Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWinter, R.
dc.contributor.authorYoung, Jesse
dc.contributor.authorStoové, M.
dc.contributor.authorAgius, P.
dc.contributor.authorHellard, M.
dc.contributor.authorKinner, S.
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-23T03:01:25Z
dc.date.available2017-06-23T03:01:25Z
dc.date.created2017-06-19T03:39:35Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationWinter, R. and Young, J. and Stoové, M. and Agius, P. and Hellard, M. and Kinner, S. 2016. Resumption of injecting drug use following release from prison in Australia.. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 168: pp. 104-111.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/53791
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.640
dc.description.abstract

INTRODUCTION: Ex-prisoners with a history of injecting drug use (IDU) experience disproportionate drug-related harm. Rapid resumption of substance use following prison release is common and evidenced in high rates of overdose mortality. However, few studies have documented the rate of IDU resumption following prison release or identified risk factors for relapse. METHODS: Structured interviews were conducted with 533 adults with a history of IDU in Queensland, Australia prior to release from prison and approximately 1, 3 and 6 months post-release. Incidence of self-reported IDU resumption was calculated overall and for each follow-up interval. Risk factors associated with time to resumption of IDU were estimated using discrete-time survival analysis. RESULTS: IDU resumption was reported by 41% of participants during a median of 98days of follow-up (IQR=94-121), an overall crude incidence of 1.06 per person-year. The highest rate was observed in the first month (23%; crude incidence 2.24 per person-year). In adjusted discrete-time survival analyses, being unemployed at the previous interview (AHR=1.59; 95%CI:1.10-2.30), shorter incarceration (=90days vs. >365days; AHR=2.20; 95%CI:1.33-3.65), and IDU during the index incarceration (AHR=2.80; 95%CI:1.92-4.09) were significantly associated with time to IDU resumption; parole was protective (AHR=0.66; 95%CI:0.47-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based efforts to prevent IDU in prison and IDU resumption after release are important for both prisoner and public health. Enhancing opportunities for employment and capitalising on the short-term benefits of parole for ex-prisoners may delay resumption of IDU after release from prison. These strategies should complement rather than replace harm reduction efforts for this high-risk population.

dc.publisherElsevier Ireland Ltd
dc.titleResumption of injecting drug use following release from prison in Australia.
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.source.volume168
dcterms.source.startPage104
dcterms.source.endPage111
dcterms.source.issn1879-0046
dcterms.source.titleDrug and Alcohol Dependence
curtin.departmentNational Drug Research Institute (NDRI)
curtin.accessStatusFulltext not available


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record