Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies 2: Medication-Assisted Therapy, 2010-2013 [United States] Archival Version

DOI

The Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies 2 (CJ-DATS 2) was launched in 2008 with a focus on conducting implementation research in criminal justice settings. NIDA's ultimate goal for CJ-DATS 2 was to identify implementation strategies that maximize the likelihood of sustained delivery of evidence-based practices to improve offender drug abuse and HIV outcomes, and to decrease their risk of incarceration. The Medication-Assisted Therapy (MAT) study focuses on implementing linkages to medication assisted treatment in correctional settings. During the study period community corrections staff engaged in training about addiction pharmacotherapies, while leadership in the corrections and treatment facilities engage in a joint strategic planning process to identify and resolve barriers to efficient flow of clients across the two systems. This study includes 28 datasets and over 1,400 variables. The first five datasets for this study contain data on the baseline characteristics of the treatment and corrections sites that participated in the study as well as the characteristics of the staff working at those facilities. Opinions about Medication Assisted Treatment surveys were administered to personnel at the participating corrections and treatment sites (D6). Data on Inter-organization Relations between Probation and Parole staff with Treatment Providers were also collected (DS7-DS18). Information was extracted from the charts of clients about their alcohol and opioid dependence as well as the referrals and treatment the clients received (DS19). Probation and parole officers and treatment providers were surveyed about monthly counts of referrals (DS20-DS21). During the study 10 staff members from the community corrections agency and local treatment providers where MAT services were available were nominated to participate in a Pharmacotherapy Exchange Council (PEC). PEC members were involved with strategic planning for implementing changes to improve the usage of Medication-Assisted Therapy. PEC members were surveyed several times throughout the study. PEC members completed surveys on how well the sites were adhering to the Organizational Linkages Intervention (OLI) process (DS22). Community corrections staff, PEC members and Connections Coordinators in the experimental group were surveyed about their perceptions of organizational benefits and costs associated with the MATICCE intervention (DS23). The PEC rated the Connections Coordinators (DS24)and the Connections Coordinators rate the PEC (DS25). PEC researchers completed surveys on how much of the OLI was completed (DS26) as well as what the sustainability of the changes made through the MATTICE project (DS27). The final dataset provides a key for who took the KPI (Key Performance Indicators) training and who was a PEC member (DS28). The objective of this study was to leverage treatment services that already exist in the community. This means that the implementation strategy was not designed to promote the delivery of clinical services nor medication prescribing within or by probation and parole offices, but rather was targeted at facilitating linkages between organizations that, despite sharing the same clients, lack incentive to coordinate services, or otherwise do not view themselves as sharing a common mission. Nine research centers partnered with stakeholder organizations to improve utilization of medical-assisted therapy. Each research center recruited two community corrections agencies that did not have overlapping administrative structures. The pairs of sites were used in a clustered randomized design experiment. One research center recruited a second pair of sites brining the total number of sites to 20. The sites' staff received a 3-hour medical assisted therapy. Next the experimental group of sites were assigned to received an Organization Linkage Intervention and were asked to nominate members of a "Pharmacotherapy Exchange Council" (PEC). The PEC went through a manualized strategic planning process with the end goal of facilitating inter-organization linkages and increase awareness about the effectiveness of Medication-assisted therapy. There are no weights associated with this study. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Created variable labels and/or value labels.; Created online analysis version with question text.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Presence of Common Scales: Please review the scoring guides in the provided user guide. Response Rates: Part 1: CD 91.3 percent / CO 91.2 percent / TD 95.8 percent / TS 84.5 percent Part 2: 80.0 percent Part 3: 85.7 percent Part 4: Same as part 1 Part 5: N/A Part 6: Baseline 85.2 percent / 3 Month 80.5 percent / 12 Month 74.5 percent Part 7: 86.1 percent Part 8: 72.9 percent Part 9: 80.4 percent Part 10: 82.2 percent Part 11: 90.8 percent Part 12: 93.3 percent Part 13: 70.6 percent Part 14: 95.0 percent Part 15: 96.3 percent Part 16: 90.6 percent Part 17: 78.3 percent Part 18: 92.3 percent Part 19: N/A Part 20: 98.2 percent Part 21: 93.6 percent Part 22: 100 percent Part 23: 98.2 percent Part 24: 93.3 percent Part 25: 99.3 percent Part 26: 100 percent Part 27: 100 percent Part 28: N/A Probation, parole, and treatment personnel in the United States 2010-2013. All applicable personnel at each study site were invited to participate. record abstracts, on-site questionnaireICPSR edited variable labels to provide users with more information and increase comparability across variables sets and datasets.ICPSR performed recodes on select variables to protect respondent confidentiality. See the "Processing/Confidentiality Notes" in each codebook for further details.

Identifier
DOI http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.3886/ICPSR34988
Related Identifier DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR34988.v1
Metadata Access https://www.da-ra.de/oaip/oai?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=oai_dc&identifier=oai:oai.da-ra.de:467539
Provenance
Creator Belenko, Steven;Visher, Christy;Leukefeld, Carl;Shafer, Michael;Prendergast, Michael;Stein, Lyn;Frisman, Linda;Ducharme, Lori;Sacks, Stanley;Friedmann, Peter;Knight, Kevin
Publisher ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research
Contributor United States Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. National Institute on Drug Abuse;United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration;United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Assistance
Publication Year 2016
Rights Delivery;This version of the study is no longer available on the web. If you need to acquire this version of the data, you have to contact ICPSR User Support (help@icpsr.umich.edu).
Contact ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research
Representation
Language English
Resource Type Dataset;administrative records data, survey data
Coverage
Discipline Not stated
Spatial Coverage {Arizona,California,Connecticut,Delaware,Kentucky,Maryland,Pennsylvania,"Puerto Rico","Rhode Island",Texas,"United States","2010 - 2013","Time period: 2010--2013"}
Temporal Coverage {Arizona,California,Connecticut,Delaware,Kentucky,Maryland,Pennsylvania,"Puerto Rico","Rhode Island",Texas,"United States","2010 - 2013","Time period: 2010--2013"}