Open Access

A comparison of psychiatric diagnoses among HIV-infected prisoners receiving combination antiretroviral therapy and transitioning to the community

  • Angela Di Paola1,
  • Frederick L Altice1, 2,
  • Mary Lindsay Powell1,
  • Robert L Trestman3 and
  • Sandra A Springer1Email author
Health & Justice20142:11

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-014-0011-1

Received: 27 March 2014

Accepted: 22 August 2014

Published: 29 October 2014

Abstract

Background

The criminal justice system (CJS), specifically prisons and jails, is ideally suited for uniform screening of psychiatric (PD) and substance use disorders (SUDs) among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA), who are concentrated in these settings. By accurately diagnosing PDs and SUDs in these controlled settings, treatment can be initiated and contribute to improved continuity of care upon release. In the context of PLWHA, it may also improve combination antiretroviral treatment (cART) adherence, and reduce HIV transmission risk behaviors.

Methods

A retrospective data analysis was conducted by creating a cohort of PLWHA transitioning to the community from prison or jail enrolled who were enrolled in a controlled trial of directly administered antiretroviral (DAART). Participants were systematically assessed for PDs and SUDs using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), a standardized psychiatric assessment tool, and compared to diagnoses documented within the correctional medical record.

Results

Findings confirm a high prevalence of Axis I PDs (47.4%) and SUDs (67.1%) in PLWHA even after prolonged abstinence from alcohol and drugs. Although prevalence of PDs and SUDs were high in the medical record, there was fair to poor agreement among PDs using the MINI, making evident the potential benefit of more objective and concurrent PD assessments to guide treatment.

Conclusions

Additional PD diagnoses may be detected in PLWHA in CJS using supplementary and objective screening tools. By identifying and treating PDs and SUDs in the CJS, care may be improved and may ultimately contribute to healthier outcomes after community release if patients are effectively transitioned.

Keywords

Psychiatric disorders Prisoners Criminal justice system HIV Substance abuse

Background

One in 100 adults in the United States (U.S.) is incarcerated, with one in 31 under community supervision in parole or probation (Pew Center on the States [2009]). In the incarcerated population, HIV and psychiatric disorders (PDs) are concentrated and syndemic, with each negatively impacting the outcome of treatment and prevention efforts. Axis I PDs and substance use disorders (SUDs) are concentrated among prisoners within the criminal justice system (CJS), being two-fold and 9-fold greater than found in the general population (James et al. [2006]; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [2011]), respectively, as defined by the 4th Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) (American Psychiatric Association. Task Force on, D.-I [2000]); similarly, the prevalence of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) is 3- to 4-fold greater within CJS than the general population, respectively (Spaulding et al. [2009]; Asner-Self et al. [2006]; Diamond et al. [2001]; Baillargeon et al. [2003]). Prison-involved PLWHA have higher rates of PDs than those without HIV, and PDs are higher among this population compared to those who are not incarcerated (Rich et al. [2011]; Altice et al. [2010]).

In the absence of HIV infection, PDs often remain undiagnosed and untreated due to a myriad of reasons (Christiana et al. [2000]; Holden et al. [2012]; Draine et al. [2002]; Link et al. [1997]; Hines-Martin et al. [2003]). It is estimated that 3 in every 5 persons with a mood, anxiety or SUD do not seek professional help in the first year of symptoms, moreover, it is common not to seek help for up to 10 years after symptoms begin (Christiana et al. [2000]). Furthermore, African Americans, who are disproportionately concentrated in the CJS, are less likely than Caucasians to seek help for PDs (Holden et al. [2012]). Prior treatment of PDs and psychiatric symptoms may not be reported to healthcare professionals to avoid the stigma associated with receiving a PD diagnosis (Link et al. [1997]). Additionally, in the presence of active substance use, inadequate diagnosis and treatment of PDs in community settings unwittingly contribute to the overburdened CJS (Draine et al. [2002]), which struggles with insufficient resources, yet these structured settings makes them suitable for standardized screening and treatment algorithms (Finkelstein et al. [2005]; Maruschak and Beavers [2009]; Kamath et al. [2013]). Consequences of undiagnosed and under-treated PDs among PLWHA can result in poor treatment outcomes for those transitioning to the community where the highly structured prison setting is discontinued, resulting in poor access and adherence to combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) (Springer et al. [2012]; Meyer et al. [2011]), suboptimal viral suppression (Uldall et al. [2004]; Springer et al. [2004]; Meyer et al. [2011]; Meyer et al. [2014]) and increased HIV risk-taking behaviors (Goforth and Fernandez [2011]; Buckingham et al. [2013]), repeated incarcerations (Baillargeon et al. [2009]; Baillargeon et al. [2010a]; Baillargeon et al. [2010b]), relapse to drug and alcohol use (Krishnan et al. [2013]), decreased retention in HIV care (Althoff et al. [2013]), a high frequency of emergency department visits (Meyer et al. [2012], [2013]), and a higher risk of death (DeLorenze et al. [2010]). Thus, correctly identifying and treating PDs among HIV-infected prisoners prior to release is crucial for effective transitional care of PLWHA who re-enter the community (Springer et al. [2011]).

Given the negative consequences of PDs on HIV treatment outcomes, we sought to investigate the prevalence of DSM-IV PDs among a cohort of PLWHA prescribed cART who were transitioning from prison to the community, assessed during a prolonged period of likely abstinence from drugs and alcohol, and whether they were diagnosed and treated.

Methods

Participants

This was a retrospective data analysis of a previously described prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) of directly administered antiretroviral treatment (DAART) versus self-administered treatment (SAT) among HIV-infected prisoners prescribed cART and with a pre-incarceration history of heroin or cocaine use in the 6 months prior to incarceration who were transitioning to the community. The details of the trial have been described previously (Altice et al. [2011]; Saber-Tehrani et al. [2012]), but briefly, 154 PLWHA participants prescribed cART, age ≥18 years, and within 90 days of release and returning to two areas in Connecticut (New Haven or Hartford) upon release (F.L. Altice et al. [2011]; Saber-Tehrani et al. [2012]) were recruited from 2004 through 2009. All participants underwent a baseline assessment that included demographic characteristics, drug use and addiction severity using the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) (McLellan et al. [1992]; Rikoon et al. [2006]; McLellan et al. [2006]), and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) (Sheehan et al. [1997]; D. V. Sheehan et al. [1998b]; Amorim et al. [1998]; Lecrubier et al. [1997]) assessed DSM-IV PDs in the absence of drug or alcohol use (>7 months) during incarceration and prior to community release. Of the 154 recruited, 37 participants were excluded due to missing data, either the clinical chart review (N = 21), the MINI (N = 13) or both (N = 3) were missing, resulting in 117 participants included in the final analysis (Figure 1). The parent study's randomized intervention was conducted after the baseline assessments were obtained, therefore the intervention did not impact this particular analysis.
Figure 1

Participant consort flow diagram.

Protections of human subjects

The parent study of DAART versus SAT (Altice et al. [2011]; Saber-Tehrani et al. [2012]) was approved by Yale University Human Investigation Committee and Connecticut Department of Correction Research Advisory Committee. Due to the inclusion of prisoners in this study additional assurances were provided by the Office of Human Research Protections and a Certificate of Confidentially was obtained.

Measures of psychiatric disorders

After extensive training by developers of the MINI 5.0 computerized version, trained researchers administered the MINI to participants while they were abstinent from alcohol or drugs. It is a short diagnostic interview with excellent reliability and validity for DSM-IV diagnoses (Sheehan et al. [1997]; D. V. Sheehan et al. [1998b]; Amorim et al. [1998]; Lecrubier et al. [1997]) and validated to the Structured Clinical Interview (SCID-P) (Spitzer et al. [1992]), and the Composite International Diagnostics (CIDI) (Robins et al. [1988]) for International Statistical Classification of Disease (ICD-10) (D. Sheehan et al. [1997]; Sheehan et al. [1998b]; Amorim et al. [1998]; Lecrubier et al. [1997]) with high construct validity and internal and external consistency. For this analysis, current (the past 12 months) and lifetime symptom diagnoses from selected MINI 5.0 modules, were used as the "gold standard" (Sheehan et al. [1997]; Sheehan et al. [1998b]; Amorim et al. [1998]; Lecrubier et al. [1997]).

For care and treatment, the Connecticut Department of Correction (CTDOC) contracts the University of Connecticut Health Center Correctional Managed Health Care to follow a standardized Mental Health Policy (State of CT Dept of Correction, [2008]), which outlines the screening and evaluation process. Intake screenings are conducted by a licensed social worker or registered nurse within 24 hours of referrals for: all first time incarcerations, those discharged from a psychiatric facility within 30 days, those who display or indicate suicidal ideation within 30 days of incarceration, inmates that are indicated by the court or concerned party to have mental health concerns, or inmates with either self or concerned party reports of a history of suicide attempts or plans within three years. Additionally, self-referrals or referrals from concerned parties are evaluated within 72 hours (State of CT Dept of Correction [2008]). Through a class action lawsuit, additional mental health screening is mandated for prisoners with HIV. Inmate classification scores are used by the CTDOC to quantify the severity of health care needs related to underlying PDs ranging from 1 (no issues) to 5 (24-hour nursing needs). (These classification scores are available at: http://www.ct.gov/doc/lib/doc/PDF/PDFReport/ClassificationManualLibraryCopy.pdf). Although no standardized screening tools are used, all HIV-infected prisoners are assessed further by a licensed professional. After screening, triage to other professionals for further assessment and treatment is performed when indicated and the diagnoses noted within the clinical record are used as the basis within prison. Medical records reflect all diagnoses from community medical records and those made within the CTDOC and are noted as active or inactive.

Additional measures

Baseline characteristics included gender, age, ethnicity, housing status, education level, randomization group (DAART vs. SAT), drug use assessment of opioid or cocaine use, hazardous drinking, participation in pre-incarceration opioid substitution therapy and employment status. All SUDs using the MINI or Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) (Saunders et al. [1993]; Barbor [2001]) assessed the 12-month time period before the incarceration. Opioid and cocaine use disorders were determined by using DSM-IV criteria for opioid or cocaine dependence and abuse; alcohol use disorders were assessed by the AUDIT, scores of eight or greater for men or four or greater for women were used to define an alcohol use disorder (Bradley et al. [1998]; National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism [2005]). Score for opioid, cocaine and alcohol use disorders were coded dichotomously. Additional drug use and addiction and psychiatric symptom severity was ascertained using the ASI version 5 (McLellan et al. [1992]) as well as psychiatric symptom severity for the 30 days prior to incarceration. The ASI composite drug (>0.16), alcohol (>0.17) and psychiatric (>0.22) scores were reported as dichotomous variables using cut-offs scores shown to have high levels of sensitivity and specificity for DSM-IV diagnoses (Rikoon et al. [2006]; Calsyn et al. [2004]).

Additional baseline characteristics collected from the participant's prison medical record included prescription information for psychiatric medications, incarceration dates, antiretroviral (cART) medications, and pre-release HIV treatment status consisting of: HIV RNA viral load (VL), and CD4 lymphocyte counts (CD4).

Analysis

Bivariate logistic regression analyses of the different psychiatric diagnosis by the MINI or medical record were used to assess the differences in baseline demographic characteristics. Statistical significance was defined at p < 0.05 for all associations. Levels of agreement between the MINI and medical record were calculated using Cohen's Kappa (Cohen [1960]). Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS Version 19 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

MINI diagnoses were compared to diagnoses recorded in the correctional medical record using logistic regression. Diagnoses from both the MINI and medical record were categorized into three major types of Axis I disorders: mood, anxiety and thought disorders. Mood disorders included current symptom diagnoses within past 12 months of major depression and bipolar disorders; anxiety disorders included current (past 12 month) symptom diagnosis of panic disorder, agoraphobia, obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and lifetime symptom diagnosis for panic disorder; and thought disorders included psychotic disorder with and without schizophrenic features for current and lifetime symptom diagnoses.

Results

Demographic characteristics

Baseline characteristics (Table 1) demonstrated that participants were primarily Black (53.8%) or Hispanic (32.5%) men (82.1%) in their mid-40s. Over half (51.3%) anticipated unstable housing (with a family member or friend temporarily, transitional housing, drug treatment facility, or not knowing) or being homeless (24.2%: in a homeless shelter or on the street) upon prison release. Clinically, 29.9% were prescribed psychiatric medications and all were prescribed cART (most were prescribed a protease inhibitor-based cART regimen [64.3%]), the majority (78.6%) achieved viral suppression (VL < 400 copies/mL) prior to release and had a mean CD4 of 403.6 cells/mL.
Table 1

Baseline Characteristics

Baseline characteristics

Total sample

(N=117)

Gender

 

Male

96 (82.1%)

Female

21 (17.9%)

Mean Age, years (SD)

45.4 (±6.9)

Ethnicity

 

White

16 (13.7%)

African-American

63 (53.8%)

Hispanic

38 (32.5%)

Anticipated Housing

 

Unstable Housing

60 (51.3%)

Homeless

29 (24.8%)

Stable Housing

21 (17.9%)

Opioid Use Disorder*

43 (36.8%)

Cocaine Use Disorder*

54 (46.2%)

Hazardous Drinking (AUDIT**)

50 (42.7%)

Viral Load (Baseline)

 

< 400 copies/mL

92 (78.6%)

< 50 copies/mL

66 (56.4%)

Mean Log HIV-1 RNA Level, cells/mL (SD)

2.300 (±1.02)

CD4+ lymphocytes count, cells/mL (SD)

403.61 (±244.4)

Addiction Severity Index Composite Scores

Psychiatric Composite Score (n=112)

 

Mean Severity Score (SD)

0.254 (±0.25)

High Severity (>.22)

52 (46.4%)

Drug Use Composite Score (n=113)

 

Mean Severity Score (SD)

0.085 (±0.08)

High Severity (>.16)

15 (13.3%)

Alcohol Use Composite Score (n=112)

 

Mean Severity Score (SD)

0.055 (±0.11)

High Severity (>.17)

8 (7.1%)

Prescribed Psychiatric Medications

35 (29.9%)

Anti-Depressants

22 (18.8%)

Anti-Psychotics

2 (1.7%)

Mood Stabilizers

1 (0.9%)

Multiple Medications

16 (13.7%)

Any Psychiatric Disorder (n=116)*

55 (47.4%)

Any Mood Disorder*

37 (31.6%)

Any Anxiety Disorder (n=116)*

36 (31.0%)

Any Thought Disorder*

13 (11.1%)

SD=standard deviation.

*Criteria for diagnosis defined by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Substance use disorders combine abuse and dependence diagnosis criteria.

**Hazardous Drinking defined by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), scores ≥8 for men, ≥4 for women.

Prevalence of psychiatric disorders

Table 2 depicts the agreement of PD diagnoses made by the MINI and medical record. Both the MINI (47.4%) and medical record (44.8%) confirmed high prevalence of having any PD; concordance between the two was considered fair. Using the MINI, the prevalence of mood disorders was 31.6% overall, with 12.8% of the full sample meeting criteria for major depressive disorder and 18.8% for bipolar disorder. Similarly, 31.0% met criteria for having an anxiety disorder, with 14.7% having panic disorder, 12.0% OCD, 6.9% PTSD and 11.2% GAD. Last, 11.1% of the sample met criteria of having a thought disorder, with 7.7% having a current psychotic disorder and an additional 3.4% met criteria for lifetime psychotic disorder.
Table 2

Diagnoses Frequencies by Measure and Kappa Values

Psychiatric Disorder (N=117)

MINI diagnosis

Medical record diagnosis

No diagnosis by either measures

Diagnoses captured by both measures

Kappa level of agreement

Any diagnosis (n=116)

55 (47.4%)

52 (44.8%)

42 (36.2%)

33 (28.4%)

0.294 Fair

Mood disorder

37 (31.6%)

34 (29.1%)

62 (53.0%)

16 (29.1%)

0.212 Fair

Major Depressive Disorder

15 (12.8%)

26 (22.2%)

82 (70.1%)

6 (24%)

0.155 Poor

Bipolar Disorder

22 (18.8%)

15 (12.8%)

82 (70.1%)

2 (5.7%)

-0.052 Poor

Anxiety disorder (n=116)

36 (31.0%)

17 (14.7%)

70 (59.8%)

7 (15.2%)

0.081 Poor

Panic Disorder

17 (14.7%)

0 (0.0%)

99 (85.3%)

0 (0.0%)

0.000 Poor

Obsessive Compulsive

     

Disorder

14 (12.0%)

0 (0.0%)

103 (88.0%)

0 (0.0%)

0.000 Poor

Post-Traumatic Stress

     

Disorder

8 (6.9%)

13 (11.2%)

97 (82.9%)

1 (5%)

0.012 Poor

Generalized Anxiety

13 (11.2%)

5 (4.3%)

99 (85.3%)

1 (5.9%)

0.052 Poor

Thought disorder

13 (11.1%)

16 (13.7%)

91 (77.8%)

3 (11.5%)

0.096 Poor

While the prevalence of mood and thought disorders was similar using the MINI and the medical record, anxiety disorders were higher using the MINI (31.0% versus 14.7%, p = 0.33). Among the subgroups of anxiety disorders, the MINI diagnosed significantly more panic disorders (14.7% vs. 0%, p < 0.001), and OCD (12.0% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) when compared to diagnoses documented in the medical record.

Agreement of Psychiatric Disorder diagnoses

Despite that both the MINI and the medical record review confirmed high levels of PD, the level of agreement between the two was at best, fair, and mostly poor. The highest (fair) level of agreement (kappa = 0.289) was found for having any PD diagnosis suggesting being correctly diagnosed with a PD. When we further examined the levels of agreement for specific diagnoses, however, levels of agreement decreased. Levels of agreement for those diagnosed with a mood disorder supported a fair level of agreement (kappa = 0.212), however, there was considerable disagreement for major depressive (kappa = 0.155) and bipolar (kappa = –0.052) disorders, respectively.

Levels of agreement for any anxiety disorder (kappa = 0.081) or thought disorder (kappa = 0.096) were poor and remained similarly low for each specific diagnosis among the various anxiety and thought disorders examined.

Co-morbidity of substance use disorders

Overall, SUDs were highly prevalent along with the various PDs (Table 3). Using the MINI criteria, the prevalence of any SUD among participants who also met criteria for any Axis I PD were statistically significantly greater (p = 0.007, CI 95% 1.331-6.202) than those without an identified Axis I PD diagnosis (70.9% vs. 45.9%).
Table 3

Prevalence of Co-Morbidity of Substance Use and Psychiatric Disorders

 

Tool used for diagnosis

Regression results for any disorder diagnosis

Prevalence of substance use disorders

Any psychiatric disorder

MINI (N=55)

Medical record (N=52)

No diagnosis by either measure (N=42)

OR

95% Confidence intervals

Hazardous Drinking

25 (48.1%)

24 (46.2%)

17 (40.5%)

1.207

(0.557-2.615)

Opioid Use Disorder

15 (28.8%)

24 (46.2%)

13 (31.0%)

1.521

(0.682-3.392)

Cocaine Use Disorder

29 (55.8%)

28 (53.8%)

16 (38.1%)

1.715

(0.793-3.711)

 

Mood disorder

MINI (N=37)

Medical record (N=34)

No diagnosis by either measure (N=62)

OR

95% Confidence intervals

Hazardous Drinking

19 (51.4%)

18 (52.9%)

22 (35.5%)

1.035

(0.467-2.293)

Opioid Use Disorder

15 (40.5%)

16 (47.1%)

21 (33.9%)

1.250

(0.558-2.802)

Cocaine Use Disorder

20 (54.1%)

19 (55.9%)

25 (40.3%)

0.857

(0.397-1.851)

 

Anxiety disorder

 

MINI (N=36)

Medical record (N=17)

No disorder by either measure (N=70)

OR

95% Confidence intervals

Hazardous Drinking

15 (41.7%)

10 (58.8%)

27 (38.6%)

1.668

(0.774-3.595)

Opioid Use Disorder

17 (47.2%)

12 (70.6%)

20 (28.6%)

2.500*

(1.150-5.435)

Cocaine Use Disorder

18 (50%)

11 (64.7%)

27 (38.6%)

1.950

(0.917-4.145)

 

Thought disorder

 

MINI (N=13)

Medical record (N=16)

No diagnosis by either measure (N=91)

OR

95% Confidence intervals

Hazardous Drinking

9 (69.2%)

8 (50%)

36 (40.9%)

0.593

(0.699-4.064)

Opioid Use Disorder

7 (53.8%)

6 (37.5%)

32 (35.2%)

1.352

(0.556-3.289)

Cocaine Use Disorder

9 (69.2%)

5 (31.3%)

42 (46.2%)

1.000

(0.417-2.397)

OR: Odds Ratio.

Hazardous Drinking defined by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), scores ≥8 for men, ≥4 for women (N=113).

Opioid and Cocaine Use Disorder defined by DSM-IV criteria via the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) for abuse and dependence.

*p<0.05.

SUD co-morbidities among those who met criteria for an anxiety disorder using the MINI or the medical record were also high. Those with an anxiety disorder diagnosis by the MINI or medical record versus those without a diagnosis were statistically significantly more likely to meet criteria for opioid use disorder (p = 0.021, CI 95% 1.150-5.435). Elevated, but non-statistically significant differences were found for those with an anxiety disorder and having a concurrent cocaine or alcohol use disorders.

Discussion

This study confirms high prevalence of both PDs and SUDs among HIV-infected prisoners who are transitioning to the community. It is imperative to accurately identify and treat these disorders before release since each can independently and negatively contribute to poor post-release treatment outcomes if left untreated.

The aim of the study was to compare differences in PD diagnoses when using a relatively quick and validated DSM-IV screening tool, the MINI (Lecrubier et al. [1997]; D. V. Sheehan et al. [1998a]; D. V. Sheehan et al. [1998b]), and compare findings to the medical record diagnosis of PLWHA during incarceration when they are mostly free from alcohol and drugs. Central to this study's findings is that it is challenging to make a PD diagnosis in the setting of active drug or alcohol use, but all of the study participants had been incarcerated for approximately 7 months and expect for unusual conditions, free from alcohol or drugs. This is also the first English-language study that examines the prevalence of Axis I PDs and SUDs among a group of HIV-infected prisoners who are transitioning to the community, and additionally compares the diagnoses made during incarceration. The hypothesis we formed was that the diagnoses would differ between the two measures and we found a fair level of agreement between the MINI and prison medical record for those with any PD, and fair to poor degrees of concordance between the three major categories explored in this analysis. The prevalence of mood disorders was similar based between the MINI and medical record (31.6% and 29.1%), but of those, only 28.6% were diagnosed using both measures. Anxiety disorder diagnoses were found to be different between the measures (MINI 31.0% vs. 14.7% medical record), however, and only 15.2% of individuals shared a diagnosis using both assessments. Similarly, the prevalence of thought disorders was 11.1% using the MINI vs. 13.7% using the medical record, with a mutual concordant diagnosis of only 11.5% from both measures. The prison medical record diagnoses matched moderately well with the MINI, thus suggesting that the prison system does a reasonable job in screening for PD among the inmates, although the kappa values suggest that significant improvements can be made for certain diagnoses.

Given the continuous concern of suicide among prisoners, screening questions that focus on measuring suicidal ideation, depression and psychosis and less on anxiety and thought disorders, may explain the higher rates of agreement for mood disorders versus the other disorders. Despite the staff and budget limitations of prisons, correctional facilities are able to improve and maintain the health of the inmates by directly administering the inmate's medications, providing increased medical attention, having access to support from staff and the general structure of prisons thus allowing inmates to live a more organized life. Extensive efforts have created a system to improve successful linkage of PLWHA upon release from prisons to appropriate community services, enabling continuity of care including the possible continuation of directly administered medications, for not only for cART but all medications, including psychiatric medications. Findings here, however, support the integration of HIV and psychiatric care for transitional care programs.

The prevalence of mood disorders by either measure in this study is high when compared to 6.8% in the general population (Reeves et al. [2011]), and some other correctional systems like in Texas where only 11.0% had reported diagnoses of major depressive, bipolar, non-schizophrenic psychotic disorders or schizophrenia (Baillargeon et al. [2009]). Similarly, 12.3% of U.S. adults report a lifetime diagnosis of an anxiety disorder, with higher prevalence among women and non-Hispanic white groups (Reeves et al. [2011]); much lower than the rate of 31.0% found in this analysis. Additionally, this analysis found an astounding prevalence of bipolar disorder (18.8%) compared to 1.7% nationally (Reeves et al. [2011]). Given the likely impulsivity of those with poorly controlled bipolar disorder and its contribution to SUDs, a targeted treatment plan to stabilize this population during incarceration and post-release to the community may improve retention in care, reduce relapse to drug and alcohol use and decrease HIV risk behaviors. Importantly, properly diagnosing bipolar disorder has important implications since treatments differ from other mood disorders. The prevalence in this study was also greater than those found in a different study of the Texas prisoners using the diagnosis of PDs solely from the medical record (Baillargeon et al. [2009]) where only 11.0% of 71,333 Texas inmates were diagnosed with a PD (Baillargeon et al. [2009]); and higher prevalence of PDs among HIV-infected when compared to their HIV negative counterparts (Baillargeon et al. [2003]). Overall there appears to be variance of reported PD diagnosis among prisoners in other studies, which may be due to the type of diagnostic screening tool utilized by correctional facilities line in Texas (Baillargeon et al. [2009]; Baillargeon et al. [2003]).

Although this study was specific to PLWHA, it is well known that PD are very common among all persons with the CJS including HIV uninfected persons. Thus likely improving accuracy of diagnosis of PD will improve care not only among PLWHA but also for all persons within the CJS and post-release (Brink [2005]). The MINI is not a gold standard over a trained psychiatric assessment of psychiatric disorders, but given the high concentration of PDs in the U.S. prisons, a standardized psychiatric diagnostic screening tool that can be administered quickly and accurately would enhance existing screening policies. Additionally, screening during every new admission could identify new symptoms of PD, allowing the facility to initiate treatment and arrange for continued treatment upon release. A single screening upon intake especially for those coming directly from the community where active drug or alcohol use, however, could complicate diagnostics and might lead to inaccurate diagnoses. Thus, innovative strategies that make acute PD diagnoses followed by assessments after periods of abstinence might better serve prisoners. For the duration of incarceration and after release, treatment of PD can increase cART adherence (Blower et al. [2000]), and reduce sexual risk behavior (Kalichman [2008]). Increased surveillance, treatment and continued care may also have implications for reduced PD symptoms thereby reducing relapse and reincarceation (Fu et al. [2013]). As a result, it may also improve the safety of the community and potentially reduce the risk of HIV transmission by reducing risk behaviors (Spaulding et al. [2002]).

Important in this analysis is the high prevalence of PD among HIV-infected prisoners transitioning to the community. Although standard PD screening algorithms in prisons identified many diagnoses, some were not identified and others were incorrectly diagnosed. While not all CJS settings may opt to use the MINI due to budgetary constraints (costs for the proprietary screening instrument or staff time required to administer it), brief and accurate validated screening and diagnostic instruments for PDs should be considered to consistently identify the PD to offer appropriate treatment and later refer to community resources upon release. Such validated PD screens developed specifically for CJS exist (Ford et al. [2009]; Steadman et al. [2005]) and can serve as a first stage in an efficient diagnostic process. Correctly identifying Axis I PDs and SUDs is of high importance for CJS-involved patients, while alternative ways to improve psychiatric treatment continue to be pursued. The calculus is heightened especially for PLWHA who also must transition effectively to the community. The transition from correctional facility to the community has been shown to be a troublesome time; and it has been shown that PD is a factor in reincarceration (Binswanger et al. [2007]; Baillargeon et al. [2010a]; Fu et al. [2013]). A focused treatment plan during their incarceration and after release is an important opportunity to reduce this risk that should include screening to identify PDs.

Strengths and limitations

To our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating a specific DSM-IV disorder validated tool to evaluate prison-based psychiatric diagnoses among HIV-infected prisoners. By conducting this analysis we are able to begin to construct a single state system image of the current state of the mental health of HIV-infected prisoners, and find areas to improve comprehensive care. Limited within this evaluation, however, is the retrospective nature of this study among PLWHA in the CT CJS and a sample size that was not determined a priori to support this analysis, and limits the generalizability. Additionally, limited data were available to contribute to the different PD diagnoses including their association with criminal justice history. Nonetheless, it demonstrated high levels of PDs and SUDs in this population. The MINI 5.0 version used in this analysis did not include lifetime diagnosis criteria for all of the PDs, therefore the diagnosis of bipolar disorder becomes challenging given that there may be symptoms that have not manifested within the 12 months of pre-release assessment (potentially reducing the apparent prevalence). For those subjects incarcerated less than one year, there is also concern for confounding SUDs that may have masked or mimicked some symptoms as well. Additionally, a majority of the participants in the analysis have a history of prior incarcerations, and therefore it is likely that the diagnoses in the medical records may be older than the MINI diagnoses. In this context, the current sample diagnosed with a mood disorder had a co-morbid diagnosis of cocaine use disorder 54.1% and opioid use disorder 40.5%. Additional research is needed in this area to explore brief, validated screening instruments for PD to improve early identification, initiate appropriate psychiatric treatment and ensure continuity of care post-release in order to guide integrated care efforts for PLWHA with multiple co-occurring disorders as they transition to the community (Ford et al. [2009]; Steadman et al. [2005]).

Conclusions

A consistent screening and assessment protocol for all DSM-IV PDs in the CJS may improve care in the facilities and with proper referrals, may improve retention in care upon release. Given that all PLWHA are now recommended to initiate cART, such strategies should have great impact on HIV treatment as prevention efforts (Montaner [2013]). Those with PDs increase the burden of care in prisons and the community upon release. Addressing the issue of identification and appropriate treatment for PDs in a controlled environment such as during incarceration can have implications within correctional facilities and later in the community. Given the recent release of DSM-V, this would be an ideal time for all correctional facilities and community supervision program to evaluate their current policies regarding PDs screening and treatment. Further research is needed in this area to examine the full implications of increased screening for PDs among PLWHA.

Authors' contributions

FLA was responsible for the funding and the parent trial. AD, FLA and SAS were responsible for the analytic study design and AD and SAS drafted the manuscript. AD conducted the data analysis. FLA, MLP and RLT drafted selected sections of the manuscript. All authors provided feedback and approved the final manuscript.

Abbreviations

CJS: 

criminal justice system

PD: 

psychiatric disorder

SUD: 

substance use disorder

PLWHA: 

people living with HIV/AIDS

MINI: 

Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview

cART: 

combination antiretroviral therapy

RCT: 

randomized controlled trial

DAART: 

directly administered antiretroviral treatment

SAT: 

self-administered treatment

CTDOC: 

Connecticut Department of Correction

AUDIT: 

Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test

ASI: 

Addiction Severity Index

VL: 

HIV RNA viral load

CD4: 

CD4 lymphocyte counts

OCD: 

obsessive compulsive disorder

PTSD: 

post-traumatic stress disorder

GAD: 

generalized anxiety disorder

Declarations

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge the participants of the parent study; all the clinical, research and support staff at Yale Community and Clinical Research; and Dr. Alexei Zelenev at the Yale AIDS Program for statistical advice. Funding was provided by the National Institute of Drug Abuse for research (R01 DA017059) and career development (K02 DA032322 for SAS and K24 DA017072 for FLA). The funding sources played no role in this study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, writing of the manuscript or the discussion to submit the paper for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Infectious Diseases, AIDS Program
(2)
Yale University School of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases
(3)
University of Connecticut Health Center, Correctional Managed Health Care

References

  1. Althoff AL, Zelenev A, Meyer JP, Fu J, Brown SE, Vagenas P, Avery AK, Cruzado-Quinones JH, Spaulding AC, Altice FL: Correlates of retention in HIV care after release from jail: results from a multi-site study. AIDS and Behavior 2013, 17(Suppl 2):S156-S170. doi:10.1007/s10461–012–0372–1 doi:10.1007/s10461-012-0372-1 10.1007/s10461-012-0372-1View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Altice FL, Kamarulzaman A, Soriano VV, Schechter M, Friedland GH: Treatment of medical, psychiatric, and substance-use comorbidities in people infected with HIV who use drugs. Lancet 2010, 376(9738):367–387. doi:S0140–6736(10)60829-X [pii] 10.1016/S0140–6736(10)60829-X doi:S0140-6736(10)60829-X [pii] 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60829-X 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60829-XView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Altice FL, Tehrani AS, Qiu J, Herme M, Springer SA: Directly Administered Antriretroviral Therapy (DAART) is Superior to Self-Administered Therapy (SAT) Among Released HIV + Prisoners: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial. 2011.Google Scholar
  4. American Psychiatric Association. Task Force on, D.-I. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders : DSM-IV-TR. American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC; 2000.Google Scholar
  5. Amorim P, Lecrubier Y, Weiller E, Hergueta T, Sheehan D: DSM-IH-R Psychotic Disorders: procedural validity of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Concordance and causes for discordance with the CIDI. European Psychiatry 1998, 13(1):26–34. doi:10.1016/S0924–9338(97)86748-X doi:10.1016/S0924-9338(97)86748-X 10.1016/S0924-9338(97)86748-XView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Asner-Self KK, Schreiber JB, Marotta SA: A cross-cultural analysis of the Brief Symptom Inventory-18. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology 2006, 12(2):367–375. doi:2006–05763–013 [pii] 10.1037/1099–9809.12.2.367 doi:2006-05763-013 [pii] 10.1037/1099-9809.12.2.367 10.1037/1099-9809.12.2.367View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Baillargeon J, Ducate S, Pulvino J, Bradshaw P, Murray O, Olvera R: The association of psychiatric disorders and HIV infection in the correctional setting. Annals of Epidemiology 2003, 13(9):606–612. doi:10.1016/S1047–2797(03)00061–9 S1047279703000619 [pii] doi:10.1016/S1047-2797(03)00061-9 S1047279703000619 [pii] 10.1016/S1047-2797(03)00061-9View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Baillargeon J, Binswanger IA, Penn JV, Williams BA, Murray OJ: Psychiatric disorders and repeat incarcerations: the revolving prison door. The American Journal of Psychiatry 2009, 166(1):103–109. doi:appi.ajp.2008.08030416 [pii] 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08030416 doi:appi.ajp.2008.08030416 [pii] 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08030416 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08030416View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Baillargeon J, Giordano TP, Harzke AJ, Spaulding AC, Wu ZH, Grady JJ, Baillargeon G, Paar DP: Predictors of reincarceration and disease progression among released HIV-infected inmates. AIDS Patient Care and STDs 2010a, 24(6):389–394. doi:10.1089/apc.2009.0303 doi:10.1089/apc.2009.0303 10.1089/apc.2009.0303View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Baillargeon J, Penn JV, Knight K, Harzke AJ, Baillargeon G, Becker EA: Risk of reincarceration among prisoners with co-occurring severe mental illness and substance use disorders. Administration and Policy in Mental Health 2010, 37(4):367–374. doi:10.1007/s10488–009–0252–9 doi:10.1007/s10488-009-0252-9 10.1007/s10488-009-0252-9View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Barbor, T, Higgins-Biddle, JC, Saunders, JB, & Montero, MG. (2001). AUDIT-the alcohol use disorders identification test. Guidelines for Use in Primary Care. Second Edition, WHO.Google Scholar
  12. Binswanger IA, Stern MF, Deyo RA, Heagerty PJ, Cheadle A, Elmore JG, Koepsell TD: Release from prison--a high risk of death for former inmates. New England Journal of Medicine 2007, 356(2):157–165. doi:356/2/157 [pii] 10.1056/NEJMsa064115 doi:356/2/157 [pii] 10.1056/NEJMsa064115 10.1056/NEJMsa064115View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Blower SM, Gershengorn HB, Grant RM: A tale of two futures: HIV and antiretroviral therapy in San Francisco. [Comment Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.]. Science 2000, 287(5453):650–654. 10.1126/science.287.5453.650View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Bradley KA, Bush KR, McDonell MB, Malone T, Fihn SD: Screening for problem drinking: Comparison of CAGE and AUDIT. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1998, 13(6):379–388. doi:10.1046/j.1525–1497.1998.00118.x doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00118.x 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00118.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Brink J: Epidemiology of mental illness in a correctional system. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 2005, 18(5):536–541. doi:10.1097/01.yco.0000179493.15688.78 00001504–200509000–00014 [pii] doi:10.1097/01.yco.0000179493.15688.78 00001504-200509000-00014 [pii] 10.1097/01.yco.0000179493.15688.78View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Buckingham E, Schrage E, Cournos F: Why the Treatment of Mental Disorders Is an Important Component of HIV Prevention among People Who Inject Drugs. Advance Preventive Medicine 2013, 2013: 690386. doi:10.1155/2013/690386 doi:10.1155/2013/690386Google Scholar
  17. Calsyn DA, Saxon AJ, Bush KR, Howell DN, Baer JS, Sloan KL, Malte CA, Kivlahan DR: The Addiction Severity Index medical and psychiatric composite scores measure similar domains as the SF-36 in substance-dependent veterans: concurrent and discriminant validity. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2004, 76(2):165–171. doi:S0376871604001309 [pii] 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.04.018 doi:S0376871604001309 [pii] 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.04.018 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.04.018View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Christiana JM, Gilman SE, Guardino M, Mickelson K, Morselli PL, Olfson M, Kessler RC: Duration between onset and time of obtaining initial treatment among people with anxiety and mood disorders: an international survey of members of mental health patient advocate groups. Psychological Medicine 2000, 30(3):693–703. 10.1017/S0033291799002093View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Cohen J: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960, 20(1):37–46. 10.1177/001316446002000104View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. DeLorenze GN, Satre DD, Quesenberry CP, Tsai AL, Weisner CM: Mortality after diagnosis of psychiatric disorders and co-occurring substance use disorders among HIV-infected patients. AIDS Patient Care and STDs 2010, 24(11):705–712. doi:10.1089/apc.2010.0139 doi:10.1089/apc.2010.0139 10.1089/apc.2010.0139View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Diamond PM, Wang EW, Holzer CE 3rd, Thomas C, des Anges C: The prevalence of mental illness in prison. Administration and Policy in Mental Health 2001, 29(1):21–40. 10.1023/A:1013164814732View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Draine J, Salzer MS, Culhane DP, Hadley TR: Role of social disadvantage in crime, joblessness, and homelessness among persons with serious mental illness. Psychiatric Services 2002, 53(5):565–573. 10.1176/appi.ps.53.5.565View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Finkelstein R, Tiger R, Netherland J: Appendix E: Towards an Understanding of Meeting HIV-Infected Substance Users. In Public Financing and Delivery of HIV/AIDS Care: Securing the Legacy of Ryan White. Edited by: Council NR. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC; 2005:313–339.Google Scholar
  24. Ford JD, Trestman RL, Wiesbrock VH, Zhang W: Validation of a brief screening instrument for identifying psychiatric disorders among newly incarcerated adults. Psychiatric Services 2009, 60(6):842–846. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.60.6.842 doi:10.1176/appi.ps.60.6.842 10.1176/appi.ps.60.6.842View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Fu JJ, Herme M, Wickersham JA, Zelenev A, Althoff A, Zaller ND, Bazai AR, Avery AK, Porterfield J, Jordan AO, Simon-Levine D, Lyman M, Altice FL: Understanding the revolving door: individual and structural-level predictors of recidivism among individuals with HIV leaving jail. AIDS and Behavior 2013, 17(Suppl 2):S145-S155. doi:10.1007/s10461–013–0590–1 doi:10.1007/s10461-013-0590-1 10.1007/s10461-013-0590-1View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Goforth HW, Fernandez F: The Triple Threat: Mental Illness, Substance Abuse, and the Human Immunodeficiency Virus. In Addiction medicine. Edited by: Johnson BA. Springer, New York; 2011:1181–1194.Google Scholar
  27. Hines-Martin V, Malone M, Kim S, Brown-Piper A: Barriers to mental health care access in an African American population. Issues in Mental Health Nursing 2003, 24(3):237–256. 10.1080/01612840305281View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Holden KB, McGregor BS, Blanks SH, Mahaffey C: Psychosocial, socio-cultural, and environmental influences on mental health help-seeking among African-American men. Journal of Men's Health 2012, 9(2):63–69. doi:10.1016/j.jomh.2012.03.002 doi:10.1016/j.jomh.2012.03.002 10.1016/j.jomh.2012.03.002View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. James DJ, Glaze LE: Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, DC, U.S.; 2006.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Kalichman SC: Co-occurrence of treatment nonadherence and continued HIV transmission risk behaviors: implications for positive prevention interventions. Psychosomatic Medicine 2008, 70(5):593–597. doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181773bce doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181773bce 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181773bceView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Kamath J, Zhang W, Kesten K, Wakai S, Shelton D, Trestman R: Algorithm-driven pharmacological management of bipolar disorder in Connecticut prisons. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 2013, 57(2):251–264. doi:10.1177/0306624X11427537 doi:10.1177/0306624X11427537 10.1177/0306624X11427537View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Krishnan A, Wickersham JA, Chitsaz E, Springer SA, Jordan AO, Zaller N, Altice FA: Post-release substance abuse outcomes among HIV-infected jail detainees: results from a multisite study. AIDS and Behavior 2013, 17(Suppl 2):S171-S180. doi:10.1007/s10461–012–0362–3 doi:10.1007/s10461-012-0362-3 10.1007/s10461-012-0362-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Lecrubier Y, Sheehan DV, Weiller E, Amorim P, Bonora I, Sheehan KH, Janavs J, Dunbar GC: The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). A short diagnostic structured interview: Reliability and validity according to the CIDI. European Psychiatry 1997, 12(5):224–231. doi:10.1016/S0924–9338(97)83296–8 doi:10.1016/S0924-9338(97)83296-8 10.1016/S0924-9338(97)83296-8View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Link BG, Struening EL, Rahav M, Phelan JC, Nuttbrock L: On stigma and its consequences: evidence from a longitudinal study of men with dual diagnoses of mental illness and substance abuse. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 1997, 38(2):177–190. 10.2307/2955424View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Maruschak L, Beavers R: HIV in Prisons, 2007–08. In Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Washington, D.C.: U.S; 2009.Google Scholar
  36. McLellan AT, Kushner H, Metzger D, Peters R, Smith I, Grissom G, Pettinati H, Argeriou M: The Fifth Edition of the Addiction Severity Index. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 1992, 9(3):199–213. 10.1016/0740-5472(92)90062-SView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. McLellan AT, Cacciola JC, Alterman AI, Rikoon SH, Carise D: The Addiction Severity Index at 25: origins, contributions and transitions. American Journal on Addictions 2006, 15(2):113–124. doi:10.1080/10550490500528316 doi:10.1080/10550490500528316 10.1080/10550490500528316View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Meyer JP, Chen NE, Springer SA: HIV Treatment in the Criminal Justice System: Critical Knowledge and Intervention Gaps. AIDS Research and Treatment 2011, 2011: 680617. doi:10.1155/2011/680617 doi:10.1155/2011/680617 10.1155/2011/680617View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Meyer JP, Qiu J, Chen NE, Larkin GL, Altice FL: Emergency department use by released prisoners with HIV: an observational longitudinal study. PloS One 2012, 7(8):e42416. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042416 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042416 10.1371/journal.pone.0042416View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Meyer JP, Qiu J, Chen NE, Larkin GL, Altice FL: Frequent emergency department use among released prisoners with human immunodeficiency virus: characterization including a novel multimorbidity index. Academic Emergency Medicine 2013, 20(1):79–88. doi:10.1111/acem.12054 doi:10.1111/acem.12054 10.1111/acem.12054View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Meyer, JP, Cepeda, J, Springer, SA, Wu, J, Trestman, RL, & Altice, FL. (2014). HIV in people reincarcerated in Connecticut prisons and jails: an observational cohort study. Lancet HIV, In Press. ., [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2352–3018(14)70025–6].Google Scholar
  42. Montaner JS: Treatment as prevention: toward an AIDS-free generation. Top Antiviral Medicine 2013, 21(3):110–114.Google Scholar
  43. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (2005). Helping Patients Who Drink Too Much: A Clinician's Guide. Available at: . Accessed December 12 2012., [http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/Practitioner/CliniciansGuide2005/clinicians_guide.htm].
  44. Pew Center on the States. (2009). One in 31: The Long Reach of American Corrections Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  45. Reeves WC, Strine TW, Pratt LA, Thompson W, Ahluwalia I, Dhingra SS, McKnight-Eily LR, Harrison L, D'Angelo DV, Williams L, Morrow B, Gould D, Safran MA: Mental illness surveillance among adults in the United States. MMWR Surveillance Summaries 2011, 60(Suppl 3):1–29.Google Scholar
  46. Rich JD, Wohl DA, Beckwith CG, Spaulding AC, Lepp NE, Baillargeon J, Gardner A, Avery A, Altice FL, Springer SA: HIV-Related Research in Correctional Populations: Now is the Time. Current HIV/AIDS Reports 2011, 8(4):288–296. doi:10.1007/s11904–011–0095–3 doi:10.1007/s11904-011-0095-3 10.1007/s11904-011-0095-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  47. Rikoon SH, Cacciola JS, Carise D, Alterman AI, McLellan AT: Predicting DSM-IV dependence diagnoses from Addiction Severity Index composite scores. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 2006, 31(1):17–24. doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2006.03.003 doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2006.03.003 10.1016/j.jsat.2006.03.003View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  48. Robins LN, Wing J, Wittchen HU, Helzer JE, Babor TF, Burke J, Farmer A, Jablenski A, Pickens R, Regier DA, Sartorius N, Towle LH: The Composite International Diagnostic Interview. An epidemiologic Instrument suitable for use in conjunction with different diagnostic systems and in different cultures. Archives of General Psychiatry 1988, 45(12):1069–1077. 10.1001/archpsyc.1988.01800360017003View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  49. Saber-Tehrani AS, Springer SA, Qiu J, Herme M, Wickersham J, Altice FL: Rationale, study design and sample characteristics of a randomized controlled trial of directly administered antiretroviral therapy for HIV-infected prisoners transitioning to the community - a potential conduit to improved HIV treatment outcomes. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2012, 33(2):436–444. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2011.11.002 doi:10.1016/j.cct.2011.11.002 10.1016/j.cct.2011.11.002View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  50. Saunders JB, Aasland OG, Babor TF, de la Fuente JR, Grant M: Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on Early Detection of Persons with Harmful Alcohol Consumption–II. Addiction 1993, 88(6):791–804. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. Sheehan D, Lecrubier Y, Harnett-Sheehan K, Janavs J, Weiller E, Bonors L, Keskiner A, Schinka J, Knapp E, Sheehan MF, Dunbar GC: Reliability and Validity of the MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): According to the SCID-P. European Psychiatry 1997, 12: 232–241. 10.1016/S0924-9338(97)83297-XView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  52. Sheehan DV, Janavs J, Baker R, Harnett-Sheehan K, Knapp E, Sheehan M, Lecrubier Y, Weiller E, Hergueta T, Amorim P, Bonora LI, Lepine JP: MINI - Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview - English Version 5.0.0 - DSM-IV. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 1998a, 59: 34–57.Google Scholar
  53. Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E, Hergueta , Baker R, Dunbar GC: The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. [Comparative Study Historical Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review]. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 1998b, 59(Suppl 20):22–33. quiz 34–57 quiz 34–57Google Scholar
  54. Spaulding A, Stephenson B, Macalino G, Ruby W, Clarke JG, Flanigan TP: Human immunodeficiency virus in correctional facilities: a review. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2002, 35(3):305–312. doi:CID011575 [pii] 10.1086/341418 doi:CID011575 [pii] 10.1086/341418 10.1086/341418View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  55. Spaulding AC, Seals RM, Page MJ, Brzozowski AK, Rhodes W, Hammett TM: HIV/AIDS among inmates of and releasees from US correctional facilities, 2006: declining share of epidemic but persistent public health opportunity. PloS One 2009, 4(11):e7558. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007558 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007558 10.1371/journal.pone.0007558View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  56. Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Gibbon M, First MB: The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID). I: History, rationale, and description. Archives of General Psychiatry 1992, 49(8):624–629. 10.1001/archpsyc.1992.01820080032005View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  57. Springer SA, Pesanti E, Hodges J, Macura T, Doros G, Altice FL: Effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy among HIV-infected prisoners: reincarceration and the lack of sustained benefit after release to the community. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2004, 38(12):1754–1760. 10.1086/421392View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  58. Springer SA, Spaulding AC, Meyer JP, Altice FL: Public health implications for adequate transitional care for HIV-infected prisoners: five essential components. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2011, 53(5):469–479. doi:cir446 [pii] 10.1093/cid/cir446 doi:cir446 [pii] 10.1093/cid/cir446 10.1093/cid/cir446View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  59. Springer SA, Dushaj A, Azar MM: The impact of DSM-IV mental disorders on adherence to combination antiretroviral therapy among adult persons living with HIV/AIDS: a systematic review. AIDS and Behavior 2012, 16(8):2119–2143. doi:10.1007/s10461–012–0212–3 doi:10.1007/s10461-012-0212-3 10.1007/s10461-012-0212-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  60. State of CT Dept of Correction. (2008). Mental health services. Accessed 2/29/2012., [http://www.ct.gov/doc/LIB/doc/PDF/AD/ad0803.pdf].Google Scholar
  61. Steadman HJ, Scott JE, Osher F, Agnese TK, Robbins PC: Validation of the brief jail mental health screen. Psychiatric Services 2005, 56(7):816–822. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.56.7.816 doi:10.1176/appi.ps.56.7.816 10.1176/appi.ps.56.7.816View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  62. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2011). Results from the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings. In NSDUH Series H-41, HHS Publication No. (SMA) 11-4658. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.Google Scholar
  63. Uldall KK, Palmer NB, Whetten K, Mellins C: Adherence in people living with HIV/AIDS, mental illness, and chemical dependency: a review of the literature. AIDS Care 2004, 16(Suppl 1):S71-S96. doi:10.1080/09540120412331315277 doi:10.1080/09540120412331315277 10.1080/09540120412331315277View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Di Paola et al.; licensee Springer. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.