Skip to main content Accessibility help

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.

Close cookie message
×

Maintenance Message

Cambridge Core ecommerce is unavailable Sunday 08/12/2024 from 08:00 – 18:00 (GMT). This is due to site maintenance. We apologise for any inconvenience.

  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • An audit of the quality of HCR-20 violence risk assessments in a low secure service

  • Piyal Sen, Simone Lindsey, Nilanjan Chatterjee, Rajesh Rama-Iyer, Marco Picchioni
  • Journal:
    Journal of Psychiatric Intensive Care / Volume 11 / Issue S1 / December 2015
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    09 December 2015, e3
    Print publication:
    December 2015
  • Introduction

    The HCR-20 is one of the most popular structured clinical judgement tools used in forensic settings; yet, there are no published tools to assess the quality of its use. This study used the CAI-V, a tool to assess the competency of those carrying out risk assessment, to develop a quality tool for the use of HCR-20.

    Method

    The audit was carried out between July 2012 and July 2013 on all patients resident in St Andrew’s Essex, a low secure unit. The results of the first audit led to an action plan for clinical improvement, subsequently re-audited a year later.

    Results

    Most of the HCR-20 ratings scored in the competent range in both audits, but the greatest weakness was identified in the treatment planning section. The re-audit showed improvement, but there remained areas for development.

    Discussion

    The audit highlighted broad areas of improvement like the need for full multidisciplinary involvement, more attention to formulation, and the need for greater consultation and information gathering from outside professionals and family members. The quality tool developed could be adapted to the requirements of any service, and used accordingly.