Factors of Recidivism among Individuals with Co-occurring Conditions in Rural Mental Health Jail Interventions

Estimates indicate that nearly half of rural jail detainees meet the criteria for co-occurring disorders (COD). It is critical to examine factors of recidivism among detainees with COD in rural communities. This exploratory study aimed to examine factors of recidivism among adults in rural jails. Administrative data sources were utilized to assess postyear recidivism among 191 individuals with COD who participated in a jail-based intervention. Results indicated that a greater number of previous jail bookings and not receiving continuity of care were the strongest associations of overall recidivism, and a greater number of previous jail bookings was associated with of multiple recidivism events. The protective effect of receiving continuity of care was diminished in reducing recidivism 4- to 12-months following jail release. Re-entry services should consider developing or further expand specialized psychiatric care parole and connections to evidence-based integrated dual diagnosis treatment with a focus on programs with adaptability for rurality.

Disconnect between psychiatric and addiction services: a review of patients’ attendances at Alcohol Tobacco and Other Drug Services after a psychiatric admission

Objective: To investigate the rate of attendance at Alcohol Tobacco and Other Drug Services (ATODS) for patients discharged from an acute mental health unit with a primary/secondary diagnosis of substance use disorder (SUD); and describe factors, demographics, diagnoses and service provision that relate to their attendance. Method: All inpatients between 1 November 2016 and 31 October 2017 with a diagnosis of SUD were compared for their attendance at ATODS within 30 days of discharge. Other measures included their admission data (e.g. demographics, diagnosis), and indices of their illness severity. Results: Of 1295 admissions for a total of 900 patients, 32.4% of patients had an SUD diagnosis. Only 10.3% of these patients attended ATODS. There were no significant differences by gender, age, indigenous status, illness severity or dual diagnosis intervention during their inpatient stay on attendance. Relative to the SUD-only group, individuals with any psychiatric comorbidity were three–four times less likely to attend ATODS. Conclusion: Despite the ongoing emphasis on dual diagnosis treatment, the rate of engagement with ATODS remains low. Further review is needed to determine whether enhanced information sharing or case management models may improve attendance rates.

Challenges in working with patients with dual diagnosis

Purpose Studies have shown that mental health professionals find working with patients with dual diagnosis challenging, and the purpose of this paper is to examine some of these challenges. Design/methodology/approach In total, 85 mental health professionals from 8 different mental health centres in Denmark were interviewed. The data analysis was inspired by a grounded theory approach. Findings Different challenges in the dual diagnosis treatment were identified and they suggested that the focus of treatment was mainly on the mental illness rather than the substance use disorder. The single focus of the treatment made it challenging to treat patients with dual diagnosis sufficiently. While several studies explain the single focus by inadequate competencies among professionals, the present study suggests that the single focus is also explained by the way that the treatment is organised. For instance, standardized treatment packages and insufficient guidelines on substance abuse treatment make it challenging to treat patients with dual diagnosis. Originality/value This paper suggests that a more flexible, and a longer period of, treatment, together with more sufficient guidelines on dual diagnosis treatment and a more formalized collaboration with the substance abuse treatment centres, will make it a less challenging issue to treat patients with dual diagnosis.