Approximately 2.2 million people are incarcerated in the United States. The carceral population is aging due to strict sentencing laws, which has increased the frequency and acuity of off-site medical care. Inpatient providers must follow departments of correction procedures when treating incarcerated patients, which often prevents adherence to standards of care and puts the health of patients at risk. Shackling is a common requirement during hospitalization and is associated with increased risk for complications. Current state and federal policies regarding shackling lack specifics to prevent patient harm. Incarcerated people have a constitutionally protected right to health care, but with current policy, we are not meeting this essential responsibility. Updates to policy are needed to ensure that patients receive compassionate, safe, and constitutionally mandated health care.

Background: Jail detention can disrupt the continuity of care for people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWH). Using a state's "Data to Care" (D2C) program might help overcome this barrier, but raises important questions of data security, personal privacy, resource allocation, and logistics. Methods: As part of a study involving in-depth expert stakeholder interviews, a 1-day workshop was convened to identify and discuss potential ethical challenges in extending North Carolina's D2C program to jail settings. Workshop participants included public health officials, community advocates, HIV clinicians, jail administrators, privacy experts, criminal justice researchers, and a formerly incarcerated PLWH. Workshop participants discussed the results of earlier stakeholder interviews with the goal of identifying the most important points to consider in assessing the merits of extending D2C surveillance to jail settings. Results: Although the workshop participants expressed support for improving the continuity of HIV care for jail detainees, they had mixed perspectives on whether a jail-based D2C program should include in-jail or post-release follow-up interventions. Their positions were influenced by their views on 4 sets of implementation issues: privacy/data-sharing; government assistance/overreach; HIV criminalization/exceptionalism; and community engagement. Limitations: The limitations of this stakeholder engagement exercise include its purposive recruitment, relatively small number of participants, and limited duration. Conclusions: Improving the continuity of HIV care in particular jail settings will depend on a number of local considerations. In deciding between models featuring in-jail and post-release follow-up care, the most important of these considerations will be the possibility of establishing good partnerships between the jail, the health department, and the community. Additional research on the dynamics and impact of different models is needed.

Objective: To use the example of COVID-19 vaccine prioritization for incarcerated workers to call attention to the need to prioritize incarcerated workers' health. Methods: From November to December 2020, we searched publicly available information (e.g. Department Of Corrections websites and press releases) for 53 US prison systems, including all states, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and Puerto Rico. Coders reviewed if states had prison labor policies, if states had COVID-19 specific prison labor policies, the location of work, industries both pre- and during the COVID-19 pandemic, the scope of work, and hourly wage. Findings were compared to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's occupational vaccine prioritization recommendations. Results: Every facility has incarcerated individuals working in some capacity with some resuming prison labor operations to pre-pandemic levels. All but one prison system has off-site work locations for their incarcerated population and many incarcerated workers have resumed their off-site work release assignments. Additionally, every state has incarcerated workers whose job assignments are considered frontline essential workers (e.g. firefighters). In at least five states, incarcerated workers are participating in frontline health roles that put them at higher risk of acquiring COVID-19. Yet, no state followed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended vaccination plan for its incarcerated population given their incarcerated workers' essential worker status. Conclusion: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that incarcerated people be prioritized for vaccination primarily due to the risk present in congregate style prison and jail facilities. Furthermore, our review found that many incarcerated people perform labor that should be considered "essential", which provides another reason why they should have been among the first in line for COVID-19 vaccine allocation. These findings also highlight the need for incarcerated workers' health to be prioritized beyond COVID-19.

Purpose: Vaccinating adults who are involved with the carceral system, particularly those aged 55 or older, is crucial to containing the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA, particularly as variants continue to emerge and spread. In this Viewpoint, the authors discuss the reasons why improving access to COVID-19 vaccine and boosters among community supervised adults, especially the aging population, is critical to mitigating the public health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study concludes by providing recommendations to enhance vaccine and booster uptake in this population, as the pandemic continues. Design/methodology/approach: This is a Viewpoint paper regarding mitigating the spread of COVID-19 by improving access to vaccine and boosters among community supervised adults, especially the aging population. Findings: A key population that has been overlooked in vaccination efforts are older adults involved in the carceral system who are living in the community (i.e. "community supervised" or people on probation or parole). Older adults on probation and parole are at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 transmission and severe disease due to numerous factors at the individual, community, social and structural levels. Originality/value: Implementation of recommendations presented in this Viewpoint will mitigate COVID-19 risk among a population that has been marginalized and overlooked, yet has been the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Purpose: The impact of incarceration on health is well known. Yet, most studies measure incarceration alone and miss additional exposure to the criminal legal system over time. We evaluated adult criminal legal sanctions - inclusive of arrests, charges, probation, incarceration - from ages 18-35 and inequities by juvenile sanctions and race. Methods: Using the National Longitudinal Survey on Youth 1997, a nationally representative data set of adolescents followed into their mid-thirties (1997-2017), we calculated the mean cumulative count, or the average number of criminal legal events per person per study visit, stratified by juvenile sanctions and race. Results: Of 7024 participants, 1679 experienced 3,075 encounters. There were seven arrests, 30 charges, nine probation encounters, and 13 incarceration events /100 participants by age 35. Juvenile sanctions were most common for Black individuals. Among those experiencing juvenile sanctions, Black and White individuals had similar numbers of encounters, but Black individuals had more arrests and incarceration stays. For those without juvenile encounters, Black individuals had more encounters than White individuals. Conclusions: Research on health effects of criminal legal sanctions must consider encounters beyond incarceration and focus on life course trajectories and racial inequities.