Simultaneous and Concurrent Polydrug Use of Alcohol and Prescription Drugs: Prevalence, Correlates, and Consequences*


In this study, we sought to examine the prevalence, correlates, and consequences associated with simultaneous polydrug use and concurrent polydrug use of alcohol and prescription drugs. For purposes of this investigation, simultaneous polydrug use referred to the co-ingestion of different drugs at the same time, and concurrent polydrug use referred to the use of different drugs on separate occasions within the past 12 months.
Click Here to read complete article:

Management of the High Risk Offender: Recognizing, Managing and Containing the "Hard Core Drinking Driver"

William L. White and David L. Gasperin

The 1.5 million persons arrested each year for driving under the influence of alcohol or other drugs (DUI) constitute a growing portion of the caseloads of the nation's probation officers (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2002). The sheer volume of these cases poses the challenge of determining which DUI offenders pose the greatest threat to public safety and require more rigorous monitoring and case management. There is growing consensus that more sophisticated approaches are needed to examine how particular risk factors interact to predict DUI recidivism and future involvement in alcohol related crashes (C'de Baca, Miller, & Lapham, 2001). This article responds to that challenge by reviewing the research on the highest risk DUI offenders, introducing the Hard Core Drinking Driver Checklist, and discussing principles probation officers can utilize to effectively manage the hard core drinking driver (HCDD).
Click Here to read complete article:

Drug Court Review, Volume VI, Issue 2, page 109 Effectiveness of the SCRAM Alcohol Monitoring Device: A Preliminary Test

National Drug Court Institute
Alexandria, Virginia
Victor E. Flango, Ph.D. and Fred L. Cheesman, Ph.D.

A systematic literature review was conducted of published and unpublished DWI Court program evaluations released through April 30, 2007. [See Addendum for a subsequent evaluation released in October 2007]. Each evaluation report was scored for methodological rigor by at least two trained, independent raters according to established scientific criteria. One evaluation exceeded 80% of recommended criteria (deemed methodologically "good") and an additional four evaluations exceeded 65% of recommended criteria (deemed "marginally acceptable"). Many of the evaluations had serious methodological shortcomings, including reporting outcomes only for graduates, failing to account for participant dropout, employing inadequate statistical techniques, and evaluating potentially immature programs.
Click here to read the complete article: Click here to read the complete article:

Evidence-Based Sentencing for Drug Offenders: an Analysis of Prognostic Risks and Criminogenic Needs

Douglas B. Marlowe, Ph.D, J.D.

Substance abusers are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. Approximately eighty percent of offenders in the U.S. meet a broad definition of substance involvement and between one-half and two-thirds satisfy official diagnostic criteria for substance abuse or dependence. In a national sample of U.S. booking facilities, positive urine drug screens were obtained from approximately sixty-five percent of the arrestees in most jurisdictions. The positive urine results were not merely attributable to drug offenders, but rather were obtained from the majority of arrestees for most categories of crimes, including violent crimes, theft and property crimes.
Click here to read the complete article: