Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Sexual Health Sexual Health Society
Publishing on sexual health from the widest perspective
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > SH > SH23181
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 21(2)

Juvenile probation officers delivering an intervention for substance use significantly reduces adolescents’ risky sexual behaviours

Rebecca L. Fix https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5506-3960 A * , Colleen S. Walsh B , Ashli J. Sheidow https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0081-6179 C , Michael R. McCart C , Jason E. Chapman C and Tess K. Drazdowski https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2339-0780 C
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA.

B Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23284, USA.

C Oregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR 97401, USA.

* Correspondence to: rebecca.fix@jhu.edu

Handling Editor: Jason Ong

Sexual Health 21, SH23181 https://doi.org/10.1071/SH23181
Submitted: 3 November 2023  Accepted: 5 February 2024  Published: 26 February 2024

© 2024 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing

Abstract

Background

Risky sexual behaviour (RSB) is a serious public health problem for adolescents. We examined whether a contingency management intervention implemented by juvenile probation officers (JPOs) targeting substance use also impacted RSB.

Methods

A total of 218 adolescents on probation were randomly assigned to contingency management or to probation as usual.

Results

The substance use intervention delivered by JPOs reduced rates of RSB over time (β = −0.32, P = 0.041 at 6 months; β = −0.32, P = 0.036 at 9 months).

Conclusions

Adolescents receiving a substance use intervention from JPOs demonstrated reduced/prevented RSB. Interventions targeting single risk behaviours in juvenile probation populations should measure changes in other risk behaviours. Under-resourced communities lacking clinicians might consider JPOs delivering interventions.

Keywords: delinquency, evaluation, family, intervention, justice system, legal system, prevention, youth.

References

1  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexual risk behaviors can lead to HIV, STDs, & teen pregnancy. Adolescent and School Health; 2019.

2  Tolou-Shams M, Harrison A, Hirschtritt ME, et al. Substance use and HIV among justice-involved youth: intersecting risks. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep 2019; 16(1): 37-47.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

3  Letourneau EJ, McCart MR, Sheidow AJ, et al. First evaluation of a contingency management intervention addressing adolescent substance use and sexual risk behaviors: risk reduction therapy for adolescents. J Subst Abuse Treat 2017; 72: 56-65.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

4  Rudes DS, Viglione J, Sheidow AJ, et al. Juvenile probation officers’ perceptions on youth substance use varies from task-shifting to family-based contingency management. J Subst Abuse Treat 2021; 120: 108144.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

5  Sheidow AJ, McCart MR, Chapman JE, et al. Capacity of juvenile probation officers in low-resourced, rural settings to deliver an evidence-based substance use intervention to adolescents. Psychol Addict Behav 2020; 34(1): 76-88.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

6  Higgins ST, Silverman K, Heil SH. Contingency management in substance abuse treatment. Guilford Press; 2007.

7  Lussier JP, Heil SH, Mongeon JA, et al. A meta-analysis of voucher-based reinforcement therapy for substance use disorders. Addiction 2006; 101(2): 192-203.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

8  Childs K, Viglione J, Chapman JE, Drazdowski TK, McCart MR, Sheidow AJ. Delinquency, substance use, and risky sexual behaviors among youth who are involved in the justice system and predominantly reside in rural communities: patterns and associated risk factors. J Crime and Justice 2023; 46(2): 211-230.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

9  Fino E, Jaspal R, Lopes B, et al. The sexual risk behaviors scale (SRBS): development & validation in a university student sample in the UK. Eval Health Prof 2021; 44(2): 152-160.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

10  Huizinga D, Elliott DS. Reassessing the reliability and validity of Self-Report Delinquency measures. J Quant Criminol 1986; 2(4): 293-327.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

11  Pechorro P, Lima R, Simões M, et al. Validity and reliability of the self-report delinquency among a sample of at-risk youths. J Forensic Psychiatry Psychol 2018; 30(1): 1-16.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

12  Thornberry T, Krohn M. The self-report method for measuring delinquency and crime: criminal justice 2000. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice; 2000.

13  Chorpita BF, Reise S, Weisz JR, et al. Evaluation of the brief problem checklist: child and caregiver interviews to measure clinical progress. J Consult Clin Psychol 2010; 78(4): 526.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

14  Dennis ML, Titus JC, White M, et al. Global appraisal of individual needs: administration guide for the GAIN and related measures. Bloomington, IL: Chestnut Health Systems; 2003.

15  Ritchwood TD, Ford H, DeCoster J, et al. Risky sexual behavior and substance use among adolescents: a meta-analysis. Children Youth Serv Rev 2015; 52: 74-88.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

16  Dittus PJ, Michael SL, Becasen JS, et al. Parental monitoring and its associations with adolescent sexual risk behavior: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 2015; 136(6): e1587-e1599.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

17  White C. Treatment services in the juvenile justice system: examining the use and funding of services by youth on probation. Youth Violence Juv Justice 2017; 17(1): 62-87.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

18  Ingel SN, Davis LR, Rudes DS, et al. Misunderstanding and sensemaking among juvenile probation officers working with evidence-based practices. Vict Offenders 2022; 17: 975-993.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |