法医和非法医灵活自信社区治疗的来访者和专业人员的差异

Journal of forensic nursing Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-17 DOI:10.1097/JFN.0000000000000463
Maartje Clercx, Genevieve van Tuijn
{"title":"法医和非法医灵活自信社区治疗的来访者和专业人员的差异","authors":"Maartje Clercx, Genevieve van Tuijn","doi":"10.1097/JFN.0000000000000463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Flexible assertive community treatment (FACT) has been adapted for application with clients with criminal justice involvement (forensic FACT [ForFACT]). Differences have been found between clients of ForFACT services and clients of nonforensic FACT services; however, less is known about differences in behaviors. Furthermore, because of the different guiding frameworks and goals of treatment, and the difference in clients' presenting problems, it is possible professionals also differ in terms of specialist skills they need and in areas of care they deem important.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The current study used an online survey among professionals of ForFACT and non-ForFACT teams to gain insight into mental disorders and clients' presenting behavioral problems and to gain insight into the level of forensic vigilance needed by professionals of both services. We also gathered information pertaining to important areas of care and what both groups of professionals view as key nursing interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ForFACT clients differ from non-ForFACT clients in terms of the clients' presenting psychiatric problems. Furthermore, ForFACT professionals indicated they encounter more clients who show aggressive and (sexually) transgressive behavior. ForFACT professionals were found to score higher on forensic vigilance; however, no differences pertaining to important areas of care and key nursing interventions were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings further strengthen the notion that ForFACT clients are a different group compared with non-ForFACT clients, and professionals need different skills. Organizations could provide tailored supervision and training to ForFACT professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":94079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences Between Clients and Professionals of Forensic and Nonforensic Flexible Assertive Community Treatment.\",\"authors\":\"Maartje Clercx, Genevieve van Tuijn\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JFN.0000000000000463\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Flexible assertive community treatment (FACT) has been adapted for application with clients with criminal justice involvement (forensic FACT [ForFACT]). Differences have been found between clients of ForFACT services and clients of nonforensic FACT services; however, less is known about differences in behaviors. Furthermore, because of the different guiding frameworks and goals of treatment, and the difference in clients' presenting problems, it is possible professionals also differ in terms of specialist skills they need and in areas of care they deem important.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The current study used an online survey among professionals of ForFACT and non-ForFACT teams to gain insight into mental disorders and clients' presenting behavioral problems and to gain insight into the level of forensic vigilance needed by professionals of both services. We also gathered information pertaining to important areas of care and what both groups of professionals view as key nursing interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ForFACT clients differ from non-ForFACT clients in terms of the clients' presenting psychiatric problems. Furthermore, ForFACT professionals indicated they encounter more clients who show aggressive and (sexually) transgressive behavior. ForFACT professionals were found to score higher on forensic vigilance; however, no differences pertaining to important areas of care and key nursing interventions were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings further strengthen the notion that ForFACT clients are a different group compared with non-ForFACT clients, and professionals need different skills. Organizations could provide tailored supervision and training to ForFACT professionals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of forensic nursing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of forensic nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JFN.0000000000000463\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JFN.0000000000000463","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基本原理:灵活果断的社区治疗(FACT)适用于涉及刑事司法的客户(forensic FACT [ForFACT])。ForFACT服务的客户与非取证FACT服务的客户之间存在差异;然而,人们对行为差异知之甚少。此外,由于不同的指导框架和治疗目标,以及客户呈现问题的差异,专业人员在他们需要的专业技能和他们认为重要的护理领域方面也可能存在差异。方法:本研究对ForFACT和非ForFACT团队的专业人员进行在线调查,以了解精神障碍和客户呈现的行为问题,并了解两种服务的专业人员需要的法医警惕水平。我们还收集了有关重要护理领域的信息,以及两组专业人员认为的关键护理干预措施。结果:在精神问题的表现上,ForFACT患者与非ForFACT患者存在差异。此外,ForFACT专业人士表示,他们遇到的客户中,有更多的人表现出攻击性和(性)侵犯行为。事实上,专业人士在法医警惕性方面得分更高;然而,在重要的护理领域和关键的护理干预措施方面没有发现差异。结论:这些发现进一步强化了ForFACT客户与非ForFACT客户是不同群体的概念,专业人员需要不同的技能。组织可以为ForFACT专业人员提供量身定制的监督和培训。
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
Differences Between Clients and Professionals of Forensic and Nonforensic Flexible Assertive Community Treatment.

Rationale: Flexible assertive community treatment (FACT) has been adapted for application with clients with criminal justice involvement (forensic FACT [ForFACT]). Differences have been found between clients of ForFACT services and clients of nonforensic FACT services; however, less is known about differences in behaviors. Furthermore, because of the different guiding frameworks and goals of treatment, and the difference in clients' presenting problems, it is possible professionals also differ in terms of specialist skills they need and in areas of care they deem important.

Method: The current study used an online survey among professionals of ForFACT and non-ForFACT teams to gain insight into mental disorders and clients' presenting behavioral problems and to gain insight into the level of forensic vigilance needed by professionals of both services. We also gathered information pertaining to important areas of care and what both groups of professionals view as key nursing interventions.

Results: ForFACT clients differ from non-ForFACT clients in terms of the clients' presenting psychiatric problems. Furthermore, ForFACT professionals indicated they encounter more clients who show aggressive and (sexually) transgressive behavior. ForFACT professionals were found to score higher on forensic vigilance; however, no differences pertaining to important areas of care and key nursing interventions were found.

Conclusion: These findings further strengthen the notion that ForFACT clients are a different group compared with non-ForFACT clients, and professionals need different skills. Organizations could provide tailored supervision and training to ForFACT professionals.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Forensic Mental Health Nurses' Perceptions and Experiences of Trauma-Informed Care in a High-Secure Hospital. A Canadian Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner's Personal Reflection and Ongoing Questioning of Vicarious Trauma. Emergency Department Workers' Perceived Support and Emotional Impact After Workplace Violence. Reporting Intimate Partner Violence in the Healthcare Setting. Pain During Incarceration: Searching for Safety in Hypermasculine Correctional Settings.
×
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