Men placed on waiting lists for psychiatric admission from Irish Prisons over five years: Clinical outcomes during a forensic “bed crisis”

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q1 LAW International Journal of Law and Psychiatry Pub Date : 2023-09-12 DOI:10.1016/j.ijlp.2023.101923
Margaret Gallagher , Damian Smith , Philip Hickey , Mark Nolan , Eimear Ní Mhuircheartaigh , Michael Murray , Enda Taylor , Michelle Connaughton , Conor O'Neill
{"title":"Men placed on waiting lists for psychiatric admission from Irish Prisons over five years: Clinical outcomes during a forensic “bed crisis”","authors":"Margaret Gallagher ,&nbsp;Damian Smith ,&nbsp;Philip Hickey ,&nbsp;Mark Nolan ,&nbsp;Eimear Ní Mhuircheartaigh ,&nbsp;Michael Murray ,&nbsp;Enda Taylor ,&nbsp;Michelle Connaughton ,&nbsp;Conor O'Neill","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2023.101923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Ireland has low provision rates of general and forensic beds compared with other western countries. In recent years there have been difficulties and delays in accessing forensic beds for prisoners with severe mental illness.</p></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><p>We aimed to determine clinical outcomes for male prisoners assessed as requiring psychiatric admission over an extended period, with time frames for admission and other outcomes. We aimed to determine whether admissions to forensic and non-forensic locations were risk-appropriate.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Participants included all male prisoners placed on psychiatric admission waiting lists in Ireland over five years 2015–2019. We described demographic, clinical and offending variables. We measured clinical outcomes including forensic admission, other admission and recovery with voluntary treatment in prison. We also measured times to clinical outcomes. Security requirements and clinical urgency were assessed using the DUNDRUM Toolkit scales 1 and 2.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>541 male prisoners were placed on admission waiting lists and spent an aggregate of over 114 years on admission waiting lists during 2015–2019. Almost one quarter improved with voluntary treatment allowing removal from waiting lists, while over 75% did not. Admission was achieved for a majority of cases, albeit after lengthy delays for some. The most frequent outcome was diversion from remand to non-forensic inpatient settings. Non-forensic admissions arranged by the Prison Inreach and Court Liaison Service (PICLS) at Ireland's main remand prison at Cloverhill contributed 54% (179/332) of all admissions achieved and 76% (179/235) of all non-forensic admissions from prison waiting list. Median delay to admission was 59 days for forensic admissions and 69 days for admissions to non-forensic hospitals from sentenced settings, compared with 16.5 days for admissions to non-forensic hospitals from remand.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Long delays for forensic admission during a five-year period of limited access to such beds were partly mitigated by transfers to non-forensic hospitals, mainly diversion of minor offenders from remand settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"91 ","pages":"Article 101923"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252723000663","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Ireland has low provision rates of general and forensic beds compared with other western countries. In recent years there have been difficulties and delays in accessing forensic beds for prisoners with severe mental illness.

Aims

We aimed to determine clinical outcomes for male prisoners assessed as requiring psychiatric admission over an extended period, with time frames for admission and other outcomes. We aimed to determine whether admissions to forensic and non-forensic locations were risk-appropriate.

Methods

Participants included all male prisoners placed on psychiatric admission waiting lists in Ireland over five years 2015–2019. We described demographic, clinical and offending variables. We measured clinical outcomes including forensic admission, other admission and recovery with voluntary treatment in prison. We also measured times to clinical outcomes. Security requirements and clinical urgency were assessed using the DUNDRUM Toolkit scales 1 and 2.

Results

541 male prisoners were placed on admission waiting lists and spent an aggregate of over 114 years on admission waiting lists during 2015–2019. Almost one quarter improved with voluntary treatment allowing removal from waiting lists, while over 75% did not. Admission was achieved for a majority of cases, albeit after lengthy delays for some. The most frequent outcome was diversion from remand to non-forensic inpatient settings. Non-forensic admissions arranged by the Prison Inreach and Court Liaison Service (PICLS) at Ireland's main remand prison at Cloverhill contributed 54% (179/332) of all admissions achieved and 76% (179/235) of all non-forensic admissions from prison waiting list. Median delay to admission was 59 days for forensic admissions and 69 days for admissions to non-forensic hospitals from sentenced settings, compared with 16.5 days for admissions to non-forensic hospitals from remand.

Conclusions

Long delays for forensic admission during a five-year period of limited access to such beds were partly mitigated by transfers to non-forensic hospitals, mainly diversion of minor offenders from remand settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
爱尔兰监狱五年来被列入精神病入院等候名单的男子:法医“床位危机”期间的临床结果
背景与其他西方国家相比,爱尔兰的普通病床和法医病床供应率较低。近年来,在为患有严重精神疾病的囚犯提供法医床位方面出现了困难和延误。目的我们旨在确定被评估为需要长期精神病入院的男性囚犯的临床结果,以及入院时间和其他结果。我们的目的是确定进入法医和非法医地点是否具有适当的风险。方法参与者包括2015年至2019年爱尔兰五年内被列入精神病入院等待名单的所有男性囚犯。我们描述了人口统计学、临床和冒犯性变量。我们测量了临床结果,包括法医入院、其他入院和在监狱自愿治疗后的康复。我们还测量了临床结果的时间。使用DUNDRUM Toolkit量表1和2评估了安全要求和临床紧迫性。结果2015年至2019年,541名男性囚犯被列入入院等待名单,总共在入院等待名单上度过了114年。自愿治疗允许从等待名单中删除后,近四分之一的情况有所改善,而超过75%的情况没有改善。尽管有些病例拖延了很长时间,但大多数病例还是获准入院。最常见的结果是从还押转移到非法医住院环境。爱尔兰克洛弗希尔主要还押监狱的监狱囚犯和法院联络处(PICLS)安排的非法医入院占所有入院人数的54%(179/332),占监狱等待名单上所有非法医入院人数的76%(179/235)。从被判刑的环境中,法医入院的中位延迟时间为59天,而从还押到非法医医院的中位推迟时间为16.5天。结论在五年的有限床位使用期间,法医入院的长期延误通过转移到非法医医院(主要是将未成年罪犯从还押场所转移)得到了部分缓解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
54
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Law and Psychiatry is intended to provide a multi-disciplinary forum for the exchange of ideas and information among professionals concerned with the interface of law and psychiatry. There is a growing awareness of the need for exploring the fundamental goals of both the legal and psychiatric systems and the social implications of their interaction. The journal seeks to enhance understanding and cooperation in the field through the varied approaches represented, not only by law and psychiatry, but also by the social sciences and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
The response of the secretary of state and the “supervised discharge” provision of the UK mental health bill 2022: Potential problems and opportunities in the wake of Secretary of State for Justice v MM [2018] UKSC 60 Capacity and incapacity: An appropriate border for non-consensual interventions? Child maltreatment and suicidal ideation among justice–and welfare–involved adolescents in Nigeria: Investigating the mediating role of social support and emotion regulation Recent research involving consent, alcohol intoxication, and memory: Implications for expert testimony in sexual assault cases Comparison of sociodemographic, clinical, and alexithymia characteristics of schizophrenia patients with and without criminal records
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1