International journal of prison health最新文献

Purpose: A settings-based approach to health promotion emphasizes everyday environments in shaping health. Prisons are, therefore, potentially important arenas for health promotion. However, the inherent restriction of prisoner agency presents a fundamental challenge in this regard. There is a gap in qualitative research on prisoners' perspectives on health-related topics and a need for greater understanding of health promotion within prisons. This study aims to explore male prisoners' experiences of a Norwegian low-security prison as a setting for health promotion.

Design/methodology/approach: This study was conducted in Forest Prison, a Norwegian low-security facility for 125 male prisoners. The prison offers various amenities and activities to prepare inmates for reintegration into society. The research used semi-structured interviews with 20 diverse prisoners. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using Gale et al.'s framework method.

Findings: This study revealed varied prisoner perspectives on Forest Prison as a setting for health promotion. In prisoners' talk, the importance of agency was evident. Restricted agency triggered negative emotions and distrust, while extended agency fostered trust and wellbeing. Although Forest Prison provides a considerable degree of agency, some prisoners did not fully benefit from this agentic context because of disparities in resources.

Originality/value: Initiatives across three areas of action will strengthen Forest Prison as a setting for health promotion: extending agency, empowering prisoners and developing a prison culture with positive social relationships, effective communication and information flow. The findings of this study provide theoretical insights beyond the specific context, which can serve as a basis for developing prisons as health promoting settings.

Purpose: The sexual health of the male prison population is often among the poorest in a country. This paper aims to identify the wider health impacts and social value of a sexual health self-sampling programme offered to male prisoners in an open prison setting in Wales.

Design/methodology/approach: This study applied a unique pilot approach of using Health Impact Assessment and Social Return on Investment Frameworks in tandem. Key stakeholder groups affected by the intervention were identified, and engaged with through workshops, interviews and questionnaires to identify and quantify the health impacts and wider outcomes. Outcomes were then valued using proxy financial values to present the overall estimated social value of the self-sampling service.

Findings: Based on a small sample, results indicate that for every £1 spent on the self-sampling service in the prison, a potential value of £4.14 was created. This resulted in a ratio of £4.14:£1. Approximately one-third of the value created (£1,517.95) was categorised as monetarily returnable, whereas the remaining value (£3,260.40) was purely illustrative social value, for example improved mental well-being.

Originality/value: This unique pilot study demonstrates the health impacts and wider social value of providing a self-sampling sexual health service to prisoners within an open prison setting. By innovatively testing the feasibility of using a Health Impact Assessment process alongside Social Return on Investment analyses, this paper has outlined how the frameworks can be used in synergy to illustrate not just direct return on investment but also the social value of providing such a service.

Purpose: During the COVID-19 pandemic, prisons faced a unique challenge of preventing and managing outbreaks with minimal adverse impact. This study aims to describe the epidemiology of COVID-19 in prisons, identify lessons learnt and make recommendations.

Design/methodology/approach: The authors used the PubMed advanced search function using MeSH terms; (coronavirus, sars) AND (prisons) AND (disease outbreaks). The authors included original research reporting COVID-19 outbreaks in prisons. All other types and non-English publications were excluded. The authors used a structured data abstraction template to extract data systematically, and a second author independently abstracted data from 10% of the papers for quality assurance.

Findings: The search yielded 96 hits. The authors included 15 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. These studies were from four countries. Seven studies reported individual outbreaks. The mean and median number of inmates and staff were 1,765, 1,126 and 575, 510. The mean and median number of cases among inmates and staff were 584, 464, and 72, 77. The number of reported deaths varied from 0 to 11. The authors present the prison-specific hazards grouped under human factors, healthcare factors and environmental factors. The authors also summarise interventions deployed as either primary prevention interventions, such as vaccinations, or secondary prevention interventions, including screening and contact tracing.

Originality/value: This narrative review summarises the prison-specific hazards, which include movement of people in and out of the person, moving in new prisoners from other prisons, mixing of prisoners when transporting to courts, limited medical and isolation resources, crowded dormitories, shared lavatories, small communal facilities, poor ventilation and overcrowding. The interventions included limiting non-medical transfers into and out of the persons, assigning staff members to specific areas, encouraging face coverings among prisoners and staff and social isolation measures within the constraints of the prison setting. The interventions were adopted by prison authorities to contain and manage the outbreaks. Public Health and prison authorities need to be aware of the risk of further outbreaks of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases in these settings and implement key measures identified in this review to minimise adverse outcomes.

Purpose: Smoke-free prison policies have been introduced in some countries, in part to address very high levels of tobacco use in people in prison. However, relapse rates post-release remain high. This papers aims to improve understanding of post-release smoking and/or vaping behaviour is necessary to inform support for a priority population.

Design/methodology/approach: The authors searched health, social science and criminal justice databases for studies about smoking/vaping behaviours among people released from smoke-free prisons. Studies were included if they reported primary data and were published between January 2017 and March 2024 in English; the population was adults/young people (16 yr+) imprisoned or formerly imprisoned, in prisons with comprehensive smoke-free policies; and at least one of the following was reported: pre-release intention to smoke, vape or remain abstinent post-release; smoking/vaping behaviour post-release and factors influencing smoking/vaping behaviour; attempts to quit again following post-release smoking/vaping relapse.

Findings: Nine studies met our criteria. The evidence base is small and mainly from the USA or Australia. Evidence continues to suggest that most people resume smoking after leaving a smoke-free prison. No new interventions have been successful in reducing relapse rates. No studies report on vaping post-release, although two studies report on perceived factors affecting smoking relapse post-release from prisons allowing vaping.

Research limitations/implications: Given very high rates of relapse, there remains a significant need to better understand what approaches are feasible and acceptable for reducing return to smoking post-release.

Originality/value: This review updates the limited evidence on smoking behaviours after leaving a smoke-free prison.

Purpose: COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Considering the restricted and enclosed nature of prisons and closed environments and the prolonged and close contact between individuals, COVID-19 is more likely to have a higher incidence in these settings. This study aims to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 among prisoners.

Design/methodology/approach: Papers published in English from 2019 to July 7, 2023, were identified using relevant keywords such as prevalence, COVID-19 and prisoner in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Google Scholar. For the meta-analysis of the prevalence, Cochrane's Q statistics were calculated. A random effect model was used due to the heterogeneity in COVID-19 prevalence across included studies in the meta-analysis. All analyses were performed in STATA-13.

Findings: The pooled data presented a COVID-19 prevalence of 20% [95%CI: 0.13, 0.26] and 24% [95%CI: 0.07, 0.41], respectively, in studies that used PCR and antibody tests. Furthermore, two study designs, cross-sectional and cohort, were used. The results of the meta-analysis showed studies with cross-sectional and cohort designs reported 20% [95%CI: 0.11, 0.29] and 25% [95%CI: 0.13, 0.38], respectively.

Originality/value: Through more meticulous planning, it is feasible to reduce the number of individuals in prison cells, thereby preventing the further spread of COVID-19.

Purpose: Around the world, prison complexes have always been fundamentally taxing environments. The strained atmosphere within these prisons often contributes to the deterioration of mental health, mostly those who may already be psychologically vulnerable. This paper aims to understand whether there exists a relationship between the built environment of prisons, particularly the central prisons of India and its effects on the mental health of inmates.

Design/methodology/approach: By means of literature reviews, the study parameters were found to be connectivity to nature, lighting, acoustics, colour, air quality and thermal comfort. The data collected through interviews and email correspondences with identified experts were analysed thematically using a deductive approach to derive a set of practical recommendations, which could be implemented in Indian prisons.

Findings: The built environment of prisons impacts the prison population by further contributing to depressive symptoms. The effects of the built space persist regardless of social factors. A well-designed environment is healthy for its occupants and would yield positive changes. However, it is not the sole contributor to depression; social interactions, prison management, societal acceptance and meaningful activities are equally relevant factors. The sole focus of this paper is the relationship between the built environment and the mental health of inmates.

Originality/value: There is a paucity of research into the intersection between prison architecture and the mental health of inmates in the Indian subcontinent. This paper that addresses the gap may have significant consequences on how criminal reform is perceived, and also encourage further research in this field.

Purpose: This study aims to learn about the experiences of inmates who experienced long periods of isolation due to a COVID-19 outbreak in the Brians 1 penitentiary centre. This approach is relevant, as it sought to understand the experiences from the perspective of the prisoners during periods of isolation. The aim was to gain in-depth knowledge, based on the idiosyncrasies of this population, of their emotions and coping strategies in the prison context. This information that may be useful to prison institutions and prison primary healthcare teams to guide the organisation in future health emergencies involving the isolation of prisoners.

Design/methodology/approach: A qualitative interpretative phenomenological study was conducted. Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of 30 people who had undergone a period of isolation due to a COVID-19 outbreak in one or two of the last two outbreaks at the Brians 1 (Barcelona) prison in 2022, in the days following periods of social isolation. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using the content analysis approach, and were coded using the NVivo 12 qualitative software. The credibility and validity of the data analysed were increased through triangulation at different levels. In this study, data was collected from a heterogeneous sample of prisoners, capturing different views among the prison population.

Findings: This research gave us the opportunity to collect prisoners' accounts of isolation due to COVID-19, in which it became clear that it conditioned the management of time and space in daily prison life. The restrictions amplified negative emotions such as anxiety, stress and restlessness and led to disruptions in communication with the outside world, daily prison activities and judicial processes. Despite these changes, the prisoners understood the imperatives of isolation and the need to adapt to the new situation for a limited period of time. Faced with the detrimental effect on their well-being, the prisoners employed coping strategies focused on emotional management, social supports and occupational engagement.

Research limitations/implications: This study is subject to several limitations related to the characteristics of the sample. No women participated in the study as the modules studied were exclusively for men. People with impaired cognitive abilities, were not included. With regard to the method, it is understood that conducting the interviews in the days after the isolation may have influenced the content and enthusiasm of the participants. Despite these limitations, we are confident that the data triangulation may have given us reliable insight that will further our knowledge of prisoners' experiences in this type of situation.

Originality/value: The issue of the negative impact of restrictive measures in the prison environment has rarely

Purpose: The physical environment of correctional facilities promote infectious disease transmission and outbreaks. The purpose of this study is to compare the COVID-19 burden between the correctional facility (incarcerated individuals and staff members) and non-correctional facility population in Ontario during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design/methodology/approach: All individuals in Ontario with a laboratory confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 between 15 January 2020 and 31 December 2022 and entered into the provincial COVID-19 data were included. Cases were classified as a correctional facility case (living or working in a correctional facility) or a non-correctional facility case. COVID-19 vaccination status was obtained from the provincial COVID-19 vaccine registry. Statistics Canada census data were used to calculate COVID-19 incidence and hospitalization rates for incarcerated cases and the non-correctional facility population.

Findings: Between 15 January 2020 and 31 December 2022, there were 1,550,045 COVID-19 cases in Ontario of which 8,292 (0.53%) cases were reported in correctional (63.8% amongst incarcerated individuals, 18.6% amongst staff and 17.7% amongst an unknown classification) and 1,541,753 (99.47%) were non-correctional facility cases. Most cases in correctional facilities were men (83.8%) and aged 20-59 years (93.1%). COVID-19 incidence and hospitalization rates were generally higher among incarcerated individuals compared to the non-correctional facility population throughout the study period. COVID-19 incidence peaked in January 2022 for both the correctional facility population (21,543.8 per 100,000 population) and the non-correctional facility population (1915.1 per 100,000 population). The rate of COVID-19 hospitalizations peaked for the correctional facility population aged 20-59 in March 2021 (70.7 per 100,000 population) and in April 2021 for the non-correctional facility population aged 20-59 (19.8 per 100,000 population). A greater percentage of incarcerated individuals (73.0%) were unvaccinated at time of their COVID-19 diagnosis compared to the non-correctional facility population (49.3%). Deaths amongst correctional facility cases were rare (0.1%, 6 / 8,292) compared to 1.0% of non-correctional facility cases (n = 15,787 / 1,541,753).

Originality/value: During the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals incarcerated in correctional facilities in Ontario had higher COVID-19 incidence and hospitalization rates compared to the non-correctional facility population. These results support prioritizing incarcerated individuals for public health interventions to mitigate COVID-19 impacts in correctional facilities.