovery, it is not known to what extent rehabilitation is available to, or used by, individuals who intersect with the CJS. This scoping review explores the availability and extent of rehabilitation for individuals with TBI who intersect with the CJS, based on available literature. A systematic search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Clinical Trials, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, and Proquest Nursing and Allied Health), relevant organizations' websites, and reference lists of eligible articles identified 22 peer-reviewed articles and 2 gray literature reports that met predetermined eligibility criteria. Extracted data were synthesized through a descriptive numerical summary and qualitative content analysis. This review provides evidence that existing rehabilitation interventions are already serving individuals with TBI with a history of CJS involvement; however, they rarely consider or acknowledge TBI or CJS in their interventions. Findings also suggest opportunities to integrate rehabilitation for individuals with TBI who intersect with the CJS through TBI screening, education on TBI within CJS settings, and linkages to the community to facilitate continuity of care. This review also highlights significant gaps in knowledge regarding sex, gender, and other intersecting factors. Research to understand how these experiences impact the rehabilitation process throughout the CJS is urgently needed to enable timely and appropriate rehabilitation and continuity of care for diverse individuals with TBI who intersect with the CJS.