某法医精神卫生科情境攻击风险评估工具动态评估中、高分后干预措施评估

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology Pub Date : 2023-11-14 DOI:10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565
Alexander Challinor, Patrick Briggs, Faye Brennan, Charles Daniels, George Hurst, Mark Thorpe, Panchu Xavier, Rajan Nathan
{"title":"某法医精神卫生科情境攻击风险评估工具动态评估中、高分后干预措施评估","authors":"Alexander Challinor, Patrick Briggs, Faye Brennan, Charles Daniels, George Hurst, Mark Thorpe, Panchu Xavier, Rajan Nathan","doi":"10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThe Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression (DASA) provides a quick and systematic assessment of short-term violence risk. Risk assessment should be closely aligned to management and result in interventions aimed to reduce risk. The aim of this study was to investigate what interventions followed a moderate/high DASA score and whether they reduced risk. The impact of staff training was also assessed. The study was a retrospective analysis of health records within a medium secure hospital over 6 months. Data was gathered on tool adherence and interventions that were used to reduce risk following a moderate/high score. The change in DASA score following the intervention was recorded. There were 70 patients covering 8224 bed days. There were 24 occasions where a moderate score led to an intervention (n = 24/40%), and 26 occasions for a high score (n = 26/87%). A moderate score was mostly followed by no intervention (n = 35/59%), a high score was mostly followed by seclusion (n = 9/29%). The intervention that led to the largest reduction in DASA score was pro re nata medication following a moderate score and seclusion following a high score. The training of staff led to a reduction in tool adherence and increased intervention use. These results support the need for combining the DASA assessment with operationalised systems to link assessment with risk prevention to help reduce aggression and restrictive practices.KEYWORDS: DASAviolence risk assessmentimplementationaggressioninterventionsstructured professional judgement Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Supplementary dataSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565Data availability statementThe data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author (AC).Additional informationFundingThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.","PeriodicalId":47524,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An assessment of interventions following moderate and high scores on the dynamic appraisal of situational aggression risk assessment tool in a forensic mental health unit\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Challinor, Patrick Briggs, Faye Brennan, Charles Daniels, George Hurst, Mark Thorpe, Panchu Xavier, Rajan Nathan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTThe Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression (DASA) provides a quick and systematic assessment of short-term violence risk. Risk assessment should be closely aligned to management and result in interventions aimed to reduce risk. The aim of this study was to investigate what interventions followed a moderate/high DASA score and whether they reduced risk. The impact of staff training was also assessed. The study was a retrospective analysis of health records within a medium secure hospital over 6 months. Data was gathered on tool adherence and interventions that were used to reduce risk following a moderate/high score. The change in DASA score following the intervention was recorded. There were 70 patients covering 8224 bed days. There were 24 occasions where a moderate score led to an intervention (n = 24/40%), and 26 occasions for a high score (n = 26/87%). A moderate score was mostly followed by no intervention (n = 35/59%), a high score was mostly followed by seclusion (n = 9/29%). The intervention that led to the largest reduction in DASA score was pro re nata medication following a moderate score and seclusion following a high score. The training of staff led to a reduction in tool adherence and increased intervention use. These results support the need for combining the DASA assessment with operationalised systems to link assessment with risk prevention to help reduce aggression and restrictive practices.KEYWORDS: DASAviolence risk assessmentimplementationaggressioninterventionsstructured professional judgement Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Supplementary dataSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565Data availability statementThe data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author (AC).Additional informationFundingThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47524,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要情境攻击动态评估(DASA)提供了一种快速、系统的短期暴力风险评估方法。风险评估应与管理紧密结合,并导致旨在降低风险的干预措施。本研究的目的是调查在DASA中/高评分后采取哪些干预措施,以及它们是否降低了风险。还评估了工作人员培训的影响。该研究是对一家中型安全医院6个月以上的健康记录进行回顾性分析。在获得中/高分后,收集了工具依从性和用于降低风险的干预措施的数据。记录干预后DASA评分的变化。70例患者,8224个床位日。中等得分导致干预的情况有24例(n = 24/40%),高分导致干预的情况有26例(n = 26/87%)。中等分多为不干预(n = 35/59%),高分多为隔离(n = 9/29%)。导致DASA评分下降最大的干预措施是中度评分后的自然用药和高分后的隔离。对工作人员的培训减少了工具依从性,增加了干预措施的使用。这些结果支持将DASA评估与操作系统相结合的需求,将评估与风险预防联系起来,以帮助减少侵略和限制性做法。关键词:暴力风险评估实施攻击干预结构化专业判断披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。补充数据本文的补充数据可在线访问https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565Data可用性声明支持本研究结果的数据可应通讯作者(AC)的要求提供。本研究没有得到任何资助机构、商业或非营利部门的特别资助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
An assessment of interventions following moderate and high scores on the dynamic appraisal of situational aggression risk assessment tool in a forensic mental health unit
ABSTRACTThe Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression (DASA) provides a quick and systematic assessment of short-term violence risk. Risk assessment should be closely aligned to management and result in interventions aimed to reduce risk. The aim of this study was to investigate what interventions followed a moderate/high DASA score and whether they reduced risk. The impact of staff training was also assessed. The study was a retrospective analysis of health records within a medium secure hospital over 6 months. Data was gathered on tool adherence and interventions that were used to reduce risk following a moderate/high score. The change in DASA score following the intervention was recorded. There were 70 patients covering 8224 bed days. There were 24 occasions where a moderate score led to an intervention (n = 24/40%), and 26 occasions for a high score (n = 26/87%). A moderate score was mostly followed by no intervention (n = 35/59%), a high score was mostly followed by seclusion (n = 9/29%). The intervention that led to the largest reduction in DASA score was pro re nata medication following a moderate score and seclusion following a high score. The training of staff led to a reduction in tool adherence and increased intervention use. These results support the need for combining the DASA assessment with operationalised systems to link assessment with risk prevention to help reduce aggression and restrictive practices.KEYWORDS: DASAviolence risk assessmentimplementationaggressioninterventionsstructured professional judgement Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Supplementary dataSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2023.2280565Data availability statementThe data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author (AC).Additional informationFundingThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
44
期刊最新文献
An assessment of interventions following moderate and high scores on the dynamic appraisal of situational aggression risk assessment tool in a forensic mental health unit Do forensic mental health services have an ethical duty towards victims of mentally disordered offenders? Difficulties experienced by Turkish legal support officers in forensic interviews with individuals with autism and/or intellectual disabilities First steps towards a core outcome Set for measuring aggressive behavior in prisoners: a systematic review of current methods Prevalence of anxiety, depression, and PTSD in exonerees: a brief report
×
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