Brief motivation enhancing intervention to prevent criminal recidivism in substance-abusing offenders under supervision: a randomized trial

Figures & data

Figure 1. Flow chart.

Table 1. Baseline demographic characteristics, substance use and criminal behaviour variables stratified by supervision condition.

Variable, % (n) or M (SD)	MEI (n = 111)	SAU (n = 109)	Χ^2 or t	p-Value
Demographic characteristics
Mean age (years)	37.1 (11.31)	37.5 (10.66)	−0.322	0.748
Native, % (n)	65.5 (72)	68.8 (75)	0.279	0.667
Primary education or less, % (n)	83.5 (91)	92.6 (100)	4.266	0.058
Unemployed, % (n)	74.1 (80)	80.6 (87)	1.293	0.330
Substance use
Any prior drug/alcohol treatment, lifetime	56.0 (61)	52.3 (58)	0.305	0.591
Primary substance used			0.657	0.897
Alcohol, % (n)	41.7 (45)	36.4 (39)
Stimulating drugs, % (n)	37.0 (40)	39.3 (42)
Cannabis, % (n)	13.9 (15)	15.9 (17)
Opiates and other drugs, % (n)	7.4 (8)	8.4 (9)
Problematic use at baseline^a			0.529	0.925
No dependence or abuse, % (n)	17.3 (19)	21.1 (23)
Dependence, % (n)	2.7 (3)	2.8 (3)
Abuse, % (n)	24.5 (27)	22.9 (25)
Dependence and abuse, % (n)	55.5 (61)	53.2 (58)
Criminal behaviour
Type of crime for under probation			0.588	0.766
Property, % (n)	30.6 (34)	33.9 (37)
Violence, % (n)	52.3 (58)	52.3 (57)
Drugs and other, % (n)	17.1 (19)	13.8 (15)
Registered crimes in the year at risk prior to arrest, M (SD)	2.2 (2.63)	2.7 (4.4)	−0.864	0.389
Self-reported crimes in the year at risk prior to arrest, M (SD)	73.8 (189.37)	88.8 (163.22)	−0.566	0.572
Detained in the year prior to arrest, % (n)	39.6 (44)	37.6 (41)	0.095	0.783
Days detained in the year prior to arrest, M (SD)	75.5 (69.36)	91.4 (81.04)	−0.969	0.335
Current criminal thinking, at baseline, M (SD)	27.5 (8.70)	26.5 (9.42)	0.794	0.428
Historical criminal thinking, at baseline, M (SD)	27.5 (8.71)	26.5 (9.41)	0.795	0.428

Abbreviations: MEI: motivation enhancing intervention; SAU: supervision-as-usual.

^aSubstance abuse and dependence established with the MATE-Crimi questionnaire based on the CIDI 2.1 (DSM-IV criteria).

Table 2. Relation between MEI and re-offending (yes/no).^a

	Recidivism
	MEI, % (n)	SAU, % (n)	β	SEβ	OR	p	95% CI
Self-report^b	51.3 (39/77)	49.4 (41/83)	.135	.320	1.145	.673	0.611–2.144
Police data	41.4 (46/111)	45.0 (49/109)	−.120	.275	0.887	.663	0.517–1.520
Combined^c	56.8 (63/111)	57.8 (63/109)	.018	.275	1.019	.947	0.594–1.748

Abbreviations: MEI, motivation enhancing intervention sample; SAU, supervision-as-usual sample.

^aLogistic regression analysis with re-offending (yes/no) as dependent and MEI (yes/no) as independent variables and propensity score as covariate to correct for criminal history. Propensity score was calculated based on the following four baseline variables: days detained in the year prior to arrest, registered arrests in the year at risk prior to arrest, self-reported arrests in the year at risk prior to arrest, type of crime for under probation.

^bMissing follow-up self-report data for 60 offenders.

^cSelf-reported and/or police registered re-offending during follow-up period.

Figure 2. Cumulative proportion surviving re-offending for MEI and SAU.

Table 3. Relation between completed MEI and re-offending (yes/no).^a

	Recidivism
	MEIcompleters, % (n)	SAU, % (n)	β	SEβ	OR	p	95% CI
Self-report^b	47.4 (18/38)	49.4 (41/83)	−.034	.399	.967	.932	.442–2.113
Police data	38.0 (19/50)	45.0 (49/109)	−.204	.357	.816	.568	.405–1.641
Combined^c	56.0 (28/50)	57.8 (63/109)	015	.351	1.015	.967	.510–2.019

Abbreviations: MEI_completers: motivation enhancing intervention sample that completed all seven steps of the intervention; SAU: supervision-as-usual sample.

^aLogistic regression analysis with re-offending (yes/no) as dependent and MEI (yes/no) as independent variables and propensity score as covariate to correct for criminal history. Propensity score was calculated based on the following four baseline variables: days detained in the year prior to arrest, registered arrests in the year at risk prior to arrest, self-reported arrests in the year at risk prior to arrest, type of crime for under probation.

^bMissing follow-up self-report data for 60 offenders.

^cSelf-reported and/or police registered re-offending during follow-up period.

Figure 3. Cumulative proportion surviving re-offending for MEI completers and SAU.