1 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, Quebec.
2 Douglas Mental Health University Institute, Quebec.
Can J Psychiatry. 2019 Aug;64(8):525-530. doi: 10.1177/0706743718815902. Epub 2019 Jan 6.
Housing First is increasingly put forward as an important component of a pragmatic plan to end homelessness. The literature evaluating the impact of Housing First on criminal justice involvement has not yet been systematically examined. The objective of this systematic review is to examine the impact of Housing First on criminal justice outcomes among homeless people with mental illness.
Five electronic databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science) were searched up until July 2018 for randomised and nonrandomised studies of Housing First among homeless people with a serious mental disorder.
Five studies were included for a total of 7128 participants. Two studies from a randomised controlled trial found no effect of Housing First on arrests compared to treatment as usual. Other studies compared Housing First to other programs or compared configurations of HF and found reductions in criminal justice involvement among Housing First participants.
This systematic review suggests that Housing First, on average, has little impact on criminal justice involvement. Community services such as Housing First are potentially an important setting to put in place strategies to reduce criminal justice involvement. However, forensic mental health approaches such as risk assessment and management strategies and interventions may need to be integrated into existing services to better address potential underlying individual criminogenic risk factors. Further outcome assessment studies would be necessary.
“先住后付”(Housing First)越来越多地被提出作为终结无家可归现象的务实计划的一个重要组成部分。评估“先住后付”对刑事司法参与影响的文献尚未得到系统审查。本系统综述的目的是考察“先住后付”对有精神疾病的无家可归者刑事司法结果的影响。
截至 2018 年 7 月,我们在五个电子数据库(PsycINFO、MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、Web of Science)中搜索了关于有严重精神障碍的无家可归者的“先住后付”的随机和非随机研究。
共有 5 项研究纳入了总计 7128 名参与者。两项来自随机对照试验的研究发现,“先住后付”与常规治疗相比,对逮捕没有影响。其他研究将“先住后付”与其他方案进行比较,或将“先住后付”的不同配置进行比较,发现“先住后付”组的刑事司法参与度降低。
本系统综述表明,“先住后付”平均而言对刑事司法参与的影响很小。社区服务,如“先住后付”,可能是实施减少刑事司法参与的战略的一个重要场所。然而,可能需要将法医心理健康方法,如风险评估和管理策略以及干预措施纳入现有服务中,以更好地解决潜在的个体犯罪风险因素。需要进一步进行结果评估研究。