We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Violence perpetrated by psychiatric inpatients is associated with modifiable factors. Current structured approaches to assess inpatient violence risk lack predictive validity and linkage to interventions.
Methods
Adult psychiatric inpatients on forensic and general wards in three psychiatric hospitals were recruited and followed up prospectively for 6 months. Information on modifiable (dynamic) risk factors were collected every 1–4 weeks, and baseline background factors. Data were transferred to a web-based monitoring system (FOxWeb) to calculate a total dynamic risk score. Outcomes were extracted from an incident-reporting system recording aggression and interpersonal violence. The association between total dynamic score and violent incidents was assessed by multilevel logistic regression and compared with dynamic score excluded.
Results
We recruited 89 patients and conducted 624 separate assessments (median 5/patient). Mean age was 39 (s.d. 12.5) years with 20% (n = 18) female. Common diagnoses were schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (70%, n = 62) and personality disorders (20%, n = 18). There were 93 violent incidents. Factors contributing to violence risk were a total dynamic score of ⩾1 (OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.25–9.20), 10-year increase in age (OR 0.67, 0.47–0.96), and female sex (OR 2.78, 1.04–7.40). Non-significant associations with schizophrenia-spectrum disorder were found (OR 0.50, 0.20–1.21). In a fixed-effect model using all covariates, AUC was 0.77 (0.72–0.82) and 0.75 (0.70–0.80) when the dynamic score was excluded.
Conclusions
In predicting violence risk in individuals with psychiatric disorders, modifiable factors added little incremental value beyond static ones in a psychiatric inpatient setting. Future work should make a clear distinction between risk factors that assist in prediction and those linked to needs.
Violent behaviour by forensic psychiatric inpatients is common. We aimed to systematically review the performance of structured risk assessment tools for violence in these settings.
Methods:
The nine most commonly used violence risk assessment instruments used in psychiatric hospitals were examined. A systematic search of five databases (CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, PsycINFO and PubMed) was conducted to identify studies examining the predictive accuracy of these tools in forensic psychiatric inpatient settings. Risk assessment instruments were separated into those designed for imminent (within 24 hours) violence prediction and those designed for longer-term prediction. A range of accuracy measures and descriptive variables were extracted. A quality assessment was performed for each eligible study using the QUADAS-2. Summary performance measures (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the curve value) and HSROC curves were produced. In addition, meta-regression analyses investigated study and sample effects on tool performance.
Results:
Fifty-two eligible publications were identified, of which 43 provided information on tool accuracy in the form of AUC statistics. These provided data on 78 individual samples, with information on 6,840 patients. Of these, 35 samples (3,306 patients from 19 publications) provided data on all performance measures. The median AUC value for the wider group of 78 samples was higher for imminent tools (AUC 0.83; IQR: 0.71–0.85) compared with longer-term tools (AUC 0.68; IQR: 0.62-0.75). Other performance measures indicated variable accuracy for imminent and longer-term tools. Meta-regression indicated that no study or sample-related characteristics were associated with between-study differences in AUCs.
Interpretation:
The performance of current tools in predicting risk of violence beyond the first few days is variable, and the selection of which tool to use in clinical practice should consider accuracy estimates. For more imminent violence, however, there is evidence in support of brief scalable assessment tools.
Individual placement and support (IPS) has been repeatedly demonstrated
to be the most effective form of mental health vocational rehabilitation.
Its no-discharge policy plus fixed caseloads, however, makes it expensive
to provide.
Aims
To test whether introducing a time limit for IPS would significantly
alter its clinical effectiveness and consequently its potential
cost-effectiveness.
Method
Referrals to an IPS service were randomly allocated to either standard
IPS or to time-limited IPS (IPS-LITE). IPS-LITE participants were
referred back to their mental health teams if still unemployed at 9
months or after 4 months employment support. The primary outcome at 18
months was working for 1 day. Secondary outcomes comprised other
vocational measures plus clinical and social functioning. The
differential rates of discharge were used to calculate a notional
increased capacity and to model potential rates and costs of
employment.
Results
A total of 123 patients were randomised and data were collected on 120
patients at 18 months. The two groups (IPS-LITE = 62 and IPS = 61) were
well matched at baseline. Rates of employment were equal at 18 months
(IPS-LITE = 24 (41%) and IPS = 27 (46%)) at which time 57 (97%) had been
discharged from the IPS-LITE service and 16 (28%) from IPS. Only 11
patients (4 IPS-LITE and 7 IPS) obtained their first employment after 9
months. There were no significant differences in any other outcomes.
IPS-LITE discharges generated a potential capacity increase of 46.5%
compared to 12.7% in IPS which would translate into 35.8 returns to work
in IPS-LITE compared to 30.6 in IPS over an 18-month period if the rates
remained constant.
Conclusions
IPS-LITE is equally effective to IPS and only minimal extra employment is
gained by persisting beyond 9 months. If released capacity is utilised
with similar outcomes, IPS-LITE results in an increase by 17% in numbers
gaining employment within 18 months compared to IPS and will increase
with prolonged follow-up. IPS-LITE may be more cost-effective and should
be actively considered as an alternative within public services.
Coercion has usually been equated with legal detention. Non-statutory
pressures to adhere to treatment, ‘leverage’, have been identified as
widespread in US public mental healthcare. It is not clear if this is so
outside the USA.
Aims
To measure rates of different non-statutory pressures in distinct
clinical populations in England, to test their associations with patient
characteristics and compare them with US rates.
Method
Data were collected by a structured interview conducted by independent
researchers supplemented by data extraction from case notes.
Results
We recruited a sample of 417 participants from four differing clinical
populations. Lifetime experience of leverage was reported in 35% of the
sample, 63% in substance misusers, 33% and 30% in the psychosis samples
and 15% in the non-psychosis sample. Leverage was associated with
repeated hospitalisations, substance misuse diagnosis and lower insight
as measured by the Insight and Treatment Attitudes Questionnaire. Housing
leverage was the most frequent form (24%). Levels were markedly lower
than those reported in the USA.
Conclusions
Non-statutory pressure to adhere to treatment (leverage) is common in
English mental healthcare but has received little clinical or research
attention. Urgent attention is needed to understand its variation and
place in community practice.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.