[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study examined whether ethnic differences exist in access to care, receipt of services, and associated outcomes of 1,057 offenders participating in California's Proposition 36. Data are based on intake and 3-month follow-up interviews conducted as part of a multisite prospective treatment outcome study. Logistic regressions were conducted to examine ethnicity and other predictors of treatment placement and services intensity. Across ethnic groups, services intensity in several domains was inadequately matched to need, and few services besides substance abuse treatment were provided. Blacks and Hispanics received alcohol and employment services that were not commensurate with their greater need. Although Blacks were more likely to be placed in residential programs, their employment status worsened from intake to follow-up. There were few other ethnic differences in outcomes. Assessing and eliminating ethnic-associated differences in health service delivery, even as moderate as our findings revealed, may improve program processes and outcomes.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study describes utilization of drug abuse treatment and related perceptions among African American, Hispanic, and Anglo drug-using arrestees in Los Angeles. The study extends prior research by, first, describing ethnic variation in treatment utilization through analyses that control for nonethnic demographic factors and by, second, exploring the degree to which ethnicity is related to two predisposing factors (attitude toward treatment and perceived need) and two enabling factors (perceived cost and availability). After nonethnic demographic factors and past drug dependence are controlled, African American and Hispanic drug users in Los Angeles are less likely to report having been in drug abuse treatment. Hispanic drug users are more likely than Anglos to say that they have not sought treatment because they do not need it. African American drug users are more likely than Anglos to hold unfavorable views of treatment.
The Journal of Mental Health Administration 02/1992; 19(3):268-77.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To examine differences in drug treatment service needs, utilization, satisfaction, and outcomes between Hispanic and white methamphetamine (meth) abusers.
Intake assessments and follow-up interviews of 128 Hispanic and 371 non-Hispanic white meth abusers admitted during 2000-2001 to 43 drug treatment programs in 13 counties across California.
A prospective longitudinal study comparing ethnic differences in problem severity during pre- and posttreatment periods, as well as in services received during treatment.
The Addiction Severity Index (ASI) was administered at both intake and the 9-month follow-up to assess clients' problem severity in a number of domains. Service utilization and satisfaction were assessed 3 months following treatment admission.
Hispanics were less educated and reported more employment difficulties than whites. Whites were more likely to be treated in residential programs than Hispanics despite similar severity in drug and alcohol use, legal, medical and family/social problems, and psychiatric status. Significantly more whites than Hispanics received psychiatric services, likely because more of them were treated in residential programs. Whites also reported receiving greater numbers of total services and services addressing alcohol and psychiatric problems. While no ethnic differences were found in treatment satisfaction and several other outcomes, Hispanics demonstrated better family and social outcomes than whites.
Both Hispanic and white meth abusers improved after treatment, although benefits from treatment can be further enhanced if services underscore different facets of their psychosocial problems.
Health Services Research 09/2006; 41(4 Pt 1):1242-57. · 2.29 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.