METHODS: This study prospectively evaluated mortality after prison release and whether methadone initiated before release increased survival after release in a sample of men with HIV and OUD (n = 291). We linked national death records to data from a controlled trial of prerelease methadone initiation conducted from 2010 to 2014 with men with HIV and OUD imprisoned in Malaysia. Vital statistics were collected through 2015. Allocation to prerelease methadone was by randomization (n = 64) and participant choice (n = 246). Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate treatment effects of prerelease methadone on postrelease survival.
RESULTS: Overall, 62 deaths occurred over 872.5 person-years (PY) of postrelease follow-up, a crude mortality rate of 71.1 deaths per 1000 PY (95% confidence interval [CI] 54.5-89.4). Most deaths were of infectious etiology, mostly related to HIV. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, the impact of prerelease methadone on postrelease mortality was consistent with a null effect in unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% CI 0.6-3.1) and covariate-adjusted (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.5-2.8) models. Predictors of mortality were educational level (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-1.8), pre-incarceration alcohol use (HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1-3.9), and lower CD4+ T-lymphocyte count (HR 0.8 per 100-cell/mL increase, 95% CI 0.7-1.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Postrelease mortality in this sample of men with HIV and OUD was extraordinarily high, and most deaths were likely of infectious etiology. No effect of prerelease methadone on postrelease mortality was observed, which may be due to study limitations or an epidemiological context in which inadequately treated HIV, and not inadequately treated OUD, is the main cause of death after prison release.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02396979. Retrospectively registered 24/03/2015.
METHODS: We linked pharmacy, custodial, death, case management, and HIV surveillance data from Connecticut Departments of Correction and Public Health to create a retrospective cohort of all adults with HIV released from jails and prisons in Connecticut between 2007 and 2014. We compared the mortality rate of adults with HIV released from incarceration with the general US and Connecticut populations, and modelled time-to-death from any cause after prison release with Cox proportional hazard models.
FINDINGS: We identified 1350 people with HIV who were released after 24 h or more of incarceration between 2007 and 2014, of whom 184 (14%) died after index release; median age was 45 years (IQR 39-50) and median follow-up was 5·2 years (IQR 3·0-6·7) after index release. The crude mortality rate for people with HIV released from incarceration was 2868 deaths per 100 000 person-years, and the standardised mortality ratio showed that mortality was higher for this cohort than the general US population (6·97, 95% CI 5·96-7·97) and population of Connecticut (8·47, 7·25-9·69). Primary cause of death was reported for 170 individuals; the most common causes were HIV/AIDS (78 [46%]), drug overdose (26 [15%]), liver disease (17 [10%]), cardiovascular disease (16 [9%]), and accidental injury or suicide (13 [8%]). Black race (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·52, 95% CI 0·34-0·80), having health insurance (0·09, 0·05-0·17), being re-incarcerated at least once for 365 days or longer (0·41, 0·22-0·76), and having a high percentage of re-incarcerations in which antiretroviral therapy was prescribed (0·08, 0·03-0·21) were protective against mortality. Positive predictors of time-to-death were age (≥50 years; adjusted HR 3·65, 95% CI 1·21-11·08), lower CD4 count (200-499 cells per μL, 2·54, 1·50-4·31; <200 cells per μL, 3·44, 1·90-6·20), a high number of comorbidities (1·86, 95% CI 1·23-2·82), virological failure (2·76, 1·94-3·92), and unmonitored viral load (2·13, 1·09-4·18).
INTERPRETATION: To reduce mortality after release from incarceration in people with HIV, resources are needed to identify and treat HIV, in addition to medical comorbidities, psychiatric disorders, and substance use disorders, during and following incarceration. Policies that reduce incarceration and support integrated systems of care between prisons and communities could have a substantial effect on the survival of people with HIV.
FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.
METHODS: In a nationally representative cross-sectional study, soon-to-be released prisoners in Kyrgyzstan (N=368) and Azerbaijan (N=510) completed standardized health assessment surveys. After identifying correlated variables through bivariate testing, we built multi-group path models with pre-incarceration official and unofficial detention as exogenous variables and pre-incarceration composite HIV risk as an endogenous variable, controlling for potential confounders and estimating indirect effects.
RESULTS: Overall, 463 (51%) prisoners reported at least one detention in the year before incarceration with an average of 1.3 detentions in that period. Unofficial detentions (13%) were less common than official detentions (41%). Optimal model fit was achieved (X (2)=5.83, p=0.44; Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) GFI=0.99; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) CFI=1.00; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) RMSEA=0.00; PCLOSE=0.98) when unofficial detention had an indirect effect on HIV risk, mediated by drug addiction severity, with more detentions associated with higher addiction severity, which in turn correlated with increased HIV risk. The final model explained 35% of the variance in the outcome. The effect was maintained for both countries, but stronger for Kyrgyzstan. The model also holds for Kyrgyzstan using unique data on within-prison drug injection as the outcome, which was frequent in prisoners there.
CONCLUSIONS: Detention by police is a strong correlate of addiction severity, which mediates its effect on HIV risk behaviour. This pattern suggests that police may target drug users and that such harassment may result in an increase in HIV risk-taking behaviours, primarily because of the continued drug use within prisons. These findings highlight the important negative role that police play in the HIV epidemic response and point to the urgent need for interventions to reduce police harassment, in parallel with interventions to reduce HIV transmission within and outside of prison.
METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted among 100 HIV+ prisoners with AUDs. Participants were randomized 2:1 to receive 6 monthly injections of XR-NTX or placebo starting one week prior to release. Using multiple imputation strategies for data missing completely at random, data were analyzed for the 6-month post-incarceration period. Main outcomes included: time to first heavy drinking day; number of standardized drinks/drinking day; percent of heavy drinking days; pre- to post-incarceration change in average drinks/day; total number of drinking days; and a composite alcohol improvement score comprised of all 5 parameters.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference overall between treatment arms for time-to-heavy-drinking day. However, participants aged 20-29 years who received XR-NTX had a longer time to first heavy drinking day compared to the placebo group (24.1 vs. 9.5days; p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for other individual drinking outcomes. A sub-analysis, however, found participants who received ≥4 XR-NTX were more likely (p<0.005) to have improved composite alcohol scores than the placebo group. Post-hoc power analysis revealed that despite the study being powered for HIV outcomes, sufficient power (0.94) was available to distinguish the observed differences.
CONCLUSIONS: Among CJS-involved PLH with AUDs transitioning to the community, XR-NTX lengthens the time to heavy drinking day for younger persons; reduces alcohol consumption when using a composite alcohol consumption score; and is not associated with any serious adverse events.
METHODS: We conducted an analysis of policy documents and over 60 h of participant observation in February 2016, which included focus groups with a convenience sample of 20 therapeutic community staff members, 110 prisoners across three male and one female prisons, and qualitative interviews with two former Clean Zone participants. Field notes containing verbatim quotes from participants were analyzed through iterative reading and discussion to understand how participants generally perceive the program, barriers to entry and retention, and implications for future treatment within prisons.
RESULTS: Our analyses discerned three themes: pride in the mission of the Clean Zone, idealism regarding addiction treatment outcomes against all odds, and the demonization of methadone.
CONCLUSION: Despite low enrollment and lack of an evidence base, the therapeutic community is buttressed by the strong support of the prison administration and its clients as an "ordered" alternative to what is seen as chaotic life outside of the Clean Zone. The lack of services for Clean Zone patients after release likely contributes to high rates of relapse to drug use. The Clean Zone would benefit from integration of stabilized methadone patients combined with a post-release program.