Self-harm behaviour and externally-directed aggression In psychiatric outpatients: a multicentre, prospective study (viormed-2 study)

Distinct impulsivity profiles in subtypes of violence among community-dwelling patients with severe mental disorders: a longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Although only a few patients with severe mental disorders (SMD) can commit violent behaviour in the community, violent behaviour aggravates the stigma towards patients with SMD. Understanding the subtypes of violent behaviour may be beneficial for preventing violent behaviour among patients with SMD, but it has rarely been studied.

METHODS

This longitudinal study investigated 1914 patients with SMD in the community at baseline, and the follow-up period ranged from February 2021 to August 2021. The Barratt Impulsiveness Scale Version-11, the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire, the Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scale, the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire and the MacArthur Community Violence Instrument were used at baseline. The Modified Overt Aggression Scale was used to assess the occurrence of violent behaviour (outcome) during the follow-up period. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Latent class analysis was used to characterise the subtypes of patients with SMD who engaged in violent behaviour at follow-up.

RESULTS

We found that 7.2% of patients with SMD presented violent behaviour within six months in the community. Younger age (OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.96-1.00, p = 0.016) and no economic source (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.10-2.33, p = 0.014) were risk factors for violent behaviour. Patients with SMD who engaged in violent behaviour could be classified into three subtypes: one class characterised by a history of violence and impulsivity, another class characterised by high levels of aggression and motor impulsivity, and the last class characterised by median cognitive impulsivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Socio-demographic factors were risk factors for violent behaviour among patients with SMD, which could eliminate the discrimination toward this group. Impulsivity played a vital role in identifying the three subtypes of patients with SMD who engaged in violent behaviour. These findings may be helpful for the development of a personalised violence risk management plan for patients with SMD who commit violent behaviour in the community.

Childhood predictors of self-harm, externalised violence and transitioning to dual harm in a cohort of adolescents and young adults

BACKGROUND

The aetiology of dual harm (co-occurring self-harm and violence towards others) is poorly understood because most studies have investigated self-harm and violence separately. We aimed to examine childhood risk factors for self-harm, violence, and dual harm, including the transition from engaging in single harm to dual harm.

METHODS

Data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, a UK-based birth cohort study, were used to estimate prevalence of self-reported engagement in self-harm, violence, and dual harm at ages 16 and 22 years. Risk ratios were calculated to indicate associations across various self-reported childhood risk factors and risks of single and dual harm, including the transition from single harm at age 16 years to dual harm at age 22.

RESULTS

At age 16 years, 18.1% of the 4176 cohort members had harmed themselves, 21.1% had engaged in violence towards others and 3.7% reported dual harm. At age 22 the equivalent prevalence estimates increased to 24.2, 25.8 and 6.8%, respectively. Depression and other mental health difficulties, drug and alcohol use, witnessing self-harm and being a victim of, or witnessing, violence were associated with higher risks of transitioning from self-harm or violence at age 16 to dual harm by age 22.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of dual harm doubled from age 16 to 22 years, highlighting the importance of early identification and intervention during this high-risk period. Several childhood psychosocial risk factors associated specifically with dual harm at age 16 and with the transition to dual harm by age 22 have been identified.

Differences Between Readmitted and Non-readmitted Women in an Italian Forensic Unit: A Retrospective Study

The main objective of this study was to compare readmitted (RW) and non-readmitted (NRW) female psychiatric patients after being conditionally or unconditionally released from Italian inpatient forensic psychiatry services, in order to identify variables that were significantly linked with readmission. This study included all patients who were discharged from the female Residences for the Execution of the Security Measure (REMS) of Castiglione delle Stiviere from January 2008 to June 2015 who were not readmitted until December 31, 2018 (48). In addition, data were collected on female patients who were discharged from the same REMS before 2008 and readmitted from January 2008 to December 2018 (42). A key finding of our study was that the readmission into a female REMS was positively associated with the presence of substance use disorders (SUD) and a primary diagnosis on Axis II. To a lesser extent, younger age, being unconditionally discharged when first released, having had a shorter length of inpatient stay and having committed a crime against property for the first REMS admission was also variables that were apparently linked with readmission. The present research continues the previous research on gender-specific mentally ill offenders. Hence, the decision to proceed separately with a sample of men only and one of women only. For all these reasons, young female patients with personality disorder and SUD perhaps should remain longer in REMS and be released with conditions. In most European countries, the length of stay depends on the clinical condition and risk assessment, with some exceptions where the courts set a maximum length of stay at the outset, as in Italy. All the factors listed above influence the risk assessment. Finally, from integrating these findings into the increasing international literature on conditional release and considering the recent changes in the Italian forensic treatment model, we recommend continuing research on individual risk and protective factors as well as risk assessment instruments on conditionally and unconditionally released inpatients with genders studied separately.