Female Forensic Patients May Be an Atypical Sub-type of Females Presenting Aggressive and Antisocial Behavior

Differences between criminal offender versus non-offender female patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder: a retrospective cohort study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference between offender female patients (OFS) and non-offender female patients (NOFS) with schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD).The patients in this study were admitted to the university psychiatry in Zurich Switzerland between 1982 and 2016. Demography, psychopathology, comorbidity, and treatment differences were analyzed using binary statistics to compare 31 OFS and 29 matching NOFS with SSD. The Fisher's exact test was used for categorical data variables in small size samples and the Mann-Whitney-U-Test for nonparametric test variables, adjusted with the Benjamini and Hochberg method.The results indicate that the NOFS were cognitively more impaired, they were more likely to have had antipsychotic drugs prescribed (NOFS; 100%, OFS: 71%, OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.13-1.77, p=0.022) and their medication compliance was higher (NOFS: 84.6%, OFS: 4.5%, OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.00-0.08, p=0.000). In contrast, the OFS had completed compulsory school less often and the were observed to be more often homeless and socially isolated (OFS: 72.4%, NOFS: 34.6%, OR 4.96, 95% CI 1.58-15.6, p=0.026), self-disorders (OFS: 51.6%, NOFS: 11.1%, OR 8.53, 95% CI 2.12-34.32, p=0.011), delusions (OFS: 96.8%, NOFS: 63%, OR 17.65, 95% CI 2.08-149.99, p=0.014) and substance use disorder (51.6%, OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.85, p=0.039). Clinicians treating female offender patients with SSD should focus more on the treatment for substance use disorder, medication and early recognition of the illness for preventative purposes.

Violence risk assessment instruments in forensic psychiatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although structured tools have been widely used to predict violence risk in specialist mental health settings, there is uncertainty about the extent and quality of evidence of their predictive performance. We aimed to systematically review the predictive performance of tools used to assess violence risk in forensic mental health, where they are routinely administered.

METHODS

In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we followed PRISMA guidelines and searched four databases (PsycINFO, Embase, Medline, and Global Health) from database inception to Nov 1, 2022, to identify studies examining the predictive performance of risk assessment tools in people discharged from forensic (secure) mental health hospitals. Systematic and narrative reviews were excluded from the review. Performance measures and descriptive statistics were extracted from published reports. A quality assessment was performed for each study using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Meta-analysis was conducted on the performance of instruments that were independently externally validated with a sample size greater than 100. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022304716.

FINDINGS

We conducted a systematic review of 50 eligible publications, assessing the predictive performance of 36 tools, providing data for 10 460 participants (88% men, 12% women; median age [from 47 studies] was 35 years, IQR 33-38) from 12 different countries. Post-discharge interpersonal violence and crime was most often measured by new criminal offences or recidivism (47 [94%] of 50 studies); only three studies used informant or self-report data on physical aggression or violent behaviour. Overall, the predictive performance of risk assessment tools was mixed. Most studies reported one discrimination metric, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC); other key performance measures such as calibration, sensitivity, and specificity were not presented. Most studies had a high risk of bias (49 [98%] of 50), partly due to poor analytical approaches. A meta-analysis was conducted for violent recidivism on 29 independent external validations from 19 studies with at least 100 patients. Pooled AUCs for predicting violent outcomes ranged from 0·72 (0·65-0·79; I2=0%) for H10, to 0·69 for the Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 version 2 (95% CI 0·65-0·72; I2=0%) and Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (0·63-0·75; I2=0%), to 0·64 for the Static-99 (0·53-0·73; I2=45%).

INTERPRETATION

Current violence risk assessment tools in forensic mental health have mixed evidence of predictive performance. Forensic mental health services should review their use of current risk assessment tools and consider implementing those with higher-quality evidence in support.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust.

Just Like a Woman: Gender Role Stereotypes in Forensic Psychiatry

The relationship between violence, gender and mental health is a complex one which is yet to be fully understood. Gender role stereotypes are social constructs that can powerfully influence and regulate human behaviour, including violence; and so it is likely that they also influence the nexus of violence management and mental health which is at the core of forensic psychiatry. In this article, we examine how gender role stereotypes might influence the practice of forensic psychiatry: specifically, in relation to women as violent offenders, as patients in secure psychiatric care and as clinicians working in forensic settings. We identify areas of development in women's forensic mental health services, and examine whether patriarchal influences and gender role stereotypes may have inadvertently impacted upon these changes. We also consider whether these changes may maintain pre-existing barriers to treatment for both men and women.