Prendergast Michael, Frisman Linda, Sacks Joann Y, Staton-Tindall Michele, Greenwell Lisa, Lin Hsiu-Ju, Cartier Jerry
J Exp Criminol. 2011 Sep;7(3):225-253. doi: 10.1007/s11292-011-9123-y. Epub 2011 Apr 21.
To test whether strengths-based case management provided during an inmate's transition from incarceration to the community increases participation in community substance abuse treatment, enhances access to needed social services, and improves drug use, crime, and HIV risk outcomes. METHODS: In a multi-site trial, inmates (men and women) in four states (n = 812) were randomly assigned (within site) to receive either Transitional Case Management (TCM group), based on strengths-based principles, or standard parole services (SR group). Data were collected at baseline and at 3 and 9 months following release from prison. Analyses compared the two groups with respect to services received and to drug use, crime, and HIV risk behavior outcomes. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between parolees in the TCM group and the SR group on outcomes related to participation in drug abuse treatment, receipt of social services, or drug use, crime, and HIV risk behaviors. For specific services (e.g., residential treatment, mental health), although significant differences were found for length of participation or for number of visits, the number of participants in these services was small and the direction of effect was not consistent. CONCLUSION: In contrast to positive findings in earlier studies of strengths-based case management with mental-health and drug-abuse clients, this study found that case management did not improve treatment participation or behavioral outcomes for parolees with drug problems. The discussion includes possible reasons for the findings and suggestions for modifications to the intervention that could be addressed in future research.
测试在囚犯从监禁过渡到社区期间提供的基于优势的个案管理是否能增加对社区药物滥用治疗的参与度，改善获得所需社会服务的机会，并改善药物使用、犯罪和艾滋病毒风险结果。方法：在一项多地点试验中，四个州的囚犯（男性和女性，n = 812）被（在各地点内）随机分配接受基于优势原则的过渡性个案管理（TCM组）或标准假释服务（SR组）。在基线以及出狱后3个月和9个月收集数据。分析比较了两组在接受的服务以及药物使用、犯罪和艾滋病毒风险行为结果方面的情况。结果：TCM组和SR组的假释人员在与参与药物滥用治疗、接受社会服务或药物使用、犯罪和艾滋病毒风险行为相关的结果上没有显著差异。对于特定服务（如住院治疗、心理健康），虽然在参与时长或就诊次数上发现了显著差异，但这些服务的参与者数量较少且效果方向不一致。结论：与早期针对心理健康和药物滥用客户的基于优势的个案管理研究中的积极发现相反，本研究发现个案管理并未改善有药物问题的假释人员的治疗参与度或行为结果。讨论包括这些发现的可能原因以及对干预措施进行修改的建议，这些建议可在未来研究中探讨。
