Association of a novel restrictive housing diversion program with rates of mental health and self-injury in prison.

Restrictive housing for control purposes (RHCP, a form of solitary confinement) is used in prisons in response to disruptive behaviors, including violence. North Carolina prisons introduced the rehabilitative diversion unit (RDU) in 2016 as an alternative to and step-down from RHCP. We compared rates of psychiatric treatment and self-injury among men enrolled in the RDU and men eligible for the RDU but placed in RHCP. We used Poisson regression to calculate rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for these outcomes, using inverse probability of treatment weights to adjust for confounders. The cohort included 1,225 men in the RDU group and 3,059 in the RHCP group. In RHCP, the adjusted psychiatric treatment rate was 2.6 times (95% CI: 1.8, 3.8) and the adjusted self-injury incident rate was 1.2 times (95% CI: 0.6, 2.8) that in RDU. Nearly all self-injury incidents in RDU occurred during "non-participating time" (i.e., in a restrictive housing setting and not actively participating in RDU). After excluding non-participating time from the RDU group's person time, the adjusted RR for self-injury incidents was 23.5 (95% CI: 8.6, 64.2). These results further knowledge of potential benefits of diversion from restrictive housing. Continued development, implementation, and evaluation is needed.

Evaluation of a prison violence prevention program: impacts on violent and non-violent prison infractions.

BACKGROUND: Individuals who commit acts of violence in prisons are often placed in highly controlled environments called restrictive housing (i.e., solitary confinement), which can have severe physical and mental health consequences and does not reduce violence. As such, North Carolina prisons have introduced the rehabilitative diversion unit (RDU) to reduce the use of restrictive housing and reduce violence in prison. METHODS: We evaluated the effect of the RDU on prison infractions. We compared rates of infractions by type (including violent infractions) among men enrolled in the RDU and men who were eligible for the RDU but placed in restrictive housing for control purposes (RHCP). We also evaluated sustained program impacts by comparing the hazard of first infraction among these same two groups of men after program completion, when they had returned to the general prison population. Finally, we compared the hazard of first promotion to a less restrictive custody level (medium custody) when these men had returned to the general prison population. RESULTS: The primary analytic cohort was made up of 3128 men contributing 897,822 person-days. Adjusted rates of violent infractions were lower in the RDU than in RHCP (adjusted rate ratio: 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4, 1.1). All other categories of infractions, including drug-related infractions, occurred at higher rates during RDU, as compared to RHCP. In analyses of sustained program impacts, for most categories of infractions, there were no differences in the hazard of first infraction post-RDU and post-RHCP. However, the hazard of violent infraction post-RDU was higher (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.1, 4.0) than post-RHCP. The hazard of promotion to a less restrictive custody level was higher post-RDU (adjusted hazard ratio: 17.4; 95% CI: 7.2, 42.2) than post-RHCP. CONCLUSIONS: We found the RDU program may be effective in reducing violence for men enrolled in the program, but that these benefits were not sustained. Continued programming may be a useful tool to transition men from the programmatically intensive environment of the RDU to the general prison population. Additionally, we recommend the expansion of evidence-based treatment for substance use disorder.

Sustained impacts of North Carolina prison therapeutic diversion units on behavioral outcomes, mental health, self-injury, and restrictive housing readmission.

Therapeutic Diversion Units (TDUs) in North Carolina prisons are intended to reduce cycling of individuals with mental health conditions through restrictive housing (i.e., solitary confinement). This paper investigates if previously identified benefits of TDU are sustained when individuals return to the general prison population. Using administrative data on 3170 people, we compare individuals placed in TDUs to TDU-eligible individuals (i.e., individuals with mental health needs) placed in restrictive housing. We use survival analysis methods to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with confidence intervals (CIs), controlling for confounders. Compared to restrictive housing placement, TDU placement reduced the hazard of infractions (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.84) and subsequent restrictive housing placement (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.73) but increased the hazard of self-harm (HR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.66, 4.29) upon program release to the general prison population. These findings suggest a need for additional investments and research on restrictive housing diversion programming, including post-diversion program supports.

Impact of a Prison Therapeutic Diversion Unit on Mental and Behavioral Health Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Incarcerated individuals with mental health disorders are disproportionally sent to restrictive housing (i.e., solitary confinement), which is known to have deleterious impacts on mental health. In response, North Carolina's prison system developed Therapeutic Diversion Units, treatment-oriented units for incarcerated individuals with high mental health needs who cycle in and out of restrictive housing. This analysis compares the impact of restrictive housing and Therapeutic Diversion Units on infractions, mental health, and self-harm among incarcerated individuals. METHODS: Data were 2016-2019 incarceration records from North Carolina prisons. Outcomes were rates of infractions, inpatient mental health admissions, and self-harm in restrictive housing and Therapeutic Diversion Units. Inverse probability of treatment weights was used to adjust for confounding, and Poisson regression with generalized estimating equations was used to estimate adjusted rate ratios. Analyses were conducted between January and December 2020. RESULTS: The analytic sample was 3,480 people, of whom 463 enrolled in a Therapeutic Diversion Unit. Compared with Therapeutic Diversion Unit rates, the rate of infractions was 3 times as high in restrictive housing (adjusted rate ratio=2.99, 95% CI=2.31, 3.87), the inpatient mental health admissions rate was 3.5 times as high (adjusted rate ratio=3.57, 95% CI=1.97, 6.46), and the self-injury incident rate was 3.5 times as high (adjusted rate ratio=3.46, 95% CI=2.11, 5.69). CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic Diversion Unit use had strong impacts on infractions, mental health, and self-harm. Therapeutic Diversion Units provide a promising alternative to restrictive housing for individuals with mental health disorders.