Risk stratification for violent behavior in critically ill patients: Current assessment tools

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 NURSING Intensive and Critical Care Nursing Pub Date : 2025-01-25 DOI:10.1016/j.iccn.2025.103957
Sebastian Berger , Simon A. Amacher , Martin Lohri , Sabina Hunziker , Caroline E. Gebhard , Anja Frei , Raoul Sutter
{"title":"Risk stratification for violent behavior in critically ill patients: Current assessment tools","authors":"Sebastian Berger ,&nbsp;Simon A. Amacher ,&nbsp;Martin Lohri ,&nbsp;Sabina Hunziker ,&nbsp;Caroline E. Gebhard ,&nbsp;Anja Frei ,&nbsp;Raoul Sutter","doi":"10.1016/j.iccn.2025.103957","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Workplace violence (WPV) presents challenges in intensive care units (ICUs) calling for reliable prediction of violence. This narrative review aimed to identify and evaluate risk assessment tools from acute care settings which are or might be used to predict violent behavior in adult ICU patients focusing on their performance and clinical utility.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A screening of PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar was conducted to identify risk scores used in the acute care setting such as emergency departments, hospitals and ICUs. Risk factors, predictive validity of scores and their relevance to the ICU setting were evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>24 studies were included. Two studies reported the use in general ICU populations, while eight studies were conducted in psychiatric ICUs and 14 studies implemented the use of risk tools in emergency departments or general wards. Ten risk scores were identified using 30 different variables. Those could be categorized into patient demographics, behavior, history of violence, mental status and other items such as sleep disturbances. The Broset Violence Checklist (BVC) was the most commonly used risk score. It showed moderate predictive accuracy in psychiatric settings including psychiatric ICUs, but limited validation for general ICUs. The overall evidence level was low with serious risk of bias. Other tools demonstrated varying sensitivity and specificity but lacked validation in ICUs.</div></div><div><h3>Implications for clinical practice</h3><div>ICU nurses and physicians are often subjected to violence. There is little evidence on scores to predict patients‘ behavior. Most assessments come from outside the ICU, but may be promising in critical care.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This review underscores the need for the development of violence risk assessment tools tailored to the ICU, as the challenges with violent ICU patients differ from other populations. New predictive models must be developed including factors associated with patients’ violent behavior in ICUs as compiled in this review.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51322,"journal":{"name":"Intensive and Critical Care Nursing","volume":"89 ","pages":"Article 103957"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive and Critical Care Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964339725000187","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Workplace violence (WPV) presents challenges in intensive care units (ICUs) calling for reliable prediction of violence. This narrative review aimed to identify and evaluate risk assessment tools from acute care settings which are or might be used to predict violent behavior in adult ICU patients focusing on their performance and clinical utility.

Methods

A screening of PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar was conducted to identify risk scores used in the acute care setting such as emergency departments, hospitals and ICUs. Risk factors, predictive validity of scores and their relevance to the ICU setting were evaluated.

Results

24 studies were included. Two studies reported the use in general ICU populations, while eight studies were conducted in psychiatric ICUs and 14 studies implemented the use of risk tools in emergency departments or general wards. Ten risk scores were identified using 30 different variables. Those could be categorized into patient demographics, behavior, history of violence, mental status and other items such as sleep disturbances. The Broset Violence Checklist (BVC) was the most commonly used risk score. It showed moderate predictive accuracy in psychiatric settings including psychiatric ICUs, but limited validation for general ICUs. The overall evidence level was low with serious risk of bias. Other tools demonstrated varying sensitivity and specificity but lacked validation in ICUs.

Implications for clinical practice

ICU nurses and physicians are often subjected to violence. There is little evidence on scores to predict patients‘ behavior. Most assessments come from outside the ICU, but may be promising in critical care.

Conclusion

This review underscores the need for the development of violence risk assessment tools tailored to the ICU, as the challenges with violent ICU patients differ from other populations. New predictive models must be developed including factors associated with patients’ violent behavior in ICUs as compiled in this review.
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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
15.10%
发文量
144
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: The aims of Intensive and Critical Care Nursing are to promote excellence of care of critically ill patients by specialist nurses and their professional colleagues; to provide an international and interdisciplinary forum for the publication, dissemination and exchange of research findings, experience and ideas; to develop and enhance the knowledge, skills, attitudes and creative thinking essential to good critical care nursing practice. The journal publishes reviews, updates and feature articles in addition to original papers and significant preliminary communications. Articles may deal with any part of practice including relevant clinical, research, educational, psychological and technological aspects.
期刊最新文献
The impact of clearly defined debriefing practices on nurses working within an adult intensive care: A systematic review Critical care nurses’ intention to leave and related factors: Survey results from 5 European countries Occurrence rate and risk factors for rest and procedural pain in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis Delirium management in 2024: A status check and evolution in clinical practice since 2016 “Do we still need central venous pressure monitoring in the ICU? No!”
×
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