Drug Treatment Courts: A Quantitative Review of Study and Treatment Quality

Abstract

The effectiveness of drug courts has been the subject of numerous studies, and three major meta-analyses have examined many of these studies in regard to two main factors: (1) study quality and (2) treatment quality. The current study examines these two factors more closely. Study quality was assessed using the Collaborative Outcome Data Committee Guidelines (CODC); studies were rated as “rejected,” “weak,” “good,” or “strong” based on methodological quality. Drug court treatment quality was assessed by evaluating adherence to the principles of Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR). The RNR principles have been previously shown to mediate the effectiveness of offender treatment across various offender groups and a variety of criminogenic needs. In total, 96 studies were reviewed and assessed according to study and treatment quality. Results found that the study quality of the literature is poor and that this accounts for much of the variability in findings seen across studies. Furthermore, analyses revealed that although adherence to the RNR principles was poor, increasing adherence to RNR resulted in more effective treatment of offenders and reduced recidivism. Using only methodologically acceptable studies, the least biased estimate of the effectiveness of drug courts in reducing recidivism was found to be approximately 8%.