Cargando…

Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions

BACKGROUND: Individuals who commit acts of violence in prisons are often placed in highly controlled environments called restrictive housing (i.e., solitary confinement), which can have severe physical and mental health consequences and does not reduce violence. As such, North Carolina prisons have...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Remch, Molly, Swink, Gregory, Mautz, Charles, Austin, Anna E., Naumann, Rebecca B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10367332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37488625
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40621-023-00450-9
_version_ 1785077367438311424
author Remch, Molly
Swink, Gregory
Mautz, Charles
Austin, Anna E.
Naumann, Rebecca B.
author_facet Remch, Molly
Swink, Gregory
Mautz, Charles
Austin, Anna E.
Naumann, Rebecca B.
author_sort Remch, Molly
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Individuals who commit acts of violence in prisons are often placed in highly controlled environments called restrictive housing (i.e., solitary confinement), which can have severe physical and mental health consequences and does not reduce violence. As such, North Carolina prisons have introduced the rehabilitative diversion unit (RDU) to reduce the use of restrictive housing and reduce violence in prison. METHODS: We evaluated the effect of the RDU on prison infractions. We compared rates of infractions by type (including violent infractions) among men enrolled in the RDU and men who were eligible for the RDU but placed in restrictive housing for control purposes (RHCP). We also evaluated sustained program impacts by comparing the hazard of first infraction among these same two groups of men after program completion, when they had returned to the general prison population. Finally, we compared the hazard of first promotion to a less restrictive custody level (medium custody) when these men had returned to the general prison population. RESULTS: The primary analytic cohort was made up of 3128 men contributing 897,822 person-days. Adjusted rates of violent infractions were lower in the RDU than in RHCP (adjusted rate ratio: 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4, 1.1). All other categories of infractions, including drug-related infractions, occurred at higher rates during RDU, as compared to RHCP. In analyses of sustained program impacts, for most categories of infractions, there were no differences in the hazard of first infraction post-RDU and post-RHCP. However, the hazard of violent infraction post-RDU was higher (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.1, 4.0) than post-RHCP. The hazard of promotion to a less restrictive custody level was higher post-RDU (adjusted hazard ratio: 17.4; 95% CI: 7.2, 42.2) than post-RHCP. CONCLUSIONS: We found the RDU program may be effective in reducing violence for men enrolled in the program, but that these benefits were not sustained. Continued programming may be a useful tool to transition men from the programmatically intensive environment of the RDU to the general prison population. Additionally, we recommend the expansion of evidence-based treatment for substance use disorder. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40621-023-00450-9.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10367332
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103673322023-07-26 Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions Remch, Molly Swink, Gregory Mautz, Charles Austin, Anna E. Naumann, Rebecca B. Inj Epidemiol Original Contribution BACKGROUND: Individuals who commit acts of violence in prisons are often placed in highly controlled environments called restrictive housing (i.e., solitary confinement), which can have severe physical and mental health consequences and does not reduce violence. As such, North Carolina prisons have introduced the rehabilitative diversion unit (RDU) to reduce the use of restrictive housing and reduce violence in prison. METHODS: We evaluated the effect of the RDU on prison infractions. We compared rates of infractions by type (including violent infractions) among men enrolled in the RDU and men who were eligible for the RDU but placed in restrictive housing for control purposes (RHCP). We also evaluated sustained program impacts by comparing the hazard of first infraction among these same two groups of men after program completion, when they had returned to the general prison population. Finally, we compared the hazard of first promotion to a less restrictive custody level (medium custody) when these men had returned to the general prison population. RESULTS: The primary analytic cohort was made up of 3128 men contributing 897,822 person-days. Adjusted rates of violent infractions were lower in the RDU than in RHCP (adjusted rate ratio: 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4, 1.1). All other categories of infractions, including drug-related infractions, occurred at higher rates during RDU, as compared to RHCP. In analyses of sustained program impacts, for most categories of infractions, there were no differences in the hazard of first infraction post-RDU and post-RHCP. However, the hazard of violent infraction post-RDU was higher (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.1, 4.0) than post-RHCP. The hazard of promotion to a less restrictive custody level was higher post-RDU (adjusted hazard ratio: 17.4; 95% CI: 7.2, 42.2) than post-RHCP. CONCLUSIONS: We found the RDU program may be effective in reducing violence for men enrolled in the program, but that these benefits were not sustained. Continued programming may be a useful tool to transition men from the programmatically intensive environment of the RDU to the general prison population. Additionally, we recommend the expansion of evidence-based treatment for substance use disorder. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40621-023-00450-9. BioMed Central 2023-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10367332/ /pubmed/37488625 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40621-023-00450-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Original Contribution
Remch, Molly
Swink, Gregory
Mautz, Charles
Austin, Anna E.
Naumann, Rebecca B.
Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions
title Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions
title_full Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions
title_fullStr Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions
title_short Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions
title_sort evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions
topic Original Contribution
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10367332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37488625
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40621-023-00450-9
work_keys_str_mv AT remchmolly evaluationofaprisonviolencepreventionprogramimpactsonviolentandnonviolentprisoninfractions
AT swinkgregory evaluationofaprisonviolencepreventionprogramimpactsonviolentandnonviolentprisoninfractions
AT mautzcharles evaluationofaprisonviolencepreventionprogramimpactsonviolentandnonviolentprisoninfractions
AT austinannae evaluationofaprisonviolencepreventionprogramimpactsonviolentandnonviolentprisoninfractions
AT naumannrebeccab evaluationofaprisonviolencepreventionprogramimpactsonviolentandnonviolentprisoninfractions