Risk assessment by client and case manager for shared decision making in outpatient forensic psychiatry

A Scoping Review of Patient Involvement in Violence Risk Assessment

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aimed to summarize the published literature on patient involvement in violence risk assessment. Two research questions reviewed the extent of patient involvement and what evidence exists.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

English-language peer-reviewed published articles of any methodology related to violence risk assessment toward others were included. Articles were related to forensic and mental health practice and involve patients directly in the process.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were comprehensively searched, as well as the reference lists of included articles. Both authors reviewed articles for inclusion and extracted data from included articles.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Articles reported on three approaches to patient engagement in structured violence risk assessment: how patients were involved or experienced the process, using rating scales, and using questions related to patient self-perceived risk. In relation to what evidence existed, four main themes emerged: patient views about risk and their involvement in risk assessment, comparing the predictive accuracy of patient self-rated tools with clinician-rated tools, predictive accuracy of a patient self-rated tool, and comparing risk ratings between patients and clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a dearth of research published about involving patients in their own risk assessment. Patients report both positive and negative experiences of the process. From cohort-type studies, results have shown that patient self-risk assessment can have a similar predictive ability to the clinician ratings related to adverse violence outcomes. Findings from studies can pave the way for future clinical research around the tools that have been developed thus far.

Risk assessment for aggressive behaviour in schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Aggressive or violent behaviour is often associated with people with schizophrenia in common perceptions of the disease. Risk assessment methods have been used to identify and evaluate the behaviour of those individuals who are at the greatest risk of perpetrating aggression or violence or characterise the likelihood to commit acts. Although many different interventions have been developed to decrease aggressive or violent incidences in inpatient care, staff working in inpatient settings seek easy-to-use methods to decrease patient aggressive events. However, many of these are time-consuming, and they require intensive training for staff and patient monitoring. It has also been recognised in clinical practice that if staff monitor patients' behaviour in a structured manner, the monitoring itself may result in a reduction of aggressive/violent behaviour and incidents in psychiatric settings.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of structured aggression or violence risk assessment methods for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP, on 10 February 2021. We also inspected references of all identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing structured risk assessment methods added to standard professional care with standard professional care for the evaluation of aggressive or violent behaviour among people with schizophrenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently inspected citations, selected studies, extracted data, and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated a standard estimation of the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) and its 95% CI. We assessed risk of bias in the included studies and created a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies in the review. The total number of participants was not identifiable, as some studies provided number of participants included, and some only patient days. The studies compared a package of structured assessment methods with a control group that included routine nursing care and drug therapy or unstructured psychiatric observations/treatment based on clinical judgement. In two studies, information about treatment in control care was not available. One study reported results for our primary outcome, clinically important change in aggressive/violent behaviour, measured by the rate of severe aggression events. There was likely a positive effect favouring structured risk assessment over standard professional care (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.85; 1 RCT; 1852 participants; corrected for cluster design: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial reported data for the use of coercive measures (seclusion room). Compared to standard professional care, structured risk assessment may have little or no effect on use of seclusion room as days (corrected for cluster design: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.07; N = 20; low-certainty evidence) or use of seclusion room as secluded participants (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.39 to 8.7; 1 RCT; N = 20; low-certainty evidence). However, seclusion room may be used less frequently in the standard professional care group compared to the structured risk assessment group (incidence) (corrected for cluster design: RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.47; 1 RCT; N = 20; substantial heterogeneity, Chi2 = 0.0; df = 0.0; P = 0.0; I2 = 100%; low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a clear effect on adverse events of escape (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.11; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence); fall down (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence); or choking (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.11; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence) when comparing structured risk assessment to standard professional care. There were no useable data for patient-related outcomes such as global state, acceptance of treatment, satisfaction with treatment, quality of life, service use, or costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, it is not possible to conclude that structured aggression or violence risk assessment methods are effective for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses. Future work should combine the use of interventions and structured risk assessment methods to prevent aggressive incidents in psychiatric inpatient settings.

"Walking Together Towards Freedom." Patients' Lived Experiences of Participation in Outpatient Forensic Care

There is a general agreement regarding the significance of patient participation in care. In forensic psychiatric care, however, this appears to be troublesome because of the paradoxical nature of having responsibility; to give person-centered, recovery-oriented psychiatric care and to protect society from potentially dangerous individuals. The aim of this study was to describe patients' lived experiences of participation in outpatient forensic psychiatric care. Data were collected by means of individual interviews with five patients. The phenomenological hermeneutical analysis shed light on patient participation as having two dimensions. The outer dimension focuses on participation as "doing" and as a means of developing the understanding and skills necessary for being discharged from forensic care, while the inner dimension is related to "being" and experiences of acceptance and inclusion in communion with other people. This emphasises the importance of supporting patients' experiences of being involved in everyday life together with others, even in periods when patients' possibilities to affect decisions regarding their care are limited.

Outcome Measures in Forensic Mental Health Services: A Systematic Review of Instruments and Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

Background

Outcome measurement in forensic mental health services can support service improvement, research, and patient progress evaluation. This systematic review aims to identify instruments available for use as outcome measures in this field and assess the evidence for the most common instruments, specific to the forensic context, which cover multiple outcome domains.

Methods

Studies were identified by searching seven online databases. Additional searches were then performed for 10 selected instruments to identify additional information on their psychometric properties. Instrument manuals and gray literature was reviewed for information about instrument development and content validity. The quality of evidence for psychometric properties was summarized for each instrument based on the COnsensus-based Standards for health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) approach.

Results

A total of 435 different instruments or variants were identified. Psychometric information on the 10 selected instruments was extracted from 103 studies. All 10 instruments had a clinician reported component with only two having patient reported scales. Half of the instruments were primarily focused on risk. No instrument demonstrated adequate psychometric properties in all eight COSMIN categories assessed. Only one instrument, the Camberwell Assessment of Need: Forensic Version, had adequate evidence for its development and content validity. The most evidence was for construct validity, while none was identified for construct stability between groups.

Conclusions

Despite the large number of instruments potentially available, evidence for their use as outcome measures in forensic mental health services is limited. Future research and instrument development should involve patients and carers to ensure adequate content validity.

Perceptions of procedural justice and coercion among forensic psychiatric patients: a study protocol for a prospective, mixed-methods investigation

BACKGROUND

The risk and recovery paradigms are the dominant frameworks informing forensic mental health services and have been the focus of increasing research interest. Despite this, there are significant gaps in our understanding of the nature of mental health recovery in forensic settings (i.e., 'secure recovery'), and specifically, the key elements of recovery as perceived by forensic patients and their treatment providers. Importantly, we know little about how patients perceive the forensic mental health system, to what extent they see it as fair and legitimate, and how these perceptions impact upon treatment engagement, risk for adversity, and progress in recovery.

METHODS

In this prospective, mixed-methods study, we investigate patient perceptions of procedural justice and coercion within the context of the forensic mental health system in Ontario, Canada (final N = 120 forensic patients and their primary care providers). We elicit patient self-assessments of risk and progress in recovery, and assess the degree of concordance with clinician-rated estimates of these constructs. Both qualitative and quantitative methods are used to assess the degree to which patient perceptions of coercion, fairness and legitimacy impact upon their level of treatment engagement, risk for adversity and progress in recovery. A prospective, two-year follow-up will investigate the impact of patient and clinician perspectives on outcomes in the domains of forensic hospital readmission, criminal reoffending, and rate of progress through the forensic system.

DISCUSSION

Results from this mixed-methods study will yield a rich and detailed account of patient perceptions of the forensic mental health system, and specifically whether perceptions of procedural fairness, justice and legitimacy, as well as perceived coercion, systematically influence patients' risk for adversity, their ability to progress in their recovery, and ultimately, advance through the forensic system towards successful community living. Findings will provide conceptual clarity to the key elements of secure recovery, and illuminate areas of similarity and divergence with respect to how patients and clinicians assess risk and recovery needs. In doing so, knowledge from this study will provide a deep understanding of factors that promote patient safety and recovery, and provide a foundation for optimizing the forensic mental health system to improve patient outcomes.

Exploring Needs and Quality of Life of Forensic Psychiatric Inpatients in the Reformed Italian System, Implications for Care and Safety

The Italian forensic psychiatric system underwent drastic reforms. The newly developed facilities are inspired by psychiatric community services, embracing a recovery-oriented approach. Needs and quality of life are broader concepts that consider the more rehabilitative and humanitarian aspects of treatment. In one of the new Italian forensic psychiatric services, this cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the needs and quality of life of forensic psychiatric patients. A second aim was to validate the Italian version of the Forensic inpatient Quality of Life questionnaire Short Version (FQL-SV). Overall, 42 forensic psychiatric patients were assessed using the Forensic version of the Camberwell Assessment of Need (CANFOR), the Historical-Clinical-Risk-Management-20 (HCR-20), the FQL-SV, and the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQoL-Bref). Patients reported significantly fewer needs, whether met or unmet, than their treating clinicians. The general level of agreement between patients and clinicians on specific needs was low Kappa values were < .40 for 64% of the total needs and 46% of the unmet needs. Risk factors according to the HCR-20 mean scores were 13.1, 4.6, and 6.4 for the historical, clinical and risk management subscale. Quality of life was moderate to high for 74% of the patients. Our results showed that lower numbers of needs, whether reported by patients or clinicians, were associated with a better quality of life. The Italian FQL-SV had a Cronbach's alpha of 0.86 and correlated as expected with the WHOQoL-Bref. The FQL-SV is a valid and reliable tool, justifying its use for routinely assessing QoL in Italian forensic psychiatric services. This study enhances our understanding of needs and quality of life of forensic psychiatric patients and how their assessment could have an additional value for recovery-oriented treatment in forensic psychiatry. Although the detained status of forensic patients imposes real limits on the capacity for autonomy and choice, incorporating the patient's perspective on decision-making processes, in relation to aspects of treatment, care, and daily life, may have benefits such as a better treatment adherence or therapeutic alliance. Future research should clarify how routinely assessing needs and quality of life can contribute to the recovery of these forensic psychiatric patients.

The Perspective of Forensic Inpatients With Psychotic Disorders on Protective Factors Against Risk of Violent Behavior

Background: Little is known about the opinions of forensic inpatients with psychotic disorders like schizophrenia on factors likely to prevent or decrease future violent behavior. Aims: To understand the perspectives of forensic inpatients with psychotic disorders on protective factors against risk of violent behavior and compare them to factors identified by professional staff. Method: Using the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors (SAPROF) checklist for self-appraisal of violence risk, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 32 inpatients of the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act Ward and compared the results with those of professionals. Results: Inpatients scored higher in the SAPROF total score, the motivational factors of "life goals" and "motivation for treatment," and the protective level in general. Inpatients scored themselves lower in risk level than professionals. The degree of agreement between service users' and professionals' evaluations was low for all categories except external factors. Inpatients prioritized "life goals," "self-control," and "medication" as the top three key strengths currently preventing violent behavior, whereas the professionals selected "life goals" less often. The top three important future goals for preventing future violence selected by inpatients were "work," "intimate relationships," and "life goals," with the former two being selected significantly less often by the professionals. Conclusions: This is the first study to shed light on Japanese forensic inpatients' perspectives about preventing future violent behavior. Despite professionals' underestimation, inpatients viewed themselves as having high motivation for treatment and positive life goals. Inpatients prioritized personal values such as life goals, work, and intimate relationships, whereas professionals prioritized understanding, treating, and observing the disease. Our findings are consistent with past reports on patients' and clinicians' perspectives. Awareness of such gaps in perceptions can help build fruitful therapeutic alliances. We discuss the implications in terms of treatment, how to address the gap therapeutically, and how to design treatment accordingly. Directions for future research are also discussed.

Predictive validity of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) for multiple adverse outcomes: The effect of diagnosis

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) assists risk assessment for seven risk outcomes based on scoring of risk and protective factors and assignment of clinically-informed risk levels. Its predictive validity for violence and self-harm has been established in males with schizophrenia, but accuracy across pathologically diverse samples is unknown. Routine START assessments and 3-month risk outcome data of N = 527 adult, inpatients in a UK secure mental health facility were collected. The sample was divided into diagnostic groups; predictive validity was established using receiver operating characteristics regression (rocreg) analysis in which potential covariates were controlled. In most single-diagnosis groups START risk factors ('vulnerabilities'), protective factors ('strengths'), and clinically-informed estimates predicted multiple risk outcomes with effect sizes similar to previous research. Self-harm was not predicted among patients with an organic diagnosis. The START risk estimates predicted physical aggression in all diagnostic groups, and verbal aggression, self-harm and self-neglect in most diagnostic groups. The START can assist assessment of aggressive, self-harm, and self-neglect across a range of diagnostic groups. Further research with larger sample sizes of those with multiple diagnoses is required.

Usability and Workflow Evaluation of "RhEumAtic Disease activitY" (READY). A Mobile Application for Rheumatology Patients and Providers

BACKGROUND

RhEumAtic Disease activitY (READY) is a mobile health (mHealth) application that aims to create a shared platform integrating data from both patients and physicians, with a particular emphasis on arthritis disease activity.

METHODS

We made READY available on an iPad and pilot implemented it at a rheumatology outpatient clinic. We conducted 1) a usability evaluation study to explore patients' and physicians' interactions with READY, and 2) a time motion study (TMS) to observe the clinical workflow before and after the implementation.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients and 15 physicians participated in the usability evaluation. We found usability problems in navigation, data entry, pain assessment, documentation, and instructions along with error messages. Despite these issues, 25 (75,76%) patients reported they liked READY. Physicians provided mixed feedback because they were concerned about the impact of READY on clinical workflow. Six physicians participated in the TMS. We observed 47 patient visits (44.72 hours) in the pre-implementation phase, and 42 patient visits (37.82 hours) in the post-implementation phase. We found that patients spent more time on READY than paper (4.39mins vs. 2.26mins), but overall, READY did not delay the workflow (pre = 52.08 mins vs. post = 45.46 mins). This time difference may be compensated with READY eliminating a workflow step for the staff.

CONCLUSION

Patients preferred READY to paper documents. Many found it easier to input information because of the larger font size and the ease of 'tapping' rather than writing-out or circling answers. Even though patients spent more time on READY than using paper documents, the longer usage of READY was mainly due to when troubleshooting was needed. Most patients did not have problems after receiving initial support from the staff. This study not only enabled improvements to the software but also serves as good reference for other researchers or institutional decision makers who are interested in implementing such a technology.