Developing a screening tool for offenders with intellectual disabilities – the RAPID

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salma Ali ◽  
Scott Galloway
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Rapid Screening ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Statistical Validation ◽  
Initial Development ◽  
Effective Measure ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Screening Measures

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to outline and report on the initial development of a screening tool for offenders with suspected intellectual disability (ID) known as the rapid assessment of potential intellectual disability (RAPID). Design/methodology/approach This paper summarises the wider literature in relation to screening tools and methodology, indicating that quick and easy screening measures for this population are sparse. It outlines the processes involved in the early stages of developing an evidence-based screening tool for ID offenders, and an overall pathway approach to the identification, assessment and diagnosis of ID. Findings It is possible to develop a tool that can be used to identify potential ID with relative ease. The RAPID screening tool provided practitioners with a simple and easy measure to identify such individuals so that they may be referred for further specialist assessment. It has also demonstrated that it is an effective measure in identifying offenders with a possible ID. Research limitations/implications Formal statistical validation of this tool will serve to establish and measure its overall effectiveness and utility, further encouraging the timely identification of ID offenders. Originality/value This paper responds to current extensive literature about the variability of screening measures, and provides an effective solution to the identification of vulnerable offenders. Those who may benefit from an assessment of ID, and thereafter reasonable adjustments and alternatives to custodial sentencing are considered.

Prolonged, widespread, disabling musculoskeletal pain of adolescents among referrals to the Pediatric Rheumatology Outpatient Clinic from the Päijät-Häme Hospital District in southern Finland

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 621-628
Author(s):  
Heini Pohjankoski ◽  
Maiju Hietanen ◽  
Leena Leppänen ◽  
Heli Vilen ◽  
Hannu Kautiainen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Outpatient Clinic ◽  
Pediatric Rheumatology ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Rapid Screening ◽  
Hospital District ◽  
Pain Patients ◽  
Rheumatology Outpatient

Abstract Background and aims Musculoskeletal pain among adolescents is a problem for the patients and their families and has economic consequences for society. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of prolonged disabling musculoskeletal pain of adolescents among referrals to a pediatric rheumatology outpatient clinic and describe the patient material. The second aim is to find proper screening tools which identifies patients with a risk of pain chronification and to test whether our patients fit the Pediatric Pain Screening Tool (PPST) stratification according to Simons et al. Methods We selected adolescent patients with disabling, prolonged, musculoskeletal pain and calculated the incidence. Furthermore, after the patient collection, we adjusted our pain patients to PPST. Results The incidence of prolonged musculoskeletal pain patients at our clinic was 42/100,000 patient years (pyrs) (age 13–18; 95% CI: 29–60) during years 2010–2015. A nine-item screening tool by Simons et al. proves to be valid for our patient group and helps to identify those patients who need early, prompt treatment. The functional risk stratification by Simons et al. correlates with our patients’ functional disability. Conclusions and implications In order to prevent disability and to target intervention, it is necessary to have proper and rapid screening tools to find the appropriate patients in time.

Development of a screening tool to assess prostate cancer health literacy.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 127-127
Author(s):  
Ashwin A. Kotwal ◽  
Viraj A. Master ◽  
Ashesh B. Jani ◽  
Gertrude Fraser ◽  
Andrew M Wolf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Rapid Screening ◽  
Vaginal Intercourse ◽  
Low Literacy ◽  
Poor Comprehension ◽  
Education Groups ◽  
Item Scale

127 Background: Poor comprehension of prostate cancer (PCa) related terms can create barriers to informed discussions on screening, treatment, and measuring outcomes, and contribute to disparities in African American (AA) men. We developed a screening tool to assess for low PCa-related health literacy. Methods: We assessed PCa-related literacy in a sample of 189 AA men, age >40 years from diverse socioeconomic status (SES) using a 27-item scale derived comprehension of commonly used terms for urinary, bowel and sexual function. Using item-response models we examined differential item functioning by education. We developed rapid screening tools based on understanding of 1 or 2 words to predict overall comprehension. Receiver operating characteristic curves assessed the sensitivity and specificity for individuals understanding less than a pre-specified threshold of 70% on the overall scale, defined as “low literacy.” Results are being tested in an independent sample of 110 AA men. Results: The 27-item scale had good internal reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.93). 47% of the sample met criteria for low literacy. Lower education groups had relatively poor comprehension of sexual function terms compared to higher education groups. 1-item scales using comprehension of the term “rectal urgency” had a sensitivity of 95% for identifying low literacy, “erection” had a specificity of 98%, and “vaginal intercourse” had a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 81%. Combining “vaginal intercourse” and “rectal urgency” yielded a 2-item scale with strong characteristics (sensitivity 88%, specificity 89%), as did combining “vaginal intercourse” and “erection” (sensitivity 94%, specificity 81%). Conclusions: Rapid screening tools assessing PCa-related literacy performed well in a community sample of AA men with varied SES. Providers can use these tools to identify those at risk of poor comprehension to tailor outcome measurement and shared decision making. [Table: see text]

Learning disability and challenges in male prisons: programme screening evaluation

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-59
Author(s):  
Helen Wakeling ◽  
Laura Ramsay
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Effective Use

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to validate the learning screening tool (LST) and the adapted functioning checklist-revised (AFC-R) as screening tools to aid programme allocation, and to investigate whether programme decision makers were using the tools as per the guidance provided by HMPPS Interventions Services. Design/methodology/approach LST and AFC-R data were gathered for 555 men who had been assessed for programmes between 2015 and 2018 across eight prisons and one probation area. WAIS-IV IQ data were also gathered if completed. Findings The findings provide support for the use of the LST, and AFC-R in helping to make decisions about programme allocation. The LST and AFC-R correlate well with each other, and a measure of intellectual functioning (WAIS-IV). Those who were allocated to learning disability or challenges (LDC) programmes scored higher on the LST (greater problems) and lower on the AFC-R (lower functioning) compared to those allocated to mainstream programmes. The LST had adequate predictive validity. In the majority of cases, the correct procedures were followed in terms of using the tools for programme allocation. Research limitations/implications The sample size for examining the relationships between all three tools was limited. The research was also unable to take into consideration the clinical decision making involved in how the tools were interpreted. Originality/value This research contributes to the growing evidence about the effective use of LDC screening tools in forensic settings.

How useful are the Adult Asperger Assessment and AQ-10 within an adult clinical population of all intellectual abilities?

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 118-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hayley Kenny ◽  
Alison Jane Stansfield
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Intellectual Ability ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Clinical Population ◽  
Service Development ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Autism Quotient ◽  
Significant Difference

Purpose – The Adult Asperger Assessment (AAA) was designed to be a screening tool to identify adults with Asperger syndrome and/or high-functioning autism. The AAA includes three questionnaires; the Autism Quotient (AQ), the Empathy Quotient (EQ) and the Relatives Questionnaire (RQ). The Autism Quotient-10 (AQ-10) was designed to be a “red flag” for healthcare professionals considering referral for ASD assessment. The purpose of this paper is to determine the usefulness of the AAA and AQ-10 as part of an adult autism diagnostic pathway that includes patients of all intellectual ability. Design/methodology/approach – Results were obtained for all patients who had received a clinical decision at Leeds Autism Diagnostic Service, which is a service that assesses patients of all intellectual ability, during 2015, n=214. Of these 132 were included in the analysis, 77 patients were excluded for not completing the AAA and four were excluded for not receiving a clinical decision. Findings – Results suggest that patients diagnosed with ASD without intellectual disabilities score on average 35 on the AQ, 17 on the EQ and 20 on the RQ. Those not diagnosed with ASD score on average 33 on the AQ, 22 on the EQ and 15 on the RQ. Patients with intellectual disabilities, scores are lower on the AQ, and higher on the EQ and RQ than those without intellectual disabilities. These results are the same regardless of diagnosis of ASD. The RQ is the only questionnaire to result in a significant difference between those diagnosed and not diagnosed. Results suggest that the AQ-10 is not useful in this clinical population. Research limitations/implications – This study was undertaken as part of a service development improvement process. The specific demographics of this clinical population may have influenced the findings. The process will need to be repeated to ensure that the results are consistent across time and increased sample size. The population of patients with an intellectual disability is small, further studies into the use of the AAA or the design of other intellectual disability specific screening tools should be pursued. It is of note that the AAA was never intended for use within an intellectual disability population. Originality/value – This is an original paper as it will be the first to consider the usefulness of each of the aspects of the AAA collectively. It will be the first to assess: the AQ-10 alongside the AAA, the usefulness of the AAA regardless of intellectual ability and the usefulness of the AAA within a clinical population by using the diagnostic outcome as the benchmark of the usefulness of the AAA scores. This paper will only be discussing the scores generated by the AAA, and the correlation of these scores with a diagnosis.

scholarly journals Organizational transformation in health care: an activity theoretical analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 547-562
Author(s):  
Jeanette Kirk ◽  
Ove Andersen ◽  
Janne Petersen
Keyword(s):  
Structural Changes ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Organizational Transformation ◽  
Functional Decline ◽  
Daily Practice ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Medical Patients ◽  
Organizational Changes ◽  
Content Type

Purpose Older patients are at high risk of hospital readmission, which has led to an increasing number of screening and intervention programs. Knowledge on implementing screening tools for preventing readmissions in emergency department (ED), where the primary focus is often the present-day flow of patients, is scant. The purpose of this paper is to explore whether a new screening tool for predicting readmissions and functional decline in medical patients>65 years of age could be implemented and its influence on cross-continuum collaborations between the primary and secondary sectors. Design/methodology/approach The study took place in an ED in Denmark, in collaboration with the surrounding municipalities. An evaluation workshop with nurses and leaders from the ED and the surrounding municipalities took place with the aim of investigating the organizational changes that occurred in daily practice after the implementation of the screening tool. The workshop was designed and analyzed using cultural historical activity theory (CHAT). Findings The results showed that it was possible to develop collaboration between the two sectors during the test period. However, the screening tool created different transformations for the municipality employees and in the ED. The contradictions indicated that the screening tool did not mediate a general and sustained transformation in the cross-continuum collaboration. Research limitations/implications Screening tools are not objective, neutral or “acontexual” artifacts and must always be adapted to the local context and sectors. CHAT offers a perspective to understand the collective object when working with organizational transformations and implementation. Practical implications The study have shown that screening tools are not objective, neutral or “acontexual” artifacts and must always be adapted to the local context. This is called adaption process. This adaption requires time and resources that should be taken into consideration from the beginning of introduction of new screens. Originality/value This paper contributes with knowledge about CHAT which offers a way to understand the leading collective object when working with organizational transformations and implementation. CHAT focuses not only on the structural changes but also on the cultural aspects of organizational changes, which is important if we want to reach a sustained change and implement the new screening tool in different sectors.

Offender personality disorder pathway screening tools evaluation

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-211
Author(s):  
Zoe Mawby ◽  
Andrew Newman ◽  
Megan Wilkinson-Tough
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Probation Service ◽  
Offender Assessment

Purpose The offender personality disorder (OPD) pathway faces the difficult task of identifying individuals who are eligible for their service from the entire probation caseload. The offender assessment system personality disorder (OASys PD) screen is a national screening tool used by the pathway to help with this task. This paper aims to describe an evaluation of the effectiveness of this plus an additional screening tool currently used to identify eligible individuals for the OPD service in the South of England. Recommendations for improvements were made as necessary. Design/methodology/approach A mixed methods design used a quantitative analysis of data on the effectiveness of the OASys PD for correctly identifying individuals and a thematic analysis of a focus-group conducted with clinicians within the service. Findings The analysis revealed a positive predictive value of the OASys PD screen of 72% and a negative predictive value of 91%. Key themes from the focus-group revealed what worked well about the screening process, what was difficult and what needed to be improved. Practical implications The OASys PD performed better than the clinicians had expected. It was recommended that the service continued to use the combination of the screening tool and the interviews with minor adjustments. Originality/value This is the first research study of its kind on the effectiveness of the OASys Personality Disorder Screening tool. Using such a tool with some caution (the addition of consultation) creates a useful and effective process for tackling the very difficult task of identifying people for the community component of the Offender Personality Disorder Service. This research provides some evidence for the validity of such a process that is currently used throughout the National Probation Service in England and Wales.

scholarly journals Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Bipolar I Disorder Screening and the Rapid Mood Screener (RMS), a Pragmatic, New Tool

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-183
Author(s):  
Michael E. Thase ◽  
Stephen M. Stahl ◽  
Roger S. McIntyre ◽  
Tina Matthews-Hayes ◽  
Mehul Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Bipolar I Disorder ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Patient Reported

AbstractIntroductionAlthough mania is the hallmark symptom of bipolar I disorder (BD-I), most patients initially present for treatment with depressive symptoms. Misdiagnosis of BD-I as major depressive disorder (MDD) is common, potentially resulting in poor outcomes and inappropriate antidepressant monotherapy treatment. Screening patients with depressive symptoms is a practical strategy to help healthcare providers (HCPs) identify when additional assessment for BD-I is warranted. The new 6-item Rapid Mood Screener (RMS) is a pragmatic patient-reported BD-I screening tool that relies on easily understood terminology to screen for manic symptoms and other BD-I features in <2 minutes. The RMS was validated in an observational study in patients with clinically confirmed BD-I (n=67) or MDD (n=72). When 4 or more items were endorsed (“yes”), the sensitivity of the RMS for identifying patients with BP-I was 0.88 and specificity was 0.80; positive and negative predictive values were 0.80 and 0.88, respectively. To more thoroughly understand screening tool use among HCPs, a 10-minute survey was conducted.MethodsA nationwide sample of HCPs (N=200) was selected using multiple HCP panels; HCPs were asked to describe their opinions/current use of screening tools, assess the RMS, and evaluate the RMS versus the widely recognized Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ). Results were reported by grouped specialties (primary care physicians, general nurse practitioners [NPs]/physician assistants [PAs], psychiatrists, and psychiatric NPs/PAs). Included HCPs were in practice <30 years, spent at least 75% of their time in clinical practice, saw at least 10 patients with depression per month, and diagnosed MDD or BD in at least 1 patient per month. Findings were reported using descriptive statistics; statistical significance was reported at the 95% confidence interval.ResultsAmong HCPs, 82% used a tool to screen for MDD, while 32% used a tool for BD. Screening tool attributes considered to be of the greatest value included sensitivity (68%), easy to answer questions (66%), specificity (65%), confidence in results (64%), and practicality (62%). Of HCPs familiar with screening tools, 70% thought the RMS was at least somewhat better than other screening tools. Most HCPs were aware of the MDQ (85%), but only 29% reported current use. Most HCPs (81%) preferred the RMS to the MDQ, and the RMS significantly outperformed the MDQ across valued attributes; 76% reported that they were likely to use the RMS to screen new patients with depressive symptoms. A total of 84% said the RMS would have a positive impact on their practice, with 46% saying they would screen more patients for bipolar disorder.DiscussionThe RMS was viewed positively by HCPs who participated in a brief survey. A large percentage of respondents preferred the RMS over the MDQ and indicated that they would use it in their practice. Collectively, responses indicated that the RMS is likely to have a positive impact on screening behavior.FundingAbbVie Inc.

scholarly journals The effective screening tools for detecting hearing loss in elderly population: HHIE-ST Versus TSQ

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nichtima Chayaopas ◽  
Pornthep Kasemsiri ◽  
Panida Thanawirattananit ◽  
Patorn Piromchai ◽  
Kwanchanok Yimtae
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Effective Screening ◽  
Hearing Disability ◽  
Test Study ◽  
Combined Test ◽  
Single Question

Abstract Background Globally increasing number of elders is concerned. Hearing loss process in older adults cannot be avoided. An effective screening tool for hearing loss is essential for proper diagnosis and rehabilitation, which can improve QOL in older adults. Methods This prospective-diagnostic test study evaluates the diagnostic value of Thai version of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Elderly Screening (HHIE-ST) and the Thai Single Question (TSQ) surveys in screening hearing disability in 1109 Thai participants aged 60 years and older in communities in four provinces in Thailand. The HHIE-ST consisted of 10 selected questions from the validated HHIE-Thai version. A TSQ survey was developed to have the same meaning as an English Single Question survey. The participants answered both questionnaires, and a standard audiometry test assessed with air conduction from 250 to 8000 Hz was included as a gold standard. Results The prevalence of hearing disability was 38.34%. The HHIE-ST achieved a sensitivity of 88.96% (95% CI 85.77–91.64) and specificity of 52.19% (95% CI 48.24–56.13) for diagnosis hearing disability in Thai older adults, whereas the TSQ yielded a sensitivity of 88.73% and a specificity of 55.93%. A combined test including the HHIE-ST and TSQ achieved better performance with sensitivity of 85.29% and specificity of 60.13%. Conclusions Either the HHIE-ST or the TSQ is a sensitive and useful tool for screening hearing disability in Thai older adults. Using the HHIE-ST together with the TSQ resulted in a better screening tool for detecting moderate hearing loss older adults who will benefit and recommended for hearing rehabilitation. Trial registration The study is registered with the following number in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry: TCTR20151015003. Date of registration October 14, 2015.

A brief history of small business in Australia, 1970-2010

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Schaper
Keyword(s):  
Small Business ◽  
Small Firms ◽  
Formal Education ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Business Sector ◽  
Role Of Government ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Support Tools ◽  
History Of ◽  
Training And Research

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the development of the SME sector in Australia, concentrating on a number of key areas: small business definitions and numbers; the role of government; the emergence of key industry groups; and the evolution of education, training and research services. Design/methodology/approach – The study is a result of extensive literature reviews, desk research and the recollections of various participants in the field. Findings – There have been major changes to the Australian small business sector over the last 40 years. In 1983-1984 there were an estimated 550,000 small firms, and by 2010 this had grown to almost two million. Government involvement in, and support for, SMEs was virtually non-existent before 1970. Following the delivery of the Wiltshire report (1971), however, both state and federal governments responded by developing specialist advisory services, funding programmes and other support tools. Virtually non-existent before the 1970s, several peak industry associations were formed between 1977 and the 1990s. At the same time, formal education and teaching in the area expanded in the 1970s and 1980s and is now widespread. Practical implications – Development of the small business sector in Australia has often paralleled similar trends in other OECD nations. State and territory governments have often (but not always) been the principal drivers of policy change. Originality/value – There has been no little, if any, prior documentation of the evolution of the small business sector in Australia in the last 40 years.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document